June 25, 2025 - Iran: A Modern History

Our bombings of Iran in the last few days have put Iran front and center in the national news—not only provoking Iran and pleasing Netanyahu but also shifting the narrative in both the U.S. and Israel.

The old adage goes: “If your presidency is in trouble, start a war.” The beauty of that strategy is that it dominates the news cycle, distracts attention from other issues, tends to provoke a patriotic response that rallies support for the president as commander in chief, justifies the granting of emergency powers, and opens the floodgates for massive spending—whatever is deemed necessary. And of course, it provides a new foreign threat to demonize.

The result? All historical context—except the most recent or convenient—is forgotten, along with any hope of rational perspective.

During the decade or more when I facilitated a Great Decisions foreign policy discussion group, it became clear that a bit of historical context was often essential to understanding contemporary issues. A broader view allows for deeper discussion and a clearer sense of what is truly at stake.

Great Decisions is the nation’s largest civic education program on international affairs. Sponsored by the Foreign Policy Association, it brings people together in local discussion groups to explore critical global issues. Each group uses a briefing book and video series to guide thoughtful, nonpartisan conversations on topics like climate policy, global conflict, and international relations. It’s a powerful way for citizens to stay informed and engage in meaningful dialogue about the world.

Historical Context: Iran

Historically, Iran—called Persia until 1935—has been remarkably resilient, maintaining its sovereignty despite outside pressures. It even retained its national integrity while its oil was under foreign control, chiefly by the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), later renamed British Petroleum (BP).

A revolution from 1905–1911 established a constitutional monarchy, limiting royal authority. That was followed by a military coup in 1921, led by Reza Khan, who crowned himself Shah in 1925 and founded the Pahlavi dynasty.

In 1941, due to his pro-German sympathies during World War II, Reza Shah was forced to abdicate by the British and Soviets. His son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, then became Shah, ruling (sometimes in exile) until the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

In the early 1950s, Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh was democratically elected. He moved to nationalize Iran’s oil, reclaiming the industry for the Iranian people. This led to a joint CIA–MI6 coup in 1953, orchestrated by the U.S. and Britain to reinstall the Shah. His return marked the beginning of an aggressively Westernized and authoritarian regime, reliant on U.S. support and enforced through the feared secret police, SAVAK.

This, in turn, sparked the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Religious leaders, especially Ayatollah Khomeini, gained influence partly because religious gatherings were the only ones the Shah hadn’t outlawed. Khomeini returned from exile and formed an Islamic government.

That revolution led directly to the Iran Hostage Crisis (1979–1981), when Iranian students seized the U.S. embassy and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. The crisis dominated the news and proved disastrous for President Carter’s re-election hopes. Though an agreement was eventually reached, strong allegations later emerged, indicating that the Reagan campaign had delayed the release until Reagan’s inauguration—an accusation reminiscent of claims that Nixon had delayed the Vietnam peace talks in 1968 to undercut Hubert Humphrey’s campaign.

Entanglements and Contradictions

During the Reagan administration, U.S. relations with Iran grew even more complex. Despite backing Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988), the U.S. also sold weapons to Iran, some of which were used even as Iraq deployed chemical weapons, killing thousands.

This led to the Iran–Contra Affair, in which the U.S. secretly sold arms to Iran—via Israeli intermediaries—and illegally diverted the proceeds to fund anti-communist Contras in Nicaragua.

Even after this betrayal, Iran remained isolated and increasingly repressive.

From 1997 to 2005, President Mohammad Khatami led with a more moderate, pro-Western stance, though he faced pushback from hardliners.

From 2005 to 2013, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a hardliner, took office and expanded Iran’s nuclear program. (It’s worth noting that **Israel was—and still is—the only country in the Middle East known to possess nuclear weapons.)

Throughout this time, Iran faced harsh international sanctions, often led by the U.S. These eased during Hassan Rouhani’s presidency (2013–2021) with the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which traded nuclear restrictions for sanctions relief.

But in 2018, President Trump unilaterally withdrew from the deal, reimposing sanctions and leaving Iran isolated, economically weakened, and more defensively postured.

In 2020, a U.S. drone strike killed a top Iranian general, escalating tensions further.

Then in 2021, hardline cleric Ebrahim Raisi became president, closely aligned with Khamenei. Iran, cornered and under immense pressure, had few options left to maintain its sovereignty.

 And Then Came the Bombings

Israel, long engaged in covert actions against Iran, launched more dramatic attacks, confident the U.S. would support them. As Iran retaliated, the U.S. responded with bombing strikes on nuclear sites—an unambiguous act of war launched by a president without Congressional authorization.

 So, Where Does This Leave Things?

·      Donald Trump believes he alone can determine U.S. foreign policy—including matters of war.

·      Israel, under Netanyahu, holds extraordinary sway over American foreign and domestic decisions.

·      Trump fully supports Israel—not just in its destruction of Palestinian life in Gaza and the West Bank, but also in its broader Middle Eastern ambitions.

·      Iran, backed into a corner by the U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear deal and crushing sanctions, is now targeted for regime change—again.

·      Iranian offers to negotiate have been ignored or sabotaged. The goal appears not to be peace, but destruction.

·      The world knows Iran is years from building a bomb, and that it has been willing—again—to trade nuclear development for sanctions relief.

·      And yes, oil remains a central motivator.

·      Perhaps we still harbor a grudge for their rejection of the Shah and his SAVAK. Are we preparing to reinstall our puppet once more?

·      We tell ourselves: “We’re bigger and stronger. We can make them obey.”

·      We forget international law. We forget the American Constitution.

And so, we strap in for the ride.

 Ask Yourself:

Do we really want to humiliate a sovereign nation to avenge a revolution? To silence their support for Palestinians? To elevate Israel as a regional master?

It’s hard not to see this as driven by wounded national ego, racial and religious arrogance, and a need for vengeance—manufactured grievances to justify violent dominance.

Many of us believed we were better than this.