Lexington, KY - When John Stempel first published Inside the Iranian Revolution in 1981, Iranian-American relations were at a low point.
Stempel was a Foreign Service officer stationed in Tehran during the early stages of the Iranian revolution. He left the country only four months prior to the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran and the ensuing hostage crisis.
Today, Stempel is a senior professor of international relations and former director of the University of Kentucky's Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce. As the second edition of his acclaimed book is released, relations between the two countries are again difficult.
In this new edition, Stempel draws on the experiences of three decades ago to offer insight into the current relationship between the U.S. and Iran. Just as the first edition drew praise and critical acclaim, this new version, with updated chapters that bear on today's situation, is certain to do the same. This is a brilliant work, by an insightful writer who is both an adept scholar and an insightful diplomat.
Politicians, students, businesspeople and anyone looking to gain understanding of the current precarious relationship between the U.S. and Iran should read this book. Equally fascinating is to have the opportunity to talk with this esteemed author, now at home in Kentucky. The following interview gives insight into his newly released book as well as his keen skills as a diplomat and political observer.
What was the goal of your book originally, and how has that changed, if at all, with the re-release?
Stempel: My original goal was to do two things: to describe the Iranian revolution and how it came about. There were some differences of opinion, and I felt I was in a unique position to clarify. My charge was to be aware of how the Iranians looked at things.
The 30th anniversary of the American hostage-taking is coming, and I felt that it was worth putting my book out there again. It helps to establish a baseline on events where different perceptions last for a long while.
Contrast the status of U.S. and Iranian relations in 1981 with today.
Stempel: When I wrote the book, we had already broken relations with Iran. We have no formal relations today. In the early days of the Iranian revolution, while it was coming into power, we negotiated. With them, we worked very carefully to establish that negotiation is possible and a good thing. Even if it is difficult, it is better than fighting.
What should be done to improve relations between the two countries?
Stemple: Today, we need to establish that both sides gain more than they lose by talking to each other. It is not going to be easy; they have some hard feelings from what happened in the past. We shouldn't have any romantic feelings about sitting down at the table. The more people understand this, the better.
There is a great deal of unrest about Iran and a great deal of uncertainty about what to do. We should look at it straight - use negotiation. The idea that if you're bad, we can't negotiate with you is absurd.
How does the average American view Iran?
Stempel: The average American thinks Iranians are nuts and anti-American. They would be surprised to see that Iranians are very Westernized. There are currently about three million Iranians living in the United States today. During the revolution, the upper and top-middle class migrated.
Iranians are very proud, very nationalistic. I hope that Americans would recognize that shared characteristic.
How would you describe Iran's threat to the United States?
Stempel: You have to look at it in two ways. First, they could divert oil production, especially by taking over additional territory. Along with that are the nuclear issue and the relationship with Israel. It would only take two or three nuclear missiles to destroy Israel.
But second, Iran could be very helpful with other issues in the Middle East if they were friendlier with us. Iran's relationships with Europeans are somewhat better than with the United States.
Why are good relations with Iran important to U.S. business?
Stempel: The simple answer is trade. Trade is related to politics, of course, and normalizing trade could change politics.
The Iranian oil industry is run with very sophisticated American equipment. The trouble is that all that equipment is in bad shape due to the embargo we've had. Their oil industry was built with American equipment in the '50s and '60s. Since the embargo, equipment has to be smuggled in, usually from Europe.
It only makes sense to stop the embargo at this point. The Iranians are not trying to make a bomb - our info is very good on that. Trade could help reinforce a positive image of America.
My book describes what could happen and what would be likely parameters for progress. Iran is a tremendous market for American goods. Iran recently agreed to a $30 billion oil deal with China. Other nations are negotiating.
What do you think of the unrest and protests in Iran after the recent election?
Stempel: If the Iranians overthrow the current government, I want them to be as prepared as possible. The revolutionary generation is slowly dying out. Iran has a very youthful population.
Ideally, if there were points of mutual collaboration, the United States might be invited to bring a specialized mission in, including an ambassador.
I initially predicted that the current Iranian government would be replaced. I believe that didn't happen because the United States invaded Iraq.
Are there any other reasons why your book should be read now?
Stempel: Americans need to know enough not to allow our government to do whatever it wants. In other words, if your objective is the wrong one, you need to stop.
The neo-conservative effort was to put a military force in Iran. As Stephen Covey says, "If your ladder is leaning against the wrong wall, climbing higher and faster will not get you where you want to go."
The wrong ladder is the idea that we can conquer Iran in some way. You have to negotiate; don't challenge. Get in around the back door and look for their weak point.
The ironic thing is that they were at that point when we invaded Iraq - they made a proposal to us. We could have accepted it on the spot.
The most regrettable State of the Union Speech was the "Axis of Evil." Iran was the only country in that part of the world that held candlelight vigils for us during the 9/11 tragedy. We were hand in glove until Bush put this into the speech. He did not clear it with Colin Powell or Donald Rumsfeld. Bush's speechwriter put it in, and it undercut everything his administration had negotiated with Iran.
Do you think your book will be read in Iran?
Stempel: Four years after it was first published, it was translated into Farsi. When I asked the translator about my royalties, he laughed and said, "We don't have to pay royalties in Iran!" So, yes, I hope both Iranians and Americans will read the new one.