Arab Washingtonian

Print Article

Book review
The secret dealings of Israel, Iran, and the US

 

Author: Trita Parsi
Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the USpresents a clear understanding of the nature of relations among three of the most important players in the Middle East : Iran, Israel and the US.

The book, by Trita Parsi, reveals many of the secretive liaisons between Iran on the one hand, and the US and Israel on the other since the middle of the 20th century. It also brings to light the various geo-strategic factors and compulsions that have affected political relations among these sides, and which have usually been hidden and misunderstood under the garb of ideological bluster and posturing.

The author’s main argument suggests that the major transformations in Israeli-US-Iranian relations are more a result of geopolitical compulsions rather than ideological shifts. Therefore, a negotiated resolution of the strategic rivalry among the parties would facilitate the resolution of regional problems, by keeping the ideological claptrap out of the equation. The author also argues that unlike Iraq under Saddam, and the Taleban under Afghanistan, theocratic Iran is not an irrational adversary of the US and Israel. In what Parsi calls is Tehran’s often “simulated irrationality,” is nothing but a diplomatic posturing. Iran, at times, makes provocative statements but has till date not acted in an imprudent and reckless manner that would seriously destabilize its regime or even the region. For instance, it has been wise in not sharing its chemical or biological weapons with many of its proxies, like Hezbollah, out of fear of its consequences. Therefore, Iran can be safely predictable in its responses to international pressures and enticements, and does not represent a danger that cannot be contained through conventional diplomatic means.

Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the USseeks to emphasize the fact that Israel and Iran rival each other in carving their sphere of influence in the Arab world, and that this rivalry did not begin with the onset of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, but has been in existence since the time of the Shah’s reign itself. Thus, the author contends, that Iran feels it would be isolated if Israel is able to effect peace with its Arab neighbors and is, therefore, opposed to the Arab-Israeli peace process. Israel, on the other hand, is wary of the Islamic card that Iran seeks to promote in the Arab world against Israel to extend its sway in the region. Therefore, when Israeli-Arab relations hit a low, then there is a noticeable cooling off in the Israel-Iran rivalry.

Parsi cites instances when even after the Islamic Revolution, Israel sought to improve relations with Iran to counter Arab-Israeli strife. Curiously, when Iran was most vocal in its support to the Palestinians in the 1980s, Israel and its lobby in Washington told the US not to pay attention to Iranian rhetoric. It was only after 1991, says the author, when US sought to broker peace between Israel and Arabs that Iran’s proxies became active and carried out suicide attacks within Israel to derail the peace process.

According to the writer, the peace process hurts Iran’s geo-strategic interests in that it could wean away Arab parties, especially Syria, away from Iran and strategically isolate it in the region, but also because a peaceful settlement would facilitate greater US military presence in the region, which Iran detests. The author also contends that one of the reasons for Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in the year 2000, was because Israel wanted to undermine Iranian influence in the peace process, by de-legitimizing Hezbollah’s after Israeli pullout of its forces.

Parsi’s assertions become more intriguing when he claims to be revealing details of certain secret liaisons and power struggles between the two sides since the year 2000. In an attempt to counter Iran’s proxy Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, the author claims, Israel has started building a proxy force in northern Iraq against Iran. Citing a BBC report the author states that Israel is trying to use Iraqi Kurdish factions for intelligence gathering and infiltration into northwest Iran and is seeking to build a force like Hezbollah against the theocratic regime. It is noteworthy here that the population of Iranian Kurds, who are largely based in the northwest of the country, is approximately 6 million (about 10% of the Iranian population).

The author also makes another major disclosure about Iran’s climbdown from its ideological position just after the Iraq invasion in April 2003. After the lightning takeover of Baghdad by US coalition forces, Iranian leadership was alarmed and reportedly sent out a proposal to the White House, in which it offered to make major concessions to the US in order to pre-empt any future US aggression against its regime. It offered to withdraw its support from Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad and even agreed to accept the Beirut Declaration of the Arab League that espouses a two-state solution. It also offered to disband its nuclear program and vowed to cooperate in the reconstruction of Iraq. The proposal also called on the US to hand over anti-Iranian militants of the Mujahideen-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), in exchange for Al Qaeda operatives held by Iran. However, this proposal, which the author says, was sanctioned by the Iranian spiritual leader and the Iranian President of the time was turned down by US Vice President Dick Cheney and the then US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on the grounds that “we (the US administration) do not speak to evil.” The Bush administration even rebuked the Swiss carriers of this message for having overstepped their mandate.

This, the author states, was a major letdown and missed opportunity as Iran’s stock soon began to rise in the region with the ascendance of Iraq’s Shiite south and the disastrous 2006 Israeli military campaign against Hezbollah. Around the time of making the proposal to the US, Iran is also said to have made a peace overture to Israel stating that both countries would respect each others’ respective sphere of influence and keep out of each other’s hair. However, Israel also dismissed this proposal at that time, by saying that Iran was simply trying to buy time. The author believes, that if the US and Israel had not let the opportunity slip at that time, there would not have been the present threat of an imminent military showdown between the US and Iran.

The author also notes that Iran has often sought a rapprochement with the US, and has always rebuffed Israeli overtures for better relations. On the other hand, Israel has always tried to come in the way of a US-Iran détente, as it fears such a relationship would leave it out in the cold. The author advocates the feasibility of a US-Iranian rapprochement on the grounds that Iran could serve as a buffer against China’s growing influence in the Middle East and Africa. The author also believes that Iran is interested in developing the nuclear know-how but would never build a nuclear bomb because it would not risk a nuclear weapons race in the region that could undermine its superiority in conventional weapons. In fact, it was for this reason, says the author, that Iran had joined with Egypt in the 1970s to keep the region a nuclear-free zone.

The author states that as the Iranian leadership, for all its ideological trappings, is not irrational in its actions, it would be better not to engage in a military showdown to bring it down, which the author fears would be calamitous, but to integrate Iran in the world’s political and economic mainstream. This kind of an engagement has helped the US in curtailing the Chinese and it would also work in moderating the fanatical challenge posed by Iran.

Apart from being a very timely study into a highly critical subject of the times, the book is one of its kind in providing in-depth understanding and information on the nature and history of US and Israeli relations with Iran. The author has done extensive research, and has taken over 130 interviews with highly important personalities and decision-makers from all the three sides, which give credence to his assertions. Indeed, it is a book brimming with historical facts, anecdotes and analysis that is difficult to find elsewhere. The book also scores because it underlines the importance of rational approach in international relations, which it claims even Iran has pursued behind its ideological veneer, and calls on the US administration to do the same to avoid another disastrous war in the Middle East. Surprisingly though, the book pays tribute to Francis Fukuyama, a neo-conservative scholar who backed the Project for the New American Century, which the book itself denounces.





Permission to quote and reproduce texts from the Arab Washingtonian is readily granted on the condition that the source is credited. ©2006 The Arab Washingtonian
Powered By: INFINITYdezign , Logo By: Modern Art