Book Review: America and Iran: A History from 1720 to the Present
John Ghazvinian's new book is a guide to the past, present, and future of relations between the two nations
It’s common knowledge that there’s no love lost between Iran and America. From the Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979 to George W. Bush’s “axis of evil” speech to Barack Obama’s efforts to forge a nuclear deal, the dominant Shia power in the Middle East has been a key adversary of the U.S. It wasn’t always so, however, as John Ghazvinian documents in his new book, America and Iran: A History from 1720 to the Present. As he shows in exquisite detail, there is a rich, deep history between the two nations, one that provides some guidance as to how they should engage with one another going forward.
Though most Americans no doubt don’t realize it, many of those who lived in the colonies in the 18th century looked to Iran (which they referred to as Persia) as a sort of alternative to what they perceived to be the “too Muslim” Ottoman Empire. As the 19th century progressed and the Great Powers of Britain and Russia continued to squabble over Persia--often ruthlessly exploiting the country’s people and resources--Persians began to look toward the United States as a potential counterweight. At the same time, Presbyterian missionaries also made their presence felt, leaving a stamp on the nation’s educational system that would be felt for many years.
Unfortunately, things went awry throughout the 20th Century, particularly once the powers-that-be in Washington decided that supporting the dictatorial (and often downright repressive) shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, was more aligned with Cold War strategic interests. Indeed, the CIA even orchestrated a coup to ensure the downfall of the popular prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, who had done a great deal to establish Iranian sovereignty (particularly through nationalizing its oil industry, something deeply resented by the British).
The US might have ensured that its favored ally the shah was returned to power, but the unrest and resistance to him continued. While Shah Pahlavi continued to buy enormous amounts of military technology from the Americans, his people were suffering and in 1979 things came to a head with the Iranian Revolution, which toppled the shah and led to the religious rule of Ayatollah Khomeini. The stage was set for further confrontation, which duly occurred when a group of students stormed the American consulate and precipitated the Iran Hostage Crisis.
From 1979 until the present, the story of Iran and America has been one of seemingly never-ending tension and conflict. The Iranians have seen numerous good-faith efforts on their part rebuffed by an American foreign policy establishment that refuses to see them as anything other than an impediment to peace in the Middle East, an existential threat to Israel, and a sponsor of terrorism. Until the presidency of Barack Obama, no American administration really tried to establish functional relations with the Islamic Republic (though George H.W. Bush did make some gestures in that direction). Unfortunately, Obama had so much already on his plate during his first term that the much-ballyhooed nuclear deal had to wait until his second one, and by the time it was finalized his time in office was almost over. His successor, Donald Trump, tore up the agreement and bulldozed what little progress had been made.
From Ghazvinian’s point of view, there are two primary impediments to any sort of permanent and far-reaching rapprochement between America and Iran. The first is Israel, which sees a strategic American orientation toward Iran to be antithetical to its own interests and so has sought to stymy all such efforts. They are aided, in this account, by those in the US Congress and media who are quite invested in towing the pro-Israel line. (Here it’s worth pointing out that there are times, particularly in the later chapters of the book, where Ghazvinian comes dangerously close to anti-Semitism). The second are the various Gulf states that are worried that Iran's form of republican government is a threat to their own dictatorships and are thus committed to making sure that the US and Iran remain at odds.
Though it does have a few blindspots, book is a remarkably even-handed account, and while Ghazvinian doesn’t shy away from pointing out the ways in which America has committed actions that have contributed to the unsettled state of affairs, he also isn’t afraid to take the leaders of Iran to task. He points out, for example, that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad often made things more difficult with his outlandish statements, many of which were blown out of proportion by media figures in the United States. Given that there is blame on both sides of the equation, there is, as he points out, an opportunity for some form of reconciliation.
As someone only vaguely familiar with the history and politics of Iran, this book was something of a revelation, and I daresay that it will be for American readers. I didn’t know, for example, that Iran offered the United States assistance before 9/11,in the hopes that doing so would thwart the efforts of their enemies, the Taliban. Likewise, I did not realize that the use of weapons of mass destruction were forbidden by Ayatollah Khomeni as anathema to Islamic teaching, which means, of course, that all of the fear mongering about Iran seeking a nuclear bomb is a great deal of sound and fury signifying, nothing. As Ghazvinian rights points out, the Iranians have, time and again, refused to use WMDs against their opponents, even when it would have saved lives to do so, so it’s very unlikely that they would want to develop a nuclear bomb. Perhaps I’m a bit too credulous, but I personally found this argument convincing.
Ghazvinian closes the book with a call to both America and Iran to engage in a summit at which the various conflicts between them can be hashed out in a systematic and thorough fashion. It’s clear by this point that things cannot go on as they have forever and, just as importantly, that they both have a lot to gain from engaging with one another in a more substantive fashion. It remains to be seen whether the leaders of both nations will have the courage to embark on a new path.