Tuesday’s “Great Decisions” lecture this week focused on Iran – both the recent protests led by women and its general state of unrest in recent years. The briefing book essay was written by Lawrence Potter, who teaches in the School of International Public Affairs at Columbia University and was deputy direct of of Gulf/2000, a major research and documentations project on the Persian Gulf states based there, from 1994 to 2016. He is a longtime contributor to GREAT DECISIONS and published “The Persian Gulf: Tradition and Transformation” in FPA’s Headline Series Nos. 333-334 (Fall 2011).
Here are a couple of maps from the briefing book that lay out the ground in this part of the Middle East:
Once again, I was in the auditorium to hear the local lecture on this topic. The speaker was Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who is the Distinguished Adjunct Professor of Government and Public Policy at the College of William & Mary. After a distinguished 31-year career in the US Army which included serving on the faculty of the U.S. Naval War College, as Director of the U.S. Marine Corps War College and as Special Assistant to General Powell when he was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Col. Wilkerson retired in 1997 and began working with General Colin Powell. This led to his role as Powell’s Chief of Staff during the latter’s tenure as Secretary of State. He has been frequent speaker for our Great Decisions program.
Professor Wilkerson was an expert and dynamic speaker. He spoke passionately about the Middle East, a region whose instability is obvious to everyone on a daily basis. I’m not going to summarize the briefing book essay – it’s complex. But Potter frames the discussion through an acknowledgment that this is a dangerous time in the Middle East:
Rise in sectarian tensions
Increased Iranian intervention in nearby states with weak governments, such as Iraq and Syria
Perception by Arab monarchies and Israel that Teheran is their primary threat
Uncertainty about US protection of its interests in the region
Iran arms sales
Rise of youth culture that has no memory of the Shah or life under a secular government
The regime’s lack of leadership and a clear program
The role of women in Iran is the most visible element of the current crisis in the country (although it is not the only problem. These images illustrate what has been going on:
Part of the problem is that Iran does not trust the intentions of the West – specifically, the United States. They have reasons for this mistrust:
In 1953, the US led an effort to depose newly elected Prime Minister Mosaddeq who almost overthrew the Shah. US oil interests depended on the existing regime under Shah Reza Pahlavi, so Mosaddeq had to go. He went.
In 1963, the US opposed an uprising inspired by Ayatollah Khomeini. This uprising failed.
In 1979, the US oppose Khomeini’s next effort, which was ultimately successful in overturning the Shah
The uncertainty associated with the on-again, off-again “Iran Nuclear Deal,” which was supported by President Obama but repudiated by his successor. The government of Iran has increasingly become dominated by the Revolutionary Guards, which exercises its power behind the scenes. Violence is always one misstep away.
Professor Wilkerson used the briefing book essay as a springboard for his elaboration on American national security interests in the region. Here are a few takeways that stuck with me:
The previous administration broke American foreign policy and diplomacy in ways the world is just coming to understand.
The current Secretary of State, Tony Blinken (whom Wilkerson referred to disparagingly as “Winken, Blinken, and Nod) doesn’t know anything about diplomacy.
The US commitment to Israel stands in the way of a credible path toward peace in the region.
The rise of authoritarian regimes in the region – including Netanyahu in Israel and Erdogan in Turkey – stands in the way of resolving regional problems.
US policy toward Iran is signaling a willingness to go to war there.
The US invasion of Iraq 20 years ago was a disaster.
The status of “permanent war” in the Middle East has stretched the US military to the breaking point; reserve units are operating at the lowest readiness level, and active forces are stretched beyond what can be sustained.
Part of the problem is the misuse of national guard and reserves to combat natural disasters and domestic violence, including problems at the US southern border.
This has resulted in ongoing and escalating problems with recruitment. In a recent study, the US Military discovered that only 9% of the population 18-25 years old is interested at all in serving in the military.
Wilkerson, a life-long Republican who served in GOP administrations, does not recognize today’s Republican party. He says it is a party of grievance and opposition with no platform other than to oppose what the Democrats want. He fears for American democracy because a thriving system depends on the intelligent interaction among opposing interests, and the GOP has decided not to play in that arena.
During the audience Q&A, one person asked, basically, is there any hope? Wilkerson’s answer was that it has to come from within the nations involved. Outside interference almost always makes the problems worse.
And a happy Thursday to you!
I did not attend the Great Decisions lecture referenced; however, that does not restrain me from giving an opinion on Col. Wilkerson's disparaging nickname for the Sec. of State Antony Blinken. The aspects of Blinken's thinking is that he is pro-Europe, pro-internationalism and pro-alliances. I believe that, with President Biden, they have been successful in addressing Putin's war against Ukraine. With the outlook the Secretary seems to have, I believe that our country will be better prepared to work and deal with other countries around the world as allies instead of adversaries in decades to come. The nickname seems unwarranted in that he has not struck me as a person who, with a wink and a nod, accomplishes tasks that, as the phrase implies, a subtle understanding of nefarious deals between individuals or groups of decision makers. By his mere presence behind the podium, he conveys a sense of deep knowledge of world events not tied to personal investments in oil or power. He is a public servant with decades of experience behind him and with the difficult task of rebuilding a State Department badly drubbed during the last administration.