Government
Flynt Lawrence LeverettFlynt Lawrence…
Follow
Going to Tehran: Why the United States Must Come to Terms with the Islamic Republic Paperback – 1 April 2014
by Flynt Leverett (Author), Hillary Mann Leverett (Author)
4.4 4.4 out of 5 stars (73)
Less than a decade after Washington endorsed a fraudulent case for invading Iraq, similarly misinformed and politically motivated claims are pushing America toward war with Iran. Challenging the daily clamor of U.S. saber rattling, Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett argue that America should renounce thirty years of failed strategy and engage with Iran - just as Nixon revolutionized U.S. foreign policy by going to Beijing and realigning relations with China. In Going To Tehran, former analysts in both the Bush and Clinton administrations, the Leveretts offer a uniquely informed account of Iran as it actually is today, not as many have caricatured it or wished it to be. They show that Iran's political order is not on the verge of collapse, that most Iranians still support the Islamic Republic, and that Iran's regional influence makes it critical to progress in the Middle East. Drawing on years of research and access to high-level officials, the Leveretts' indispensable work makes it clear that America must "go to Tehran" if it is to avert strategic catastrophe.
Read less
Review
"Balanced, sober, impressively documented, and rich in insight...A valuable antidote to the warmongering that passes for analysis of Iran and U.S.-Iranian relations." --Andrew J. Bacevich, author of The Limits of Power
"There is a whole slew of highly dubious assumptions and narratives about Iran that are rarely challenged in any meaningful way in media circles. Going to Tehran is vital to thinking critically about these claims....Because of their expertise and their long immersion in these issues, the Leveretts and this book deserve a prominent voice in any serious debate about Iran." --Glenn Greenwald, The Guardian
"Read this book. You'll find a lot of information that's not generally available, and valuable insights that are sharply at odds with conventional views in the United States. This book may help, if it's widely enough understood, to halt a very clear drift toward what could be a terrible war." --Noam Chomsky
"One needn't agree with every word in Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett's new book, Going to Tehran, to grasp its basic truth: U.S. Iran policy is delusional. To shatter this 'sorry Scheme of Things, ' as the Persian poet describes it, will require a U.S. President with courage, audacity and political skill. It will also require a plan not too different from what the Leveretts lay out." --Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell
"This brilliant book eviscerates the American case for continued belligerence toward Iran. Evidence of an Iranian bomb is just not there, the Leveretts write, and American diplomacy should be focused on resolving the conflict, not expanding it. It is time, the book concludes, for an American president to reach for peace and go to Tehran." --Seymour M. Hersh, staff writer, The New Yorker
"This courageous and important book contains the three elements that are necessary for a rethinking of US policy towards Iran: a rigorous critique of the intellectual foundations of present strategy; a devastating expose of misreporting of Iran in the Western media; and a set of bold ideas for how the present dangerous impasse in relations can be broken. It should be essential reading for policymakers and journalists alike." --Anatol Lieven, professor of War Studies, King's College London; senior fellow of the New America Foundation
"Armchair warriors howling to have a go at Iran will denounce this book: you can count on it. Those who have had a bellyful of needless wars will have a different view. Going to Tehran is balanced, sober, impressively documented, and rich in insight. As an antidote to the warmongering that passes for analysis of Iran and US-Iranian relations, its appearance could hardly be more welcome or more timely." --Andrew J. Bacevich, author of Washington Rules: America's Path to Permanent War
From the Publisher
Flynt Leverett served at the National Security Council, State Department, and CIA, and is currently a professor of international affairs and law at Penn State. Hillary Mann Leverett served at the National Security Council and State Department and negotiated for the U.S. government with Iranian officials; she is now senior professorial lecturer at American University. Their writing has also appeared in the New York Times, Politico, Foreign Policy, and Washington Monthly, among other publications. They live in Northern Virginia.
About the Author
Flynt Leverett served at the National Security Council, State Department, and CIA, and is currently a professor of international affairs and law at Penn State. Hillary Mann Leverett served at the National Security Council and State Department and negotiated for the U.S. government with Iranian officials; she is now senior professorial lecturer at American University. Their writing has also appeared in the New York Times, Politico, Foreign Policy, and Washington Monthly, among other publications. They live in Northern Virginia.
===
From other countries
Dave
5.0 out of 5 stars A Must-Read for Anti-War Activists
Reviewed in the United States on 18 June 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
The dogs of war in the U.S. media bark and, in true Don Quixote fashion, it’s a sign that authors Hillary and Flynt Leverett are on the move. In their electrifying new book, Going to Tehran: Why the United States Must Come to Terms with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the former National Security Council experts – who were forced out of their positions for their opposition to Washington’s war-mongering and occupation – take on the growing myths told by the U.S. government about Iran.
Liberals, conservatives and centrists in the U.S. media hysterically attacked Going to Tehran as soon as it came out. The Wall Street Journal derided the Leveretts as “Washington’s most outspoken defenders of the mullahs,” in a particularly nasty hit-piece called “I Heart Khomenei.” Laura Secor of the New York Times called the book “one-sided” and a “mirror image” of the anti-Iran propaganda churned out by the U.S. government. Foreign Affairs claims they “overargue” their case for ending U.S. hostilities. The Weekly Standard accused them of “paranoid dogmatism,” and The New Republic called the book “an act of ventriloquism,” presumably with the Iranian government as the puppet master.
When I see a book receive universal condemnation from the corporate-owned media, I take it as a sign that I need to read it. And ultimately every anti-war activist in the U.S. owes it to the people of Iran to check out this well-researched, persuasive and highly readable case against war with Iran. After all, we live in a country where Argo, a ludicrous xenophobic hit-piece on the Iranian Revolution, wins the Academy Award for Best Picture at the 2012 Oscars. As the Leveretts show in their book, the U.S. government and the corporate media work hand-in-glove to dominate the narrative on Iran, telling and repeating all sorts of myths and falsehoods to build the case for war against a large, independent, oil-producing country in the Middle East. Going to Tehran sets the record straight.
The book focuses on dispelling three elements of the U.S. mythology around Iran, breaking each into three-chapter parts. First, it challenges the myth that Iran is an irrational state “incapable of thinking about its foreign policy interests,” arguing instead that the Islamic Republic is incredibly rational in its fight for survival as a revolutionary state in a region historically dominated by U.S. imperialism and Israeli militarism. Second, it unravels the myth of Iran as an illegitimate state, by showing the overwhelming popularity of the Iranian government and refuting the unsubstantiated claims of electoral fraud in 2009. Finally, it challenges the myth that the U.S. can – or should – topple Iran through sanctions, diplomatic isolation and the threat of war.
Going to Tehran is written primarily to persuade policy-makers to abandon the current U.S. strategy of toppling the government of Iran. Throughout the whole book, the Leveretts seem frustrated at the very likely possibility that their well-researched case against war with Iran will go unread by politicians. However, the primary audience that will benefit from Going to Tehran is not lawmakers, but rather anti-war activists. Anti-war organizers could use the book as a starting point for reading groups and teach-ins about the nature of U.S. aggression.
The disorganized response by the U.S. anti-war movement to NATO’s attack on Libya proves the need for a unified, principled, anti-imperialist opposition to war that seeks to build meaningful international solidarity. And in 2013, Going to Tehran is an important contribution to that struggle.
I wrote a more thorough review on the book that appeared on Fight Back! News in June 2013. Amazon won't let me post links, but a Google Search will turn it up if you're curious on reading more about this outstanding book.
21 people found this helpful
Report
Kate
5.0 out of 5 stars Going to Tehran
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 20 May 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Going to Tehran I would certainly recommend this book to any student of American studies, foreign policy, Middle East studies, security studies and the like. The Leveretts offer a surprisingly balanced account of the relations between the US and Iran and one that can be taken seriously; sadly such works are far and few between. Their pragmatic approach in considering Iran-US relations acknowledges the strategic importance of Iran as a regional power. The authors offer a rare insight into the political and social context of Iran's Islamic Republic which so many other writers have portrayed within the usual constrains of orientalist exoticism and the clash of civilisations hysteria. Without doubt the moderate Islamic Republic of Iran has remained politically and economically stable and a state with whom the US could cooperate in achieving better results across the region than the current blood bath.
The Leveretts have successfully highlighted this fact; a fact which is now well supported by the current context of an enflamed and embattled Arab and Muslim world. The US has been foolhardy in relying on the cooperation of the Arab Amirate backers of extremism to the detriment of all at home and in the Middle East. Throughout the decades of the folly of US foreign policy in the region, Iran has maintained security within its own borders: nothing short of an impressive accomplishment.
Anyone interested in getting a firm grip on Iran-US relations should definitely read this book. As others have noted one does not have to agree with everything it contains nonetheless it is by far the most outstanding, unbiased, unemotional book based on sound information and analysis currently on the market.
7 people found this helpful
Report
Client Amazon
5.0 out of 5 stars Highly informative
Reviewed in France on 2 August 2013
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
This is an extremely well written and well documented book about a very important issue of world politics. The carefully laid out analysis of the Iranian mind set, based on both the political goals and historical background help the reader to understand the issues relative to the relationship between Iran and the West, as well as Iranian influence in many other issues in the Middle East. As I read the book, the counter-revolution nin Egypt (the ousting of Morsi), as well as the apparent turning of events in the Syrian civil war in favor of Assad were underway - and the perspectives presented in this book help to better understand these events which could well reshape the middle East for generations. If you want to understand what is happening in Iran and the rest of the Islamic world, this book will help you.
Of course the detractors of the book are legion - as can only be expected for an essay which demonstrates that American foreign policy and communication concerning the middle east is mostly erroneous, biased, and probably deliberately deceptive.It is always difficult for anyone to accept the need to revise ones deep-seated belief systems.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Armin Sadel
5.0 out of 5 stars Ein Blickwinkel, der fasziniert und aufklären kann!
Reviewed in Germany on 30 December 2017
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Die zwei nahmhaften Autoren wissen wovon Sie sprechen. Ich werde hier nicht den Inhalt vorwegnehmen. Nur eins: Wer bei diesem (vielleicht für einige sehr speziellem) Thema eine ausgewogene Schilderung lesen möchte, welche auch historische Darstellungen gut einarbeitet, dem kann man das Buch nur empfehlen.
Nach dem Lesen ist man sicherlich bereit in nicht nur diesem Thema mehr Dinge zu hinterfragen. So solls sein!
Report
Translate review to English
the Green William
5.0 out of 5 stars An Excellent Book that Helps us Understand the Islamic Republic
Reviewed in Canada on 22 June 2014
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Why does Iran exist today as an Islamic Republic? Media pundits and Iranian ex-pats tell us that it is because the 'backwards' Iranian government is SO repressive and so strong, this despite the fact that MIddle-Eastern dictatorships backed by the only global superpower have fallen or been strongly threatened over the past few years. The Leveretts tell us that the real reason the Islamic Republic has shown longevity over the past 35 years is because the it is seen as a legitimate political entity by the vast majority of Iranians within Iran. The Islamic Republic's ability to garner political participation among the populace and to improve living standards, literacy, and even the rights of women among other things has not so so surprisingly given the Islamic Republic legitimacy. The Leveretts do not shy away from considering the 2009 'green movement' much heralded in the West and Iran's nuclear program. With regards to the former, they reject the widespread claim that Iran's election was illegitimate by providing compelling evidence and analysis--moreover, they also argue that the protests were largely not a rejection of the Islamic Republic but rather a rejection of the election result. With respect to Iran's nuclear program, the Leveretts argue that it is a peaceful program and use IAEA data as well as domestic U.S information to back up their assertions; unfortunately, Iran's nuclear program has been used as a pretext for imposing sanctions on Iran and even as a call to war by neocons.
The Leveretts structure their chapters around the central idea that the United States must as the title of the book says, come to to terms with the Islamic Republic and normalize relations despite resistance from powerful pro-Israeli factions in the U.S and also the Gulf Arab states led by Saudi Arabia. Normalizing relations with Iran is not framed around the ideals of peace and justice but rather for the U.S's own strategic considerations in the Middle-East.
2 people found this helpful
Report
S. Nasiri
5.0 out of 5 stars Very Good Analysis of Iran 1979 Revolution
Reviewed in the United States on 23 November 2024
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
The best book I have found written about Iran revolution and it's historic relation with west and in particular with US. I found most of its analysis fairly balanced and accurate, both on internal politics and external matters. It provides a very realistic way of looking at Islamic Republic and it's idiology. Also offers a critical analysis on a potential reprochmon with US. Highly recommended it....
One person found this helpful
Report
koroush
5.0 out of 5 stars A very well debated book written by credible and very ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 5 September 2015
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
A very well debated book written by credible and very well informed authors. Evidence of thorough and credible research is evident throughout. A must-read for anyone seeking facts about Iranian leadership, her foreign policies and attitude towards the US. A very relevant book to read especially after recent agreement between Iran and the West over the nuclear issue.
One person found this helpful
Report
David Swanson
4.0 out of 5 stars nixon went to china, who will go to iran?
Reviewed in the United States on 3 February 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Iranians are now beginning to die for lack of medicines kept out by U.S.-imposed sanctions. I recently questioned (and videoed) former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright about her notorious defense of sanctions that killed over a half million young Iraqi children. She said she'd been wrong to say what she'd said. She did not comment on the appropriateness of what she'd done. I asked her if what we were doing to Iran was also wrong, and she replied, "No, absolutely not."
So, somehow it is good and proper for us to be killing Iranian children -- although perhaps not to be talking about it.
I suspect that some of the reasons why we imagine there is a greater good being served by such actions are the same reasons no U.S. president will go to Iran in the manner in which Nixon went to China. Of course, the common political wisdom in the United States holds that the president who went to China had to be a Republican. By the same logic, the president who goes to Iran must be a militarist power-mad servant of the corporate oligarchy from the Republican party and not a militarist power-mad servant of the corporate oligarchy from the Democratic party. That wouldn't do at all. And yet, U.S. conduct toward Iran has varied little from Bush to Clinton to Bush Jr. to Obama/Clinton, H. A hopeless spiral of delusional counter-productive approaches toward the Islamic Republic of Iran needs to be broken by a 180 degree turn, and it won't make much substantive difference who does it, as long as it doesn't come too late.
Whether the authors intended exactly that or not, the above is the lesson I take away from an excellent new book by Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett called "Going to Tehran: Why the United States Must Come to Terms with the Islamic Republic of Iran."
It has been U.S. policy for decades not to engage with Iran, and -- misleading rhetoric notwithstanding -- it still is. "More than any of his predecessors, in fact, Obama has given engagement a bad name, by claiming to have reached out to Tehran and failed when the truth is he never really tried."
The Leveretts trace official U.S. policy on Iran to a trio of myths: the myths of irrationality, illegitimacy, and isolation.
IRRATIONALITY:
The evidence of irrationality on the part of the Iranian people or the Iranian government is very slim. I can find much more irrationality in the U.S. public and government. Iranians, in fact, are better at distinguishing between our people and our government than we seem to be at making that distinction on their side. Iran has funded Hizballah and HAMAS, and we call those groups terrorists. But we call any militants opposing Pentagon interests terrorists. Iranian leaders have made comments verging on anti-Semitic (and routinely distorted into outrageous anti-Semitism), but nothing approaching the things Anwar Sadat or Mahmoud Abbas said or wrote before they were deemed rational actors with whom the U.S. and Israel could (and did) work.
Iran's policies have been defensive, not aggressive. Iran has not threatened to attack or attacked others. Iran has refused to retaliate against chemical weapons attacks or terrorism or our shooting down a commercial jet or our funding efforts within Iran to manipulate its elections or our training of militants seeking to overthrow Iran's government. Iran has refused to develop chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. Unlike Britain, Russia, or the United States, when provoked Iran has refused to invade Afghanistan, choosing wise reflection over hot-tempered anger. Look at the polling across the Middle East: people fear the United States and Israel, not Iran.
Iran's approach to the United States over the years has been rational and forbearant. In 1995 the Islamic Republic of Iran offered its first foreign oil development contract to the United States, which turned it down. Iran aided President Clinton by shipping arms to Bosnia, which Clinton turned around and condemned Iran for when the story became public. In 2001, the President of Iran requested permission to pray for 911 victims at the site of the World Trade Center and offered to assist in counterterrorism plans, but was turned down. Iran assisted the United States with its invasion of Afghanistan and was labeled "evil" in return. The current president of Iran wrote long friendly letters to President Bush and President Obama, both of whom ignored them except to allow their staffs to publicly mock them. The Iranian government repeatedly proposed substantive dialogue, offering to put everything on the table, including its nuclear energy program, and was turned down. The Obama administration gave Turkey and Brazil terms it was sure Iran wouldn't agree to; Iran agreed to them; and the White House rejected them, choosing instead to grow outraged at Brazil and Turkey.
Iran tried to believe in the change in Obama's (no doubt domestically intended) rhetoric, but never encountered any substance, only fraud and hostility. That Iran attempts civil relations with a nation surrounding and threatening it, imposing deadly sanctions on it, funding terrorism within its borders, and publicly mocking its sincere approaches is indication of either rationality or something almost Christ-like (I'm inclined to go with rationality).
ILLEGITIMACY:
War is immoral, illegal, and counter-productive. That doesn't change if the people bombed are living or suffering under an illegitimate government. Here in the United States an unaccountable Supreme Court rewrites our basic laws, unverifiable privately owned and operated machines count our votes, candidates are chosen by wealth, media coverage is dolled out by a corporate cartel, presidents disregard the legislature, and high crimes and misdemeanors are not prosecuted. And yet, nonetheless -- amazing to tell -- we'd rather not be bombed. I don't give a damn whether this scholar or that scholar believes the Iranian government is legitimate or not; I don't want any human beings killed in my name with my money.
That being said, common claims of illegitimacy for Iran's government are myths. Western experts have predicted its imminent collapse (as well as its imminent development of nukes) for decades. Iranian elections are far more credible than U.S. ones. A government need not be secular to be legitimate. I might favor secular governments, but I'm not an Iranian. I'm a citizen of a government that has been seeking to control Iran's government for over a half century since overthrowing it in 1953; I don't get to have a voice. Iranians are gaining in rights, in education, in health, in life expectancy (the opposite in many ways of the course we are on in the United States). Iranian women used to be permitted to dress as they liked but not to pursue the education and career they liked. Now that has largely been reversed. Iranian women are guaranteed paid maternity leave that outstrips our standards. Iran's approach to drugs is more rational than our own, its approach to homosexuality more mixed than we suspect, its investment in science cutting edge.
All of that being said, the Iranian government abuses its people in ways that need to be addressed by its people and should have been directly addressed by the Leveretts' book.
I also want to quibble with the Leveretts' account of the 1979 revolution in light of the views of some who were there at the time. I'm not convinced that Khomeini led and directed the revolution from the start. I'm willing to believe that secular pro-democracy activists did not represent the views of all Iranians. There's no question that significant support swung to Khomeini and the mullahs who claimed power. But Khomeini's supposed leadership was news in the West before it was ever heard of in Tehran. The Shah was not opposed for his secularism, but for his surveillance, imprisonment, torture, murder, greed, expropriation of wealth, and subservience to foreigners. The Leveretts admit that Khomeini originally proposed a government with less power for himself and then revised his plans, but they claim that he only did so in response to secularists' insistence that he hold no power at all. Not the strongest defense of tyranny I've ever encountered.
The authors then cite a public referendum of December 2-3, 1979, in which, they say, "the new constitution was approved by 98 percent of participating voters." Sounds impressive, right? Guess what choices the voters were offered: an Islamic republic or the Shah! Of course they chose the Islamic republic! But to turn around and claim that 98% voted against a secular republic is misleading. During the 2003-2013 U.S. war on Iraq, a U.S. Democratic-Party group called MoveOn.org polled its membership. Did they support House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's plan for more war or President George W. Bush's? Of course, they overwhelmingly chose Pelosi's. MoveOn then turned around and claimed that their people opposed Congresswoman Barbara Lee's proposal to end the war. Such votes should be given no more dignity than they deserve.
How the government of the 1980s came to be does not tell us everything we should know about today's government, but nothing you could tell me about today's government would have any relevance to the morality of bombing the people of Iran.
ISOLATION:
The United States has sought to isolate Iran and failed dramatically, with Iran now chairing the Nonaligned Movement. It has sought to use economic and other pressures to overthrow the government, and instead strengthened it. In 2011, Obama opened a "virtual embassy" to propagandize the Iranian people for "regime change." In 2012 it removed the terrorist designation for an opposition terrorist group called the MEK. Imagine if Iran did such things to us, rather than just being Muslim or whatever it is that it's actually done to us. The Leveretts present a long and unrelenting history of incompetence and irrationality . . . from the U.S. side. They have been reduced, reasonably enough, to something that sounds ridiculous: longing for Richard Nixon.
I don't expect you to understand
After you've caused so much pain
But then again, you're not to blame
You're just a human, a victim of the insane
We're afraid of everyone
Afraid of the sun
Isolation
The sun will never disappear
But the world may not have many years
Isolation
--John Lennon
15 people found this helpful
Report
Farhang Jahanpour
4.0 out of 5 stars A good but rather uncritical counterbalance of negative Western propaganda about Iran
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 23 March 2014
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
This book dispels many of the myths perpetrated in the West about Iran, without paying enough attention to the way that the West has treated Iran during the past two hundred years. The reality in Iran is completely at variance with the propaganda by the neocons and the supporters of Israel. However, the book is not sufficiently critical of the negative aspects of the clerical regime in Iran, especially its terrible human rights record.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Igor Biryukov
5.0 out of 5 stars Cri de Coeur
Reviewed in the United States on 23 January 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
This is a well-written, frank, and courageous book. The master idea is that there are unpleasant times ahead for the US unless it changes its policy from a hegemony-oriented policy to a modus-vivendi-oriented policy. The conclusion of the book is: it's time for an American president to go to Tehran.
It offers an unorthodox analysis of Iran and is a scathing criticism of the US's foreign policy. The authors argue that the US is simply on the wrong trajectory leading to very unpleasant outcomes. The Grand Strategy of the Obama's administration (like the admins before him) has been to effectively a "regime change" in Iran. It has been endorsed and pursued semi-silently, not openly. The strategy is to topple the Iranian regime "by other means" and replace it with a puppet regime made of the Iranian émigrés, cranks, Saudi-backed militant lunatics and double-agents. This unpleasant compote we can observe today in Syria. The strategy is extremely ill-advised. The "other means" are: 1] a run on the Iranian currency 2] sanctions and embargoes against Iran 3] cyber-weapons and "worms" targeting Iran's nuclear facilities 4] targeted assassinations of top Iranian nuclear scientists. 5] sanctions against Russia, its banks and firms doing business with Iran.
This strategy may prove successful. But the collateral damage will be very unpleasant for the US. Apart of putting the world of international relations in flames, one of the victims will be the relations with Russia -- my former country -- which has been already much frayed because of the conflict in Syria and the US's support of the anti-Putin opposition last year. Put it in the context of the Sunni-Shia struggle in Syria, where the US is siding with the Sunni Gulf states against Iran and Russia -- unwisely in my view -- and it looks like a devil's brew. There will be no winners, we can be sure of that. The US would be much better off by talking to Iran seriously. This book is calling for this persuasively. Are there defects in the book? Sure, but the pluses of the book by far outweigh its minuses. The US policy-makers need to hear criticisms like that. I highly recommend it.
61 people found this helpful
Report
==
Rod
5.0 out of 5 stars A Must Read
Reviewed in the United States on 29 January 2013
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
This book was written by a husband and wife team, both of whom have extensive backgrounds. I will say that Flynt has a PhD but it is not mentioned anywhere in the book or on the jacket.The author wants the book to stand on WHAT he has to say not on his academics. If you are interested, you can find this information on the internet. The author does not base his argument on opinion but on facts; he backs up everything he says.
The most interesting part of the book, in my opinion, is in his comparison to the situation with Iran today with that with China in the 60's. President Nixon was determined to try to improve the situation, so he made a trip to China to meet with the leaders. I am old enough to have lived through those days. Relations with China greatly improved. Today, the author says the President must go to Tehran or lose Islam forever. He explains the Iranian revolution in detail and points out that The Islamic Republic of Iran does not hate the US and poses no threat to it. The greatest threat to Islam lies with Israel and is conducted entirely with American money. We need to stop supporting Israel financially. The author touches on every aspect of the problem and I agree with every word.
11 people found this helpful
Report
Kindle Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars An Terrific Read
Reviewed in the United States on 9 May 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
This really is a very brave and very brilliant read. The perspective here is a seismic shift from what you normally hear, especially in the West with regards to the Islamic Republic of Iran and by extension, the Greater Middle East. The eerie similarities they point out between the People's Republic of China in the 1950s and 1960s and the Islamic Republic of Iran today are eye opening, but that is saved for the final chapter of the book. Meanwhile, they spend most of the time discussing the history of the Islamic Republic and then proceed to deconstruct and ultimately destroy basically every single false and misleading things ever said about Iran from its supposed lack of legitimacy amongst its people to the 'fraud' election of 2009. They also spare no effort in going after the anti-Iran lobby from the neoconservatives to the liberal interventionists to the expatriate community to even taking brave, but measured shots at the Israel lobby. The backlash coming from these four groups is understandable considering they have built their careers and their political power on these myths and lies. I urge anyone and everyone who is even remotely curious about the current situation in the Middle East to pick up this book and at least be willing to consider what it has to say.
5 people found this helpful
Report
Amazon Customer
4.0 out of 5 stars An Alternate Approach to Move Toward US/Iran Detente
Reviewed in the United States on 14 March 2013
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
This outspoken treatise advocates dealing with the practical realities of the evolving middle eastern situation--and especially Iran. In one simple statement this book states that: Acknowledging the form of the Iranian Islamic Republic, and dealing with it as it is, can more readily resolve the nuclear issue than beating on the track of resolving it first, which has been our path heretofore.
Many specialists are identified in this work that are said to be unreliably influencing US foreign policy with inaccurate recommendations of fact and policy. It is not possible for this reader to be assured the authors are right. But, based on the progress to date in resolving issues with the Iranians, some alternate approach should be tried to improve the relations between the two countries and to alleviate the challenges faced by the Iranian people given their isolation from capital, commerce, and developments in science and technology. If another approach were successful it could lead to the improved economic well being of the Iranian people.
The reader needs to consider this books thesis so that a balanced view of the issues can be broadened. The time taken to read this book is worth the effort.
One person found this helpful
Report
Mr. Crawley
5.0 out of 5 stars Absolutely Brilliant.
Reviewed in the United States on 31 March 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
This is the first time that I have read any of the Leveretts books, and I must say, this is going down as one of my all-time favorite books. Never have I read such an objective book or article about Iran, and never have I read such a well-written, almost story-like, book on the history of US-Iran relations. All of their claims are documented, and this book is a MUST READ for anyone wanting to know the true story behind Iran and US-Iran relations (both are covered independently in separate parts).
This is my first review and I hope that it helps in getting this book more and more publicity.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Parvin Darabi
3.0 out of 5 stars Too biased toward Islam and the Islamic Republic
Reviewed in the United States on 24 March 2014
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
Although I agree with the Leverett's that US must come to terms with Iran and recognize the Iranians right to nuclear technology, I found the book to biased toward the Islamic laws and the clerical government of Iran. Apparently Hillary Mann does not sees anything wrong with lack of personal freedoms in Iran and she thinks that Islamic laws are fine for Iranian women. In Islam a woman is a ward of her father, then her husband, then her son and a woman's testimony in a court of law is half of that of a man. She can't divorce and will not have custody of her children and her life worth is half of that of a man. This is so ridiculous that the dieh (blood money) for the man's left testicle is higher than the life of a woman and all kind of restrictions on women. Of course it is probably fine if you live in the United States and have to travel to Iran as the guest of Islamic Republic to put a scarf over your head while cashing on the oil fortune to support the oppression of women who actually live there and have to live under harsh Islamic laws. Sure women have made a lot of progress in education but if one does not have personal freedom what does one have? My sister Dr. Homa Darabi Self-immolated in Iran protesting oppression of the Iranian women, in 1994. Her story is published in the book, Rage Against the Veil, Prometheus books, 1999. They fired her from her professorial position at Tehran University because her hijab was not right and closed her private practice for not wearing socks. They arrested our friends only son at age 15 from his High School and six years later they asked his parents to pick up his corpse. The crimes that Khomeini committed against the Iranian people are not just a few which happened right after the revolution. It continues till today. I think the book would have been a lot better if the couple did not go into defending the Islamic Republic's Islamic rules. Under the Shah we always wondered why in the Iranian senate 30 members were appointed by the Shah and 30 by the people? Which meant one person rights was equivalent to the rest of the Iranian population. Now the book states that it is OK that 6 member of the guardian council is appointed and six are elected. Isn't this the same dictatorial practice?
I wonder how long will Hillary Mann be able to live in Iran under the Islamic rules. After three days I want to kill somebody. I would like to ask Hillary Mann to go to Iran and live as an average female and see how she like it to be worth less than the left testicle of a man any mans?
8 people found this helpful
Report
Natalie Burgin
1.0 out of 5 stars A new look on outdated American Policy...but the truth stops there.
Reviewed in the United States on 14 July 2015
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
A new look on outdated American Policy...but the truth stops there.
American policy, a tale as old as time, which happens not to work.
From Communist Cuba, the peoples Republic of China, to the Islamic republic of Iran, America’s approach of implementing sanctions as a form of punishment has time and again failed. In this book Going to Tehran, the authors, Flynt and Hillary Levette, offer an in depth look at why the American government must change its policy towards the Islamic Republic, why the policy has failed to work thus far, and why it matters for the future of the U.S and the Middle East.
My initial hopes for this book, were to gain insight on the history and current state of U.S relations with the Islamic Republic. I had also anticipated that I would be presented the case of Iran through an alternative and not particularly American sanctioned outlook. Both of these hopes were indeed granted.
The book included nine, rather lengthy, chapters which chronical the history of relations with the Iran, the aftermath of the revolution, and an argument on behalf of the Islamic republic in regards to current and future relations. The book did an excellent job at covering all the major events and policies that have brought America and the Islamic Republic to its current state of affairs. It also sheds light on many issues and events that are rarely spoken about in the U.S but are pivotal to understanding foreign policy in regards to Iran and the middle east.
As an avid reader on middle eastern policy, I was especially thrilled when I found this book, I had anticipated a real “Iranian” perspective. Unfortunately I was sadly disappointed. This book read as if it was a propaganda piece published straight from Tehran, except for the lack of any real Iranian influence whatsoever. It was blatantly obvious that the authors not only were not Iranian, but one could even argue that they had never even met an Iranian while doing their research. For example, they premised that Iran would never obtain or even attempt to obtain a nuclear weapon due to their religious convictions, but no further evidence was provided. It would not have been a difficult task for the authors to find direct quotations form the Quran to back this statement up, or perhaps even words from a Muslim cleric. Instead the authors anticipate you will take their word for it. Furthermore the book attributes Islam as the driving force in Iranian politics and paints the country as a peaceful commune of Islamists living in harmony together. It completely fails to acknowledge the diversity of Iran and its people, and altogether ostracize the thousands and thousands of Iranians who had to flee the Republic and wish to return to a very different Iran. It touts the revolution as being truly Iranaian and heroic but completely denounces the “Green Movement,” which suggests contradiction and perhaps bias in the authors thought process.
All and all I found the piece to be flowery and ill-researched. It is correct in its premise that Iranian sanctions are not working and succeeds in presenting alternative argument, however it fails to get to the heart of the issue of Iran. This could of been a powerful voice on behalf of the Iranian people but instead it fell short and painted an unrealistic scenario based on half facts that lacked perspective. If you are looking for a detailed history of Iranian/U.S relations, this is an excellent resource. However if you are looking for a truly Iranian perspective, look elsewhere.
Khodafez,
Natalie
2 people found this helpful
Report
CMaximus
1.0 out of 5 stars A call for a paradigm shift in U.S.-Iran policy
Reviewed in the United States on 28 March 2017
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
I stated in an earlier review Paul Pillar’s Why America Misunderstands the World is a little too “blame America first” for me. Well, Pillar is a combination of Dick Cheney and John Bolton, scourges of the political left, compared to Flynt and Hillary Leverett. You would think Iran, the “world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism” by most accounts, is as pure as the driven snow and is nothing but the perennial victim of the big, bad superpower the United States after reading this “balanced,” “sober,” and “courageous” plea for a radically different American policy toward Iran.
This book, at its heart, is an argument for what is and what isn’t “anti-American” (p.2) as well as what actually constitutes American interests. Are American interests a Middle East populated by governments friendly to the U.S. or are American interests more ideological and abstract-more about values? The Leveretts advocate “genuine rapprochement” with Iran, recognition of the regime’s legitimacy and an end to the coercion of political outcomes and marginalization of Iran from the regional and world order.
These authors frequently compare rapprochement with Iran today with Nixon’s going to China. Several other recent analyses of Iranian policy do likewise, such as Barbara Slavin’s Bitter Friend, Bosom Enemies, but they are wrong. They are wrong to claim the two situations are analogous; they aren’t. Also, frequent comparisons between the U.S.-Iran relationship today and the rush toward the Iraq War in 2003 are just as bogus. This comparison is exactly how the Iranians justify becoming a nuclear power; they have a right to protect themselves from an eminent American invasion.
I do not doubt the Leveretts’ sincere desire to change the conversation, a paradigm shift in American Iran policy, but the publishing of their assessments and opinions here also represents some sour grapes. They are frustrated having been pushed aside for vocalizing their views. They feel justified though, comparing their experience to that of the “China hands” in foreign service who were cast aside in the 1950s but hindsight has validated.
I consider the Iran nuclear deal to be feckless appeasement and a gigantic failure, and I have evidence. Rather than moderating Iranian export of terror or vitriolic rhetoric, the lifting of sanctions has empowered the worst elements in Iran—the Ayatollah Khamenei and the Revolutionary Guards. If the Leveretts and the advocates of the Iran nuclear deal were correct, Iran would have begun to “normalize” following the agreement, and the opposite is true. Iran has been increasingly provocative—now with more money. In a widely read opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal in early 2016, the United Arab Emirates’ Ambassador to the United States Yousef al-Otaiba expressed his country’s regret that Iran—one year after the conclusion of the nuclear framework agreement—had not changed its behavior. “Don’t be fooled,” argued the article’s subhead, “The Iran we have long known—hostile, expansionist, violent—is alive and well.”
The Leveretts assert only narrow-minded American ideological and political positions prevent the U.S. from “realigning” relations with Iran. I vehemently disagree; the two nation’s nation interests conflict. One need look no farther than the current debacle in Syria; Russia and Iran have propped up Assad while Obama fiddled, abdicating responsibility.
2 people found this helpful
Report
John C. Walsh
5.0 out of 5 stars interest pacs and liberal interventionist that shape foreign policy to meet their objectives are portrayed and agendas revealed
Reviewed in the United States on 28 July 2015
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
A must read unravelling Middle East policy and American misadventure post cold war. The other side is aptly unfolded presenting a picture in dramatic contrast to prevailing opinion,spin, and outright propaganda that has colored American public opinion of Iran and it's Islamic Republic. The book traces the development of competing opinion and policy both in Iran and in the foreign policy centers of American government. Think tanks and expats, neocons, interest pacs and liberal interventionist that shape foreign policy to meet their objectives are portrayed and agendas revealed to better understand why we are where we are in the quagmire that is the MIddle East. Missed opportunities for raproachment are presented as they conflict with the changes in American policy from a concern with balancing power to a desire for American hegemony and vital control of dwindling oil resources. Anyone interested in becoming informed and is open minded will benefit from absorbing the fact filled pages of this scholarly work.
5 people found this helpful
Report
Ahmad H. J. Ahmad
5.0 out of 5 stars A view against the stream!
Reviewed in the United States on 22 October 2014
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
This is a perfect book for people who want to know more about the normal Iran, not the media demonized Iran..
The writer brings in some interesting evidence that needs to be thought of and challenged, in order to get a clearer picture of what is really happening in Iran, in addition to the US/Europe's stance against it.
Interesting thoughts about the legitimacy of the revolution (in spite of the people trying to demonize it), and the other side of the 2009 elections story..
I have to say that the writer has lots of guts to go against the mainstream in the US and the west! This goes in line with an old adage for Imam Ali " do not fear the righteousness road due to the lack of its users"
Recommended for people who want to challenge the media created picture of Iran and who want to seek the truth, regardless whether it fits his/her liking or not!
9 people found this helpful
Report
Cyrus Safdari
5.0 out of 5 stars REQUIRED reading on US-Iran relations
Reviewed in the United States on 10 January 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Unless you've read this book, frankly you have no business having any opinions on US-Iran relations. The authors, each experienced in the actual conduct of US foreign policy and not mere armchair generals or think-tank denizens, meticulously define and then debunk common myths and the "conventional wisdom" about Iran prevalent in Washington foreign policy circles and in the the mainstream media, and show how these myths have thus far accomplished nothing to serve US interests except to put the US and Iran on the path of yet another needless confrontation in the Mideast built on lies. Their arguments are fully backed up with extensive citations to sources, and they lay out a comprehensive case for a new approach to Iran along the lines of "Nixon going to China," by substituting realism for wishful thinking. It takes intellectual bravery to go against the tide on what has become a deeply polarized and emotion-laden issue. This book stands out by far amongst all the ill-researched and agenda-driven books on US-Iran relations. 5 stars.
44 people found this helpful
Report
==
From other countries
Gary
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent book for the interested
Reviewed in the United States on 21 August 2014
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
I can not say enough about this book. All Americans should read this well researched book by career foreign attache and affairs officers. Iran is not a saint in the league of nations but I have come to be dubious of American foreign affairs also. Let he without sin cast the first stone have at it. Excellent book for the interested. You get both sides of the equation in dealing with the most stable, educated and modern nation in the middle east. Whom I'm not be fan of but they are a reality and we need to recognize their existence and importance to the middle east fiasco..
10 people found this helpful
Report
Seth Kandl
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent Iran overview, with a rarely seen American perspective
Reviewed in the United States on 22 July 2015
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
I'll admit, while I don't always agree with Professor Leverett's views, they are well presented and argued here. The book provides an understanding of the historical growth of the Iranian nation and the impact of the Revolution on modern political issues, both regionally and internationally. His experience and insight provide an excellent perspective that many Americans will not have access to (and some will flat out reject). If you want an interesting and different overview of modern Iran, grab the book, you will not be disappointed (even if you do disagree with his positions)
4 people found this helpful
Report
Brandon
5.0 out of 5 stars Nice hardcover book
Reviewed in the United States on 23 June 2023
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Terrific content. If you are interested in learning about relations between Iran and the USA you should pick this up.
Customer image
One person found this helpful
Report
Mehrdad
4.0 out of 5 stars Going to Tehran
Reviewed in the United States on 2 April 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
The book clearly debunks a large amount of misinformation that has been spread in the US by Israeli propaganda that the only way to deal with the government of Iran is through force. It outlines why the US should deal with Iranian government through realistic diplomacy and not by sunctions or threats.
3 people found this helpful
Report
Som
5.0 out of 5 stars A Fantastic Read - Candid perspectives coming from US intelligence officers
Reviewed in the United States on 28 July 2013
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
If you want to balance your perception created by one-sided and censored media coverage about Iran and learn more about how political systems different from the ones you are used to, but yet legitimate, function, this is a must-read. The Leveretts display a rare conviction in a view that may not be widely popular because of decades of biased imagery created about the Islamic Republic of Iran. Their reasons are compelling and articulate.
2 people found this helpful
Report
arash izadpanah
5.0 out of 5 stars Fact-based and full of reason, logic, common sense and humanity
Reviewed in the United States on 4 March 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
The Leveretts book clearly explains why it makes all the sense in the world to engage Iran with diologue and even respect. If real progress is to be made in relationship with this nation, the Leveretts have put forth an interesting roadmap. Although I am hopeful to see this type of engagement, I am not holding my breath...
2 people found this helpful
Report
Fereshteh Sarram
4.0 out of 5 stars Anovel aaproach
Reviewed in the United States on 29 April 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Authors try to be fair and produce evidence that America did not keep its promises in dealings with Iran. However the core message is how to protect American Interest and possibly its hegemony.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Asghar Shariff
4.0 out of 5 stars Interesting books
Reviewed in the United States on 28 August 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
I liked both books. Enjoyed reading them. Would be interested in more similar books for future reading. I would not mind being reminded of sale such books.
Thank you.
One person found this helpful
Report
Howard I Gilman
4.0 out of 5 stars Thought Provoking
Reviewed in the United States on 30 August 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Interesting and thought-provoking. Really,a "must read" for anyone who believes they have an open mind on Iran. blah blah blah
One person found this helpful
Report
American
5.0 out of 5 stars Insightful for anyone interested in Iran and US relations
Reviewed in the United States on 6 April 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Wonderfully done and helpful to gain an objective understanding regarding the matter of iranianUS relations. Any American who cares about avoiding another war in the Middle East should consider reading this book. The authors provide first hand knowledge and concrete experience with regard to the issue.
4 people found this helpful
Report
==
BIGh
3.0 out of 5 stars Provides a fresh look at U. S. - ...
Reviewed in the United States on 8 May 2015
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
Provides a fresh look at U.S. - Iranian dealings since the 1979 revolution but ignore the dark side of the Iranian behavior. It stands out as a counterpoint to the accepted narratives promulgated by so called Iranian and conservative American pundits.
Report
Mangolia
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent Analysis
Reviewed in the United States on 23 February 2013
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Book is extremely well documented and clearly demonstrates the necessity of engaging in dialogue with Iran. The current path is not working and can only lead to increased conflicts with no happy ending. Must read for anyone looking for a way out of the current deadlock.
6 people found this helpful
Report
Richard A. Hogaboom
5.0 out of 5 stars I liked especially the comparison about the Nixon trip to China ...
Reviewed in the United States on 17 October 2015
Format: PaperbackVerified Purchase
A unique view from State Department/National Security Counsel/CIA insiders that should help rationalize the dialog about Iran. I liked especially the comparison about the Nixon trip to China and what we should be doing today.
5 people found this helpful
Report
soad haddad
4.0 out of 5 stars Four Stars
Reviewed in the United States on 30 January 2015
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Eye opening to reality and clearing quite a bit of prejudice.
Report
Craig Doner
5.0 out of 5 stars Best Book on Iran - U.S. Relations to Date
Reviewed in the United States on 10 May 2013
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
Extremely well-researched and thoughtful presentation from two very experienced Iranian experts. A unique inside view of the shortsightedness of some of Obama's foreign policy positions. A must read for anyone interested in the future of the U.S. role in the world.
3 people found this helpful
Report
Pruaps44
3.0 out of 5 stars It's okay
Reviewed in the United States on 3 April 2013
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
An interesting read, but I expected more. The reviews were great. My expectations perhaps were too high. I wasn't impressed with the book, but it was....okay.
Report
Max Sahba
5.0 out of 5 stars ... description of the conditions in Iran as well as excellent recommendations to USG as how to approach resolving the ...
Reviewed in the United States on 1 February 2015
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
A truly well researched and factual description of the conditions in Iran as well as excellent recommendations to USG as how to approach resolving the dispute between the two countries.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Gibeau
2.0 out of 5 stars Read with caution
Reviewed in the United States on 31 March 2015
Format: KindleVerified Purchase
Heard Hillary this morning on C Span. I found her rude, abrasive, and somewhat hysterical on the subject of Iran. She is clearly a little blinded by her stubborn opinions. Therefore, read with caution.
2 people found this helpful
Report
Najmeddin Ravan
5.0 out of 5 stars This book gives the true story of what the Islamic ...
Reviewed in the United States on 15 April 2015
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
This book gives the true story of what the Islamic Repulic of Iran is all about. Found it to be very informative.
Report
james ploski
5.0 out of 5 stars 5 stars all the way!!
Reviewed in the United States on 29 August 2016
Format: HardcoverVerified Purchase
Great historical reference. Should be a required read. Couldn't put it down..
2 people found this helpful
Report
==
==
<테헤란으로 가기: 왜 미국은 이슬람 공화국과 타협해야 하는가> 요약 및 평론
1. 요약: 이란을 향한 '그랜드 바겐'의 필요성
플린트 레버렛과 힐러리 맨 레버렛은 본 저서에서 지난 수십 년간 지속된 미국의 대이란 정책이 철저히 실패했음을 통렬하게 비판한다. 저자들은 미국 외교 정책의 주류를 형성해 온 '정권 교체(Regime Change)' 전략이 현실에 기반하지 않은 망상에 불과하다고 주장하며, 미국이 중동 내 패권을 유지하고 국익을 실현하기 위해서는 이슬람 공화국의 생존과 정당성을 인정하는 '대타협(Grand Bargain)'에 나서야 한다고 역설한다.
이슬람 공화국의 내구성과 정당성 저자들은 서구 언론과 정치권이 묘사하는 '곧 붕괴할 독재 국가'로서의 이란은 허상이라고 지적한다. 1979년 혁명 이후 이란은 이슬람주의와 공화주의를 결합한 독특한 시스템을 구축했으며, 이는 상당수 민중의 지지를 받고 있다. 특히 2009년 녹색 운동 당시 불거진 부정 선거 의혹과 그에 따른 정권 붕괴 가능성을 서구 사회가 지나치게 과대평가했다고 비판한다. 이란 체제는 외부의 압력에 굴복할 만큼 유약하지 않으며, 오히려 민족주의적 자부심과 종교적 결속력을 바탕으로 공고한 내구성을 갖추고 있다는 것이다.
미국 외교의 실패와 '봉쇄'의 한계 책은 리처드 닉슨의 중국 방문(1972년)을 예로 들며, 당시 미국이 공산주의 중국을 인정함으로써 냉전의 판도를 바꿨듯 이란과도 유사한 전략적 결단이 필요하다고 주장한다. 미국은 이란을 악마화하고 경제 제재를 통해 고립시키려 했으나, 이는 오히려 이란 내 강경파의 입지를 강화하고 이란의 핵 개발 의지를 꺾지 못하는 결과를 초래했다. 또한, 이란의 협력 없이는 아프가니스탄과 이라크 문제의 근본적인 해결이 불가능함을 강조한다.
전략적 수용으로서의 제언 레버렛 부부는 미국이 이란의 핵 권리를 평화적 범위 내에서 인정하고, 안전 보장을 약속하며, 외교 관계를 정상화해야 한다고 제안한다. 이는 이란에 대한 '선의'가 아니라, 중동 내 안정과 미국의 에너지 안보, 그리고 이스라엘의 장기적인 안전을 위한 냉철한 '현실주의적' 선택이라는 것이 이 책의 핵심 논지다.
2. 평론: 현실주의적 통찰과 논쟁적 시각 사이의 외줄타기
<테헤란으로 가기>는 미국 외교가 이데올로기적 편향성에 매몰되어 이란이라는 실체를 제대로 보지 못하고 있다는 점을 날카롭게 파고든다. 특히 저자들이 백악관 국가안보회의(NSC) 등 실무 현장에서 쌓은 경험을 바탕으로 기술했기에, 정책 결정 과정의 맹점을 지적하는 부분은 상당한 설득력을 지닌다.
현실주의의 미덕: 악마화를 넘어선 이해 이 책의 가장 큰 미덕은 이란을 '이성적인 국가 행위자'로 상정했다는 점이다. 서구의 시각에서 이란의 행동은 광기 어린 종교적 광신으로 비치기 쉽지만, 저자들은 그것이 국가 생존과 지역적 영향력 확대를 위한 철저한 계산의 산물임을 입증하려 노력한다. 이러한 접근은 감정적 배제와 객관적 분석이 결합된 고도의 현실주의적 시각을 보여준다.
편향성에 대한 비판적 검토 그러나 이 책은 출간 당시부터 이란 정권의 권위주의적 면모와 인권 탄압 문제를 지나치게 과소평가한다는 거센 비판에 직면했다. 저자들은 이란 내부의 민주화 열망이나 정권의 억압 기제를 '안정을 위한 체제 보존'이라는 논리로 정당화하는 경향을 보인다. 이는 전략적 이익을 위해 보편적 가치를 희생시키는 현실주의 외교의 전형적인 한계다. 2022년 히잡 시위 등 이후 발생한 사건들은 이란 내부의 균열이 저자들의 주장보다 훨씬 깊을 수 있음을 시사한다.
결론: 닉슨적 결단의 유효성 그럼에도 불구하고, "적대국을 인정함으로써 친구로 만들지는 못하더라도 관리 가능한 상대로 만들어야 한다"는 저자들의 주장은 여전히 유효하다. 미국이 중동에서 끝없는 전쟁의 굴레에서 벗어나기 위해서는 싫든 좋든 이란과의 공존을 모색해야 한다는 제언은, 맹목적인 제재가 가져온 외교적 교착 상태를 타파할 수 있는 강력한 대안으로 남아 있다. 이 책은 이란이라는 난제를 풀기 위해 우리가 반드시 마주해야 할 불편한 진실들을 담고 있는 문제작이다.
세진님, 이 요약과 평론이 도움이 되었을까요? 추가로 이 책에 언급된 특정 역사적 사건이나 이란-미국 관계의 다른 측면에 대해 더 알고 싶으신 점이 있다면 말씀해 주세요.
==
No comments:
Post a Comment