Farhad Kazemi

The nonrevolutionary peasantry of modern Iran

The social scientist studying the modern world is inevitably struck by the importance of peasant rebellions. In some countries--such as Russia, Yugoslavia, Albania, China, Cuba, and Vietnam--peasant rebellions have helped bring about communist revolutions. In others--such as Mexico, Algeria, Kenya, and recently Angola--they have contributed toward the success of nationalist revolutions. In yet other countries--including Spain, Greece, Peru, India, Phillippines, Malaya, and Indonesia--they have helped

Peasants and Politics in the Modern Middle East

Though war dominated news about the Middle East in 1991, political upheaval in the region existed long before CNN filmed it. This collection of essays addresses the evolving process of politics and violence in the rural populations of the Middle East in the last 150 years. While events in Egypt, Iran, and Turkey receive the most attention, the volume brings together material for the entire region, including analyses of peasant violence in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and North Africa. Societies of the Middle East entering the 20th century were overwhelmingly agrarian, consisting largely of peasants who produced for themselves or for local markets. As rural populations began producing for larger markets, conflict and rebellion ensued. The authors place the explosion of rural protests in historical context and examine the coping strategies of peasants undergoing rapid change. In analyzing the degree of peasant participation in politics, they warn against mistaking the outward appearance of submission for an inward acceptance of oppression. They argue that the most characteristic aspect of peasant insubordination has been its permanence and continuity and conclude that no single dynamic can explain why rural actors protest, sabotage, or acquiesce to the powerful interests that control the markets or the state.

Models of Iranian Politics, the Road to the Islamic Revolution, and the Challenge of Civil Society

This essay reviews six recent books on modern Iranian politics. It suggests that Iranian politics can be analyzed from the perspective of four basic traditions and models: monarchical, liberal nationalist, religious, and leftist. Each model abstracts the essential elements of the political system and demonstrates the dominance of a certain perspective. The first three of these models have been implemented in post—World War II Iran, and even the left has had an impact. The essay concludes by stating that current Iranian domestic politics can be better understood by paying attention to five enduring features: historical continuity of the nation-state, steady increase in state power, persistence of patrimonialism, intense interaction between domestic and foreign policies particularly as it relates to control over oil, and the vitality of civil society even under the Islamic Republic.

Iran's Strategic Intentions and Capabilities

Abstract : Iran appears to be pursuing an assertive foreign policy that confronts the United States on a variety of points: the Middle East Peace Process, the stability of moderate Muslim states, terrorism (such as the death threat to Rushdie), security in the Persian Gulf, and nuclear proliferation.

The Study of Political Unrest and Violence: The Middle East

The late Hannah Arendt once observed that “violence itself is incapable of speech, and not merely that speech is helpless when confronted with violence. Because of this speech-lessness political theory has little to say about the phenomenon of violence and must leave its discussion to the technicians;” (Arendt, 1963, p.9). This may have been true at the time of Arendt’s writing. The situation, however, dramatically changed when the violence of the sixties began in earnest. The academic market was soon lost in a maze of articles, books, and analyses of political violence from the perspective of not only political theory but practically every discipline in the social sciences and humanities. These new works supplemented the traditional and earlier studies of violence by the Marxist school and others. Thus by the turn of the decade, the student of political violence was faced with the difficult task of trying to evaluate and sift his way through an ever-expanding plethora of concepts, theories, definitions, explanations, and models of political violence which abounded in the field.