- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
Posted December 15, 2007
David Barsamian¿s book, Targeting Iran, is a book that delves into the U.S.-Iran conflict, the oil industry, American Foreign policy, and usage of low-intensity warfare. He offers a unique prospective in correspondence with three interviewees, Ervand Abrahamian, Noam Chomsky, and Nahid Mozaffari, gaining more than one opinion on the issue. Although these opinions tend to be towards the left, they all offer solid arguments to support their cases. Barsamian draws particular attention to the situation surrounding the CIA led military coup in 1953 and the Islamic Revolution in 1979, as well as to the Iraqi insurgency and its influence on Iran. His purpose in the book is simple and is printed in black and white as the concluding mark of the introduction: ¿The purpose of this book is to offer a primer on the escalating crisis between the United States and Iran, to provide the reader with critical background information often omitted when U.S. media discuss Iran, and to introduce readers to some of the deeper political and cultural issues at play in contemporary Iran.¿ In the introduction, Barsamian gives a depiction of Iran¿s place in the international arena and gives a general overview of the U.S.-Iran conflict, while going into Iran¿s geographic background and of U.S. national interest rooted in democracy. It goes on to exploit U.S. policy surrounding Iran in a quote that Shirin Ebadi 'an Iranian Nobel Peace Prize Laureate' chose from Hafez, a poet, that reads ¿If there is no justice, then those who are deprived may one day take to the streets and rise up.¿ In the first interview with Noam Chomsky entitled ¿Targeting Iran,¿ Barsamian explores many issues surrounding U.S. hostility towards Iraq including the hype made in mass-media, anticipatory self-defense 'the policy of the U.S. and Britain to attack a country based on a threat of force', the possible use of terrorism in the U.S., U.S. economic weakness, and the impossibility of an attack on Iran in the present-time, a situation that would amount to unpredictable consequences. In the second interview, with Ervand Abrahamin, Barsamian compares the conflict with Iraq to the conflict of Iran while noting differences in saying that that, unlike in Iraq ¿It would be incremental movements towards war rather than plans for war.¿ He also goes deeply into the matter of nuclear arms and nuclear energy in relation to Iran, calling it a matter ¿national prestige¿ and that building a bomb, to the Iranians, is not as important as ¿the option of having it.¿ Abrahamin also talks about the 1953 coup and its effects on U.S.-Iran relations. ¿The CIA carried out the 1953 coup, and therefore. Anyone in Iran who is seen as close to the U.S. is then also seen as being part of a coup conspiracy.¿ He also talks about the conflict from both a U.S. and an Iranian view in order to show opposing viewpoints on the issues surrounding the U.S.- Iran conflict. He then talks about insurgencies in Iraq and Iran, stating that Iran has a common interest with the U.S. to ¿get rid of the Taliban and al-Qaeda.¿ However, he claims that if the U.S. were to break relations with Iran, it would put up a red flag and the American position in Afghanistan would become a desperate one. The final interview, with Nahid Mozaffari is on the power of writing and how many writers gained fame after the revolution as well as censorship and political awareness. The book discusses a range of issues, as can be seen throughout the three interviews. It would be a good read for political science students in order to gain different perspectives on the U.S-Iran conflict in international relations. However, this book would also prove useful to English literature with the censoring of texts and the mentioning of poets, writers, and films, thus beWas this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.