Top positive review
5.0 out of 5 starsSpencer's Guide to Iran Contains Detailed and Essential Information for Understanding the War Between Iran and the US
Reviewed in the United States on July 25, 2016
I took awhile to create a review because I wanted to read Spencer's volume on Iran completely and thoroughly before commenting on it.
Robert Spencer has a style he uses to make an argument or carry a debate: rather than simply inject his own opinions, he uses the words of his subject. Thus, in debates on Islam, Spencer quotes traditional Islamic sources, including literal chapter and verse.
Spencer brings this style to his volume on Iran. His book is very heavy on quotes from Khomeini, Khamenei, and other parties directly involved in the history of Iran and the relations between Iran and the United States. The Iranian leaders are frank and upfront about their hostility and treachery with respect to the United States. You don't need to have a conspiracy theory to discern Iran's danger and enmity: the leaders are quite open about their intentions.
Spencer's book is only 256 pages, but contains an amazing breadth and depth of detail that I have frankly not seen elsewhere. Spencer covers the critical and important points: Iran before Islam and its relations with the Roman Empire, the conquest by Islam and the development of the Shi'a sect; the apocalyptic doctrine of Shi'a which makes nuclear aggression by Iran quite feasible, even in the face of certain and overwhelming retaliation; and the current, hyper-aggressive stance by Iran towards Israel and the US.
Spencer begins the book with a detailed chapter on the treaty between Iran and the US to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Again, simply quoting reports and in particular the statements of the Iranian leaders, Spencer makes it obvious just how dangerous the treaty is. In the first place, it's not really a treaty, as it has been ratified neither by the US Congress, nor the Iranian Congress. In fact, it's questionable as to whether the exact treaty wording is even available publicly. Spencer's book shows that the treaty is unclear as to what is really prohibited, the verification has built-in delays and relies on inspectors who are appointed by Iran, the penalties are vague and unenforceable, and the prohibitions expire on their own after a certain number of years.
The chapter on the nuclear treaty is probably the strongest and most poignant part of Spencer's book. The entire book is strong and informative, but the well-documented facts on the treaty simply leap off the page. The thing that makes the situation so bad is that the Mutually Assured Destruction situation that dampened down overt conflict between the USSR and the US during the days of the Communist regime simply doesn't apply to the Iranian government. The Iranian leaders believe completely in the Shi'a doctrine that the ultimate triumph of their own form of Islam requires the destruction of most of the world, including the country of Iran. Any tolerance on the part of our government for Iranian nuclear development is reckless and extremely dangerous.
The other most poignant part of Spencer's book, for US citizens, is the part leaving absolutely no doubt that Iran was intimately involved in the 9/11 attack. This is not speculation. The book pulls in documented facts showing repeated Iranian contacts with the hijackers during the planning and preparation stages.
The other chapters of Spencer's book are extremely informative. He gives important details on virtually every period of Iran's history.
I personally would have liked to see more detail on the 1953 CIA-sponsored coup which installed the Shah into power. Now, Spencer gave many facts of which I was unaware, including the fact that the toppling of the democratically-elected Prime Minister, Mossadegh, was somewhat constitutional in the Iran of the time. Still, I personally think the CIA-sponsored coup was a major fork in the road and should have been explored more.
Another area I would have liked to see explored more would be the relations between Sunni and Shi'a Islam. It's a can of worms. The Saudis consider the Iranians to be their biggest threat, but collaborated with Iran in the preparation of 9/11. Obviously, logic and consistency is not a strong guide in studying the relationship between Sunni and Shi'a, but it may be vital for controlling both countries in the future.
I would say the weakest part of Spencer's book is his 4 or 5 pages of recommendations at the end. For instance, one of his recommendations is "Support Iranian dissidents". The US has shown zero aptitude for understanding or controlling events in the Middle East. The last thing we need is to have further US intrusion on Iranian internal movements that we don't understand. Spencer himself points out that the Green Revolution was anything but democratic. At best, US support of Iranian dissidents would encourage them to think the US would intervene on their behalf, causing them to be more reckless than they should be. Better the US stays completely out of Iranian internal affairs.
But, the weakness of Spencer's recommendations do not detract from his book. The purpose of the book is to provide essential information on Iran. It succeeds brilliantly in that. I doubt that any set of recommendations could be formulated which would be valid more than a few months. But, the well-documented facts provided in Spencer's book are vital for understanding relations between the US and Iran, and for formulating rational policies designed to genuinely benefit the United States.