The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

Just finished reading it -- great book!

The author's analysis is objective & professional. Probably 50% of policy books today have some kind of serious bias, but I found Mr Pollack's assumptions to be fair & his conclusions to be well-reasoned. He seems to have a good command on different sociological, psychological, political and religious aspects of the Iranian society, and he presents his case without relying on guess work or unsubstainted/dishonest assertions.

I do think, however, that Mr. Pollack should have included more material on the role of Sunni-Shiite tension within the Islamic world, and its effect on Iran's policies. In addition, the author could have focused more on the perceptions Muslims in other countries have about the US & Israel. After all, while devising a strategy for relations with Iran, it is imperative that such basic complexities are considered.

Kenneth Pollack worked for 7 years as a Persian Gulf military analyst at the CIA and for 3 years as Director for Gulf affairs at the National Security Council official.

As the reader may know, Pollack's previous work was "The Threatening Storm". In it, he provided a historical perspective to the relations between Iraq and the U.S., and thoroughly analyzed alternatives for engagement based on the information available.

With "The Persian Puzzle", Pollack sets again the standard in foreign policy books. He offers a technical and non-partisan perspective to the history of Iran, its relation with other countries (especially the UK, the USSR/Russia, the US and its Middle Eastern neighbors) and its internal political struggles and infighting. This takes almost 90% of the text. The remaining 10% (around 50 pages) is invested to detailing alternatives for future engagement with Iran. Different than with Iraq, Pollack suggest a combination of approaches might be the the best option to deal with Iran from an American standpoint.

I have found this a truly top-notch work. Here is why:

- Historical perspective: Pollack provides a historical background to Iran, starting with the Elamites (the first people to civilize what is Iran today, more than 1000 BC), and including the chaos brought by Gengis Khan, the ascendence of Shi'ism, the difficult relation with Russia and Great Britain in the first half of the XX century, Reza Khan and his son the Shah, the involvement of the US (positive and negative) starting mainly from World War II, Khomeini's revolution and the Embassy incident, the Rafsanjani, Khatami administrations and how they interacted with the US (and viceversa).

- Non-biased, non-partisan view: Pollack acknowledges what now in hindsight were mistakes of US policy regarding Iraq, but does not seem to put the blame on a party, administration or person in particular. He also provides a context and tries to come with a rational explanation for them. In addition, he does not try either to put Iran or its government (or its people) as culprits or bad-intentioned. He goes the extra mile to understand their world view.

- Structure: this is a well thought book. It was not written in a rush. And the author has a clearly structured mind. The flow is very easy. There is a good sense of purpose for everything. The story is built in such a way that makes sense. The history of Iran comes first, with more intensity and details as the text brings us to the present.

- Rationality: it does not seem that Pollack wants to "prove us a point" and has written a book to "sell us his plan". He thoroughly analyzes the issue and presents all its details, complexities and paradoxes. Yes, he comes with a proposed solution, but it is not the main point of the book; it just comes as a final chapter and as his personal tack on how to solve a very difficult problem.

Notwithstanding the above, my only concern with this work is the content of Pollack's suggested proposal. Its somehow convoluted and has many "ifs". I realize this is not completely his fault. Actually, it reflects the complexity of the Iranian situation and how difficult it is in this case to find a clear-cut solution. This concern of mine does not, however, affects in any way my conclusion that this book is truly a most for anybody interested in learning more about the true facts of Iran.

In short, if the reader has a strong view about Iran and its relation with the world and wants to find a "confirmation" to his/her opinions, this book probably is not for him/her. However, if the reader is open to learning more about the topic and is willing to see the issue with all of its complexity and gray zones, this book is definitively for him/her.

This is a great book. Overall, this book is excellent, informative, educational and certainly worthwhile to read.

THE PERSIAN PUZZLE provides a clear and balanced overview and description of the historical and evolving relationship between the U.S. and Iran (this is not a book about the history of Iran, but instead its relationship with America), as well as each side's perception of the other and related world events.

Took off one star in the rating for two reasons:

(1). though the author does an excellent job in giving the reader an understanding of the historical U.S.-Iran relationship, he does not necessarily tell this story in the broader context of other world events, e.g., the Cold War, to name just one, and the interplay between these other events/actors and the U.S.-Iran relationship [the U.S.'s relationship with Iran is just one of many, but the reader is given a somewhat narrow lense to interpret events described in the book]; for a book that's 425 pages, too much of it "leads the reader to believe" that this bilateral relationship occurred in a vacuum -- external factors aren't brought in to the equation (at least not in-depth) to possibly give perspective to decisions or actions.

(2). the book concludes (50 pages) with the author's strategy for U.S. policy towards Iran. This isn't so much a criticism of the author's conclusions or suggestions -- it's more that his recommendations aren't very bold or enlightening. He recommends a 3-track approach, with each track nothing more than a small/large increase of the preceding track (almost "just more of the same"). At a minimum, not sure why this last chapter took up 50 pages when most of its conclusions and recommendations were gradually outlined in prior chapters.

This is a book that everyone should read. As the author himself notes in the book, Americans just don't know much, if anything at all, of the historical relationship between these two nations over the last 50+ years.