I agree with most of that, but I also think the geopolitics of the region are rather ephemeral and not likely to serve as a strong foundation for anti-American sentiment.
Short-lived? The US has been sticking its nose into Iranian affairs at least since since the Shah ascended to the Peacock Throne in the 1940s
At the Federation of American Scientists, John Pike writes:
In 1978 the deepening opposition to the Shah erupted in widespread demonstrations and rioting. Recognizing that even this level of violence had failed to crush the rebellion, the Shah abdicated the Peacock Throne and fled Iran on 16 January 1979. Despite decades of pervasive surveillance by SAVAK, working closely with CIA, the extent of public opposition to the Shah, and his sudden departure, came as a considerable surprise to the US intelligence community and national leadership. As late as 28 September 1978 the US Defense Intelligence Agency reported that the Shah "is expected to remain actively in power over the next ten years." [53]
Mohammad Reza Pahlavi on Iranian 20 Rials coin
Explanations for why Mohammad Reza was overthrown include that he was a dictator put in place by a non- Muslim Western power, the United States, [54] [55] whose foreign culture was seen as influencing that of Iran. Additional contributing factors included reports of oppression, brutality, [56] [57] corruption, and extravagance. [56] [58] Basic functional failures of the regime have also been blamed – economic bottlenecks, shortages and inflation; the regime's over-ambitious economic program; [59]the failure of its security forces to deal with protest and demonstration; [60] the overly centralized royal power structure. [61]International policies pursued by the Shah in order to increase national income by remarkable increases of the price of oil through his leading role in the Organization of the Oil Producing Countries (OPEC) have been stressed as a major cause for a shift of Western interests and priorities and for an actual reduction of their support for him reflected in a critical position of Western politicians and media, especially of the administration of U.S. President Jimmy Carter, regarding the question of human rights in Iran, and in strengthened economic ties between the United States of America and Saudi Arabia in the 1970s. [62]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi#Criticism_of_reign_and_causes_of_his_overthrow
For example, the big winners in Bush's Iraq war are the Shiites, who are sympathetic to the Iranians. True, America sided with Iraq in the old Iran-Iraq wars, but that no longer applies today in a post-9/11, post-Bush/Cheney world.
True. But that doesn't mean the Iranians now trust the US. Far from it...........there's all that history.
Secondly, the Iranians oppose ISIS as does America. That *should* put two current adversaries on the same side, but Iran of course still sees America as the ultimate evil.
That's why I believe the reasons why Iran hates America are much more fundamental than the shifting political winds of the Middle East.
Again. There is all that history. |
