Hey Everyone :)
Here are the readings due for Week 4. Out of the current events, make sure you read at least two, if not all!
Role of the Government http://countrystudies.us/iran/63.htm
Iran: The White Revolution
Iran's Love-Hate Relationship with the UK
Current Events:
Haaretz: Syria documents show Iran helping Assad to sidestep sanctions
Iran Won’t Yield to Pressure on Nuclear Plans, Minister Says
How to Engage Iran
Averting doomsday: My obsession with stopping a war on Iran
India Defends Oil Purchases From Iran
Feel free to comment on whichever one, or all if you like! Just do not summarize; we want to hear your thoughts and reactions to what you read. Also, do not hesitate to respond to a classmate's comment and start a discussion!
PLEASE COME READY TO DISCUSS!
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Frim "Iran's Love-Hate Relationship with the UK", we can see that the Iranian society is very diverse with lots of different opinions even though it is an authoritarian regime. This knowledge tells us that, instead of thinking the Iranian government as one, we should utilize the differences and factions within the Iranian society to the U.S.'s interest. If we can understand the different factions, we can shape change in the Iranian society without having to topple the regime ourselves. ---Wenjia Xing
ReplyDeleteIn the article about the Iran/UK relations, I found it interesting how important of a role of writers and poets are in Iran. It was just interesting to see that of the few examples that were used to show the positive side of relations between the two countries, they mainly had to do with the arts. I feel that most people that are not Iranian or have not studied the middle east, or Iran, would never believe or be aware of Iran's high regard and history it has in the arts, and how artists and their craft are still very esteemed.
ReplyDeleteI noticed that Iran/UK relations are similar to US/Iran relations. The art in Iran reminds me of Berlin's history. Towards the end of the monarchy, Germans modernization brought about new art forms that supported freedom of expression and individualism; thus, resulted in the end of the monarchy. With Iran's artistic side, I wonder if expression or abstract thinking will guide citizens to think about policy or political relations
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading the India article regarding the newly proposed sanctions on Iran. It was really interesting to read about the objective relationship India has built with Iran despite pressure from the US to end economic relations completeley with Iran. Although the article subtley kept mentioning how India is also against the nuclear program in Iran, it failed to really elaborate why, instead it seemed like a way to reassure readers That India is actually not "the bad guy" but instead an allie...who just so happens to be able to think for themselves rightfully. Publishing this article and showing how India will not just simply blindly follow the US in its footsteps actually just goes to show how blindly other countries obey the US without logically assessing the situation. The reasons displayed by India for disobeying the US are so commensensical that its hard to immagine other countries have fully understood the exact gravity of the situation.
ReplyDeleteI think that both of the Shahs had the right idea when it came to ideas to modernize Iran however, the way they went about it was wrong. I think they moved too quickly and too radically, expecting the Iranian people to change hundreds of years of culture in a span of a couple of years. Especially in the case for Mohammad Reza Shah I think he wasn’t looking holistically when he implemented his plans especially in making sure that the clerics and bazaar owners were happy, because these two groups had quite a bit of power. In regards to Iran helping Syria bypass their sanctions, I think this will only cause more friction towards Iran. Iran is blatantly defying the sanctions that The United States, Turkey, the European Union, the Arab League and other countries have imposed. I don’t think that any of these countries is going to be happy with Iran’s decision. I really liked the article “Averting doomsday: My obsession with stopping a war on Iran” because I felt like it really spoke to me on an emotional level, even making me a little scared as I read it. The idea of war is thrown around so easily but people often don’t stop to think about the casualties, both civilian and in the military, which occur as a result of them.
ReplyDeleteBianca Safai
I was most intrigued by the "How to Engage Iran" article. While the credibility must be questioned, as with all news articles, if some of the information regarding the United States poor handling of the situation is true then the current situation, expressed by the article about Iran not backing down, is given some rational. I was utterly shocked when the situations involving the United States simply ignoring or not responding to diplomatic offerings from Iran, were being described. I essentially never looked at the other side of the coin; (stupidly, ignorantly)I never thought that Iran was putting any effort into resolving their conflicts with the West in a rational, peaceful way. Beyond my personal ignorance, the USA and Western media is definitely to blame. We as Americans and Westerners never hear the other side, we definitely never hear of stories in which Iran holds out an olive branch and we don't even respond. But hey, that is why I have this class! :)
ReplyDeleteRegarding the "India Trumpets Ties With U.S. Amid Iran Oil Deal" article, I think it just frustrates me that the United States is so invested in whether or not other nations are involved with Iran, especially potential allies like India. As explain in the article, India is dependent on Iranian oil. To stop purchasing their oil would mean that India would have to look to other sources of obtaining oil, which would be difficult given that a majority of their factories are run on crude oil. I fail to understand why this is the United State's business. Petty things like this should not get in the way of U.S.-India relations, but then again, this is politics after all...
ReplyDeleteLarry Derfner brings up some solid points in his "Averting Doomsday" article. I too have never really understood why Israel wanted to attack Iran, thinking they were immune from harm. Attacking Iran would not just mean attacking Iran, but attacking Iran, their allies, and anyone else who disagrees with attacking Iran. On the other side, Israel's allies would come to defend them (mainly the U.S.), and before we'd know it, several countries would become involved in a war that Israel suspected would only go one way. Where is the logic in that?
--- Sana Ahmed
It was interesting to read about the different things the Shah did in order to modernize Iran yet it was at the expense of the lower classes. In addition, I thought the developmental plans instilled by the Shah were very interesting to read about.
ReplyDeleteI had never realized to what extent Britain had an influence on Iran and Iranian politics, but after reading the BBC article I was able to gain a bit more insight on the subject.
After reading the "Foreign Affairs" article, I have come to the conclusion that I agree with the first school of thought that Iran and the US can hopefully reach a compromise.
Secretary of State Clinton stated in 2010 that she believed Iran could enrich uranium as long as it complied with international regulations; I am not sure to what extent Iran has ben complying or not complying.
Lastly, I completely agree with the article "Averting Doomsday" and question why Israel would want to go into a full fledged war with Iran if it knows that could lead to a full on nuclear war and thousands if not millions of casualties.
So much for "goodwill for goodwill." Again, can we blame Iran for hating the US? AND isnt it obvious that the US provokes Iran? If "How to Engage Iran," doesnt make that clear, I dont know what will.
ReplyDeleteI recognize the interesting dilemma that India's relationships with Iran and the United States present. India has every right to pursue its own economic development through the rapid consumption of crude oil, even if it be at the cost of significant environmental damage (one can also say this about China's development, and if one wants, even Iran's nuclear program). There are things that we want to see happen for the best interests of our nation, but if there is a conflict of interests, how do we balance what we know is best for our nation and what we know are the rights of other countries to advance themselves?
ReplyDeleteThe article I found most interesting this week was the "Role of the Government." I may not know much about economy or politics, but it seems that Reza Shah did try and make a lot of progress during this time. However, he made several mistakes that caused his ideas to eventually lead to the revolution. He tried to reform too much too soon, without considering the traditions of religious people in Iran. He favored the wealthy, carelessly hoping that the money would trickle down eventually.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, a lot of his changes were great, in my opinion. The transportation, industrialization, education, social & cultural reforms made Iran the tech-savvy, up-to-date country that it is today. The shah did recognize that there was room for improvement, as he "voiced his intention to consider needed changes." However, he was slow in implementing these changes.
It's also interesting how this rapid Westernization sounds good on paper, yet, just like communism, does not translate well in reality. The revolution came at a convenient time for Islamic leaders, who took advantage of the unhappy lower class. They manipulated people into thinking this was the reform they wanted, when really, they made the economy worse and created Iran's downfall. In fact, instead of creating improvements, the new government simply lies about the state of the economy. I just found it funny how the government claimed the inflation rate decreased from 32.5% to 5.5% when it was actually 50%. Clearly, the revolution was just about the worst thing that could happen to Iran at a time when it had so much potential.
Honestly, I like how India still wants to buy oil from Iran despite the sanctions. I totally disagree with the sanctions in the first place, so I enjoy seeing India's resistance to fully participating in them. Also, the UK has history of having the audacity to interfere with the inner workings of many countries around the world so that they may use the foreign country's valuable resources. Whenever they interfere, they usually don't care about the people living there, which is wrong. So I could see where the hate part of the love-hate relationship between the UK and Iran comes from, but not so much the love.
ReplyDelete