The Politics of Nationalism in Modern Iran

Abstract

This sophisticated and challenging book by the distinguished historian Ali M. Ansari explores the idea of nationalism in the creation of modern Iran. It does so by considering the broader developments in national ideologies that took place following the emergence of the European Enlightenment and showing how these ideas were adopted by a non-European state. Ansari charts a course through twentieth-century Iran, analyzing the growth of nationalistic ideas and their impact on the state and demonstrating the connections between historiographical and political developments. In so doing, he shows how Iran's different regimes manipulated ideologies of nationalism and collective historical memory to suit their own ends. Firmly relocating Reza Shah within the context of the Constitutional Revolution, Ansari argues that Reza Pahlavi's identification with a monarchy by divine right bore a greater resemblance to, and facilitated, the religious nationalism that catapulted Ayatollah Khomeini to power on the back of a populist and highly personalized mythology. Drawing on hitherto untapped sources, the book concludes that it was the revolutionary developments and changes that occurred during the first half of the twentieth century that paved the way for later radicalization. As the first book-length study of Iranian nationalism in nearly five decades, it will find an eager readership among scholars of the Middle East and those students more generally interested in questions of nationalism and ideology.

The Gulf and the Horn: Changing Geographies of Security Interdependence and Competing Visions of Regional Order

“…Ethiopia, Iran and Saudi Arabia have long shared ideas about manifest destiny. The notion that regionalor even civilizationalleadership naturally belongs to them and that assimilation to the strong identity at the core of the state by the peoples surrounding it is obvious is widely shared among political elites and ordinary citizens (Markakis 2011, Ansari 2012. From such a self-image flow various important foreign policy goalsprojecting power to protect and disseminate this identity as well as delegitimising alternative conceptions which threaten their domestic hold on powerthat shape how regional security is evaluated.…”

The JCPOA: how Iran's grand strategy stifled the US

“…Indeed, the transition away from the monarchy involved individuals and groups from across the political spectrum, that is Leftists, Marxists, secularists, Islamists and nationalists, essentially actors who were fed up with the Shah's single Resurrection or Rastakhiz party's derisory rule which became more evident as the Shah's reign came to an end. 13 Indeed, it was after the melee of the revolution that the organizational structure of the IRI's foundation was able to mobilize and eventually began to emulate the Shah's rule, in the sense that the new regime also targeted and marginalized non-IRI supporting groups. The success of the IRI in doing so allowed it to garnish control over the country and ultimately implement the current political system.…”

‘This is not Our Country’: Declining Diversity in the Islamic Republic of Iran

“…Looking specifically to Iran, research on identity and migration are usually treated as separate and deal primarily with the Muslim majority. Research on Iranian identity tends to be focused on issues such as nationalism, 18 cultural and linguistic domains of interaction, 19 or religion. 20 On the other hand, studies about migration generally falls into three categories: transnationalism and diaspora, 21 personal accounts of migration, sometimes autobiographical in nature, 22 or aspects of the Afghan (or Iraqi) refugee experience in Iran.…”