Iran and the World: Continuity in a Revolutionary Decade (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 161 avoidance of superficial claims as well as the fact that his book is based on a thorough knowledge and understanding of French society. Iran and the World: Continuity in a Revolutionary Decade. By Shireen T. Hunter. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990. 256pp. $14.95/Paperback . Reviewed by Abby Harrison, M.A. Candidate, SAIS. This latest work by Shireen Hunter provides a refreshingly objective and indepth analysis of Iran's foreign policy objectives and conduct during the decade since the fall of the Shah and the advent of the Ayatollah Khomeini. In contrast to much of what has been said—and accepted—about the Ayatollah and the ruling faction around him, both in the Western press and in more scholarly fora, Iran and the World: Continuity in a Revolutionary Decade adopts an analytical and reasonable approach. The goal of the book is "to analyze Iran's behavior in light of multiple and complex sets of factors rather than one simplistic and overarching paradigm." To do so, Hunter utilizes the prevailing paradigms of state behavior to look more closely at the Iranian state, without the often intensely emotional bias of most Western observers. Hunter observes that in the West, Iran is seen as an outlaw nation run by religious fanatics who have brought about the West's problems in the Islamic world. She rejects this as an explanation for state behavior, maintaining that there is more to Iran's foreign policy than what has been widely viewed as religious fanaticism, Shi'a expansionism, or Khomeini's quest for a new Islamic world order. In discussing this hypothesis, Hunter presents the reader with a fascinating view of internal Iranian politics. In her view, the complexity of Iranian behavior in foreign policy is based on internal power struggles and an ongoing effort to balance the interests of three factions: secular-nationalist, Islamic, and leftist. Like other revolutionary governments, Hunter states, Iran has faced difficulties in balancing ideology and pragmatism. Furthermore, in the ideological division within the government, Islam is not the only ideology. In modern times, while the politicization of Islam for militant purposes has always been a factor to contend with, there have also been those who have sought to combine Islam and modern Third World ideologies such as Marxism and nationalism, thus making Islam both more current and more comprehensive. Hunter presents this search for balance as a sign of continuity between pre- and post-revolutionary Iran, and as a historical process. The period of decline vis-à-vis the West, and memories of a glorious past, are a humiliation which fuels nationalism and, to a certain extent, militant Islam. As Shi'as, the Iranians are different from other Muslims; this différence contributes to the strength of their nationalist sentiment. Yet even today, religion is only one of many factors that contributes to national identity. Thus, Hunter sees Iran as a "revolutionary state at different stages of consolidation and adaptation" rather than a state in "fanatical pursuit of a millenarian dream." In light of this, 162 SAISREVIEW Hunter re-emphasizes her main point: "one should avoid an analysis of Iran's international behavior based on such supposed traits as Shi'a fanaticism, irrationality, an inordinate love of martyrdom, or Iranian xenophobia—although elements of these have had some influence." Hunter further argues that policies during the reign of the Pahlavis were a reflection of this ongoing struggle to balance pragmatic considerations with ideology. Hunter acknowledges that Iranian foreign policy has become more ideological since the 1979 revolution. Khomeini's unique Islamic world view continues to dominate Iranian foreign policy. Rooted in Iranian history and culture, it presents a view of a world divided between the oppressors and the oppressed. Its ideology is heavily moral and spiritual, drawing a distinction between Iran and Islam, and the West. Hunter sees these concepts as designed to create a "spiritual superpower" out of Iran. Yet there are divisions within the government over the extent to which Iran can play this role; this disagreement has resulted in erratic and seemingly irrational behavior. As Hunter notes, Iran behaves sometimes like a revolutionary movement, and sometimes like a state. The results of revolutionary zeal—such as...