Iran: A Modern History Paperback – September 17, 2019

While this history book is 908 pages in length, it reads like a best-selling, exquisitely crafted novel. The narrative is dynamic and fast-paced, unlike the history and political science books I studied when I was a university student. This book's dynamic writing provides great intellectual stimulation. This book is also a great study in eloquent writing — in this country instance, it’s history writing, nonetheless: e.g., "They were predictable faces that had caressed the royal ego and followed his [Mohammad Reza Shah] uncritically, even slavishly." I decided to read this book for my edification but I have found the book's writing deliciously enjoyable.University students majoring in the humanities, English, history, and international affairs, business and politics should consider using this book for their thesis or course final papers. This book provides solid foundations for appreciation the current world events.This book provides excellent insights into Iran's "modern" history, which is replete with repeated foreign invasions and meddling.Even though I have read only about 45% of the book thus far, I, who had zero knowledge about Iran's history, have gained a greater appreciation for what helped shape today's Iran. Whether one agrees with or opposes the Western ECONOMIC sanctions that have been imposed upon contemporary Iran, he or she should read this book to gain context. (Indeed, some of the sanctions have been conditionally lifted.)This book can shed light on whether Donald J. Trump's apparent seething hatred for Iran (presumably the country's clerical, political and military leaderships) has any basis in fact. In view of the fact that the US has become a net exporter of oil (hydrocarbon), one has to wonder whether Trump's hostile posture toward the "nuclear deal" is driven by ulterior economic motives. The politics and economics of black gold (petroleum dollars) permeate every decisions made in the US, the UK, EU member nations, Iran, Russia, China, etc.Here's one sentence from the book that should whet a potential reader's curiosity: "If there was a single event beyond its borders that saved Iran [from partition, dissolution and "blows to its sovereignty], it was the destruction of the Russian Empire [caused by the Bolshevik revolution]."It is instructive to ponder the following passages from this book:"Both the Ottoman Turks and the tsarist Russians committed repeated atrocities toward urban and rural inhabitants; houses were looted, women raped, children abducted, fields burned, and their provisions confiscated.""Foreign occupation no doubt also intensified the Iranian famine. Large consignments of grain and foodstuffs were both purchased and confiscated by Russian and British armies for consumption of their troops.""[Robert] Imbrie was dispatched [in 1920's] to Iran by the US State Department to facilitate the implementation of an ongoing oil concession between an American company and the Iranian government. Sinclair Oil, the first American attempt explore oil in Iran's Caspian shores, had faced serious opposition from the Anglo-Persian Oil Company ["APOC"; today's British Petroleum (BP)], which considered the Iranian oil as it (sic) exclusive tenure."The book explains: ""[B]y 1914 th British government had acquired the majority of APOC stocks, allowing the government full control over exploration, production, and export." The APOC purportedly gave the British Empire a sixty-year tax-free monopoly, while the Iranian government was to receive 16 percent of the net profit from the revenues."The judicial reforms under Davar, beginning in the winter of 1927 . . . and continuing throughout the Raza Shah era, introduced codified statutes and monitored judicial appointments. . . . The elaborate . . . Shi'i law of contracts (mo'amelat) was no longer considered valid, even though the authors of the new statutory laws made ample use of it to adjust the French civil code to Shi'i contingencies.""In August 1941 Reza Shah was forced to abdicate, and Iran was occupied by Britain and Russia for the second time in twenty-five years. The irony of this was borne out by the Iranian people with a mix of cynicism and despair.""Even before 1933 and rise of the National Socialist Party to power in Germany, Iran relied on German technical and financial expertise for building new industries, railroad construction, the banking system, and training workforce at a German-run technical school.""the Allied occupation of Iran in September 1941 was a rude shock to most Iranians. Facing the soldiers of the Red Army, the British Indian Army, and soon after American military personnel seemed almost a surreal reversal of two decades of Pahlavi assurances of Iran's reclaimed sovereignty and the might of the Iran's Imperial Armed Forces. . . .. . .The British government held not only sway over a sector of the Iranian polity but also unyielding claims over the oil fields in the south, claims that came with some measures of intervention and intrigue. . . ."The book vividly tells of invasions and occupations of Iran by the Ottoman, Russian and British Empires. German and Sweden too meddled in Iran. The author, Professor Abbas Amanat, explained: "The rise of Germany on the Iranian horizon coincided with the discovery of oil in Iran by a British concessionaire [in May 1908] in the southwestern province of Khuzestan."We (should) study history to make better sense of today's world. The following passage from this book provides lots of "food for thought", especially for Americans and Westerns who may wish to keep today's Iran and its citizenry isolated. President Donald J. Trump and other proponents of canceling the current international nuclear agreement with Iran should be mindful of the following:"To serve the war effort, the Allies took control of the Iranian rail and road networks. The massive logistical convoy organized by the Allies' Middle East Supply Center hauled through the 'Persian corridor' to the Soviet Union millions of tons of mostly American war material provided under the Lend-Lease Act passed by the US Congress in March 1941. Military hardware, provisions, fuel, and machinery were transported from the Persian Gulf ports of Khorramshahr and Bandar Abbas across the Iranian plateau to the Caucasus or through the Caspian ports to the Russian eastern front. The supplies, amounting to at least 70 percent of Soviet military needs in the crucial years of 1941 and 1942, included 648,000 vehicles assembled in a plant set up by American personnel and manned by the local Iranians in Khuzestan province to assemble military vehicles and aircrafts. After the war Iran was praised as the 'Bridge to Victory,' in recognition of its strategic location and contribution to the war efforts, and memorial stamps were issued. Yet only meager compensation was paid for the services and the hardware, and that only after many appeals by the Iranian government to the former Allies. The Americans duly paid their share, the British procrastinated for years, and the Soviet ignored the appeals altogether."Indeed, today's friend could be tomorrow's foe, and friend yet again the following week, and so on, depending upon political, economic and military expediencies. Today's America finds itself in this same calculus especially with respect to its "relationship" with Iran. (This reader's political views are shaped by a better understanding of Iran's history, which this book does as objectively and eruditely as humanly possible.)The point of quoting those passages is that today's Iranian society is an amalgamation of Ottoman, Russian, European and even American influences with the great ancient Persian cultures, literature and history and Islamic heritage. Today's Iran is a richly multifaceted nation.Indeed, history is a good teach (but a bad master). Foreign invaders and occupiers like the British Empire overreached and amassed tremendous wealth at the huge expense of Iran's national wealth and its people. These foreign powers arguably sowed the very seeds that gave rise to some of the core elements in today's Iran."The 1933 concession extended for another sixty years AIOC's full control over the huge oil fields in Khuzestan as well as over production levels, distribution, pricing, bookkeeping, taxation, and ownership of installations and equipment at Abadan refinery. The AIOC, which was owned by the British government, was not only a vital source for replenishing the postwar British economy but also a source of steady income, having extended operations beyond Iran into neighboring Iraq; Kuwait; and the British-controlled emirates of the Persian Gulf . . . (the future United Arab Emirates).The Iranian share, a meager royalty on the production of Iranian crude, amount as late as 1951 to barely 16 percent of the total. In a cleaver ploy, moreover, the Iranian share was subject to income tax paid to the British treasury not only on the oil extracted from Iranian fields but also on AIOC production in the whole region. . . .The AIOC . . . ran the Iranian oil industry not unlike a colonial plantation. . . ."It would behoove President Donald J. Trump and his advisers to understand the following, as President Trump deliberates whether to tear up the current international Iranian nuclear agreement or whether to give the agreement full force and effect:"Oil revenue thus became a crucial factor in the stability of the Pahlavi state. The massive injection of US financial support in the 1950s and early 1960s, as well as military assistance, training, and advising, further boosted the Pahlavi prestige. Up to the mid-1960s tens of millions of US dollars . . . poured into Iranian coffers as nonobligatory aide, or were funneled through the Point Four Program's health and agriculture development projects, or though the purchase of military hardware, infrastructure development loans for building dams and a power grid, direct investment in Iranian industry, and major construction projects won by American firms.The US government's aid program in reality was a fraction of what US oil companies collected from investing in Iranian oil and a negligible expense compared to the benefits of keeping Iran as a strategic ally in the Cold War."Professor Abbas prefaces this book by acknowledging that his narrative is shaped by his own scholarship and life's experiences. The book is replete with historical facts, allowing the reads to form objective views of modern Iran, whose 20th century history had been scarred by "Western" nations and the Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union, and the Ottoman Empire. Thus, today's Iran can be understood after pealing away the Islamic extremism that is only a small fraction of the country's populace.This books recounts the fascinating nation rebuilding that the recently venerated Raza Shah shepherded and by and large succeeded in creating during his reign in the early 20th century.Professor Amanat's intricate prose is poetry in motion. This books should be read by both proponents and opponents of continued sanctions against today's Iran, which, like any sovereign nations, is seeking to protect itself against (perceived) potential foreign invasions that in fact occurred as recently as 80 years ago. What this book will teach any rational reader is to be far less sanctimonious toward Tehran, this is especially true for the likes of Donald J. Trump and the people who advise him on Iran and Tehran, which understandably is still mindful of the invasions and occupations of Iran by the Ottoman, Russian and British Empires in the early 20th century. Indeed, black gold is an irresistibly compelling motivator for nations of every stripes.Perhaps Professor Abbas Amanat, the book's author, could, with funding from think tanks or individual philanthropists, create an abbreviated audio "lecture" series on the salient points from this book and make the audio lecture available online for the public free of charge. The general public, the world over, should learn about Iran. Yes, we should also learn about Iran's purported meddling in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and other parts of the world. Also true is the fact that the large majority of Iranians are not the embodiment of evil simply because their country was cast as an "axis of evil" by certain high-ranking US officials.A good majority of Americans would be surprised to learn that the US and Iran were friends, particularly in the early 1970s, which provides hope the two nations can once again become "friendly", again in the future.". . .successive US administrations from Johnson to Ford, and especially during the Nixon years, maintained close ties with Iran in matters of security, defense, energy, and investment. . . .US polity and pubic opinion overwhelmingly viewed Iran as America's indispensable ally in the Middle East and the shah [Mohammad Reza] as a modernizing agent for his people. Friendly relations with Israel also contributed to Americas' favorable attitude toward the shah, especially after 1973. The shah's affinity with Israel was primarily grounded in common geopolitical and strategic concerns, but undeniably it helped ingratiate the shah to his American allies."Professor Amanat recounts with brutal honesty the rise of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Revolution--including the horrific purges (that involved mass killings), and the eight-year war between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Iran that began with Iraqi invasion of Iran in September 1980.Professor Amanat recounts the Islamic Republic's indiscriminate relentless persecutions (that included mass executions) of Baha'is, the largest non-Muslim community in Iran as follows: "The Islamic Revolution had been a major blow to the community as a whole. . . .Vile anti-Baha'i campaigns in the press and media, lies and fabrications in history textbooks, and economic loss and general social demotion were accompanied by losses of educational opportunities for the younger generations. [H]igher education for Baha'is [was officially banned]. . . .These actions represented a program of intolerance and intimidation aimed at suffocating to extinction a community considered by the Islamic Republic heretical and treasonous. Despite all pressures, few among the Iranian Baha'is denied their religious identity. . . .Baha'is did not present a political threat to the Islamic Republic."The revival of this old friendship between the US and Iran (and even between Iran and Israel, despite the current indomitable odds) could usher in greater world peace and tremendous economic, political and cultural opportunities and growth for the US and Iran. This book provides that hope, however tiny that hope is at present. Viewed through the optics of President Ronald Reagan's Iran-Contra Affair (August 1985 to March 1987), that US and Iran can become friendly again is not entirely implausible.

The book provides a detailed and insightful history of Iran over the past 500 years. A great read. Highly recommended.

Author takes a heroic and fairly detailed and balanced look at Modern Iran, taking it back to 16th century and establishment of Safavid dynesty and Shia religion in Iran all the way to Islamic revelution and post revelution to contemporary Iran. It provid many nuance details and examples of Iranian psychi and cultural history that never possible by a non Iranian author. Overall highly recommend reading.

This book is an excellent history of modern Iran. It is well-researched, well-documented, and well written. when reading the book you will get the feeling that the author was witnessing the events in person. Years of painstaking work has probably gone into researching and writing this book. Historians, journalists, or non-fiction writers should not show bias in their writing and Prof. Amanat follows this principle. He tries to write history the way it happened. The book is different from most of the history books about Iran. It includes political, social, artistic, economic, and literary issues from the Safavid times to the present. It is a must read not only for historians but it is also an informative, highly readable book for study, reference and research. The illustrations, references, and notes are extensive. The book deserves to become a classic history book. It should also get a literary or historical book award.

Great text and lots of information to process. not for a beginner

I first bought the audiobook to listen to on my commute but then I bought the paper book to see all the images that Amanat has included. Just finished the book with many of my questions answered. I am an Iranian/American who left Iran in 1978 and I have read several good books about Iran but this one is so rich with relevant details that it's in a class of its own. It was not always easy to keep the names of the people sorted in my mind but it starts slow and then what a crescendo...Thank you Abbas Amanat for this objective masterpiece. Another good book, just the 20th century, is James Buchan's "Days of God".

300 pages of introduction (the Safavids, Nader Shah, the Zands, and the Qajar era) before Amanat gets to the real meat of the book: 600 pages on Iran since the constitutional revolution at the dawn of the 20th century. I believe the decision to include so much early modern history was the correct one: you cannot begin to understand 20th century Iran if you do not understand Qajar Iran, and you can't understand Qajar Iran without going back to the Safavid Empire and its aftermath. This is an exhaustive, and impressive treatise on modern Iran. I consider myself fairly well-informed and I found myself learning many new things. Those chapters that deal with the era of Reza Shah, Mosaddeq, and the rise and fall of the Pahlavi dynasty are particularly fascinating.

This is an excellent history that can be almost overwhelming for the lay reader. I found the portion of the book dealing with the 20th century, the shah, and the Islamic Revolution easier to follow than the first half of the book, but that is probably largely due to this book being my introduction to Iranian history and my unfamiliarity with it. This is clearly a monumental work of scholarship, that is marred slightly by poor proofreading and editing, which is somewhat understandable in a work of this length, but, every two or three pages there is a glaring misspelling, sentence fragment, grammatical error, or subject/verb disagreement as, for example, “the statistics on public spaces is also noticeable,” “ad valorum tax,” “the constitution stipulated that all laws legislated by the Majles was to remain within the bounds of political order.” Jimmy Carter’s wife Rosalynn Carter is repeatedly misidentified as “Rosalind Carter.” One hopes that subsequent editions of this book will correct these errors.