By Brent Lollis

The nature of the conflict between the U.S. and Iran is not one of recent origin. In order to understand this conflict, it is critical that recent developments in the U.S.-Iranian relationship not be taken as fundamental. The contemporary U.S. argument against Iran is based upon two propositions: (i.) that the Iranian nuclear enrichment program is merely cover for a clandestine military nuclear weapons program; and (ii.) that the Iranian government is clandestinely supporting terrorists and insurgents in Iraq thereby killing U.S. soldiers and harming U.S. interests. The actual source of the U.S.-Iranian conflict does not rest within these two propositions; in fact, it exists within an historical relationship dating back at least to the 1953 U.S. supported coup against the democratically elected Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh.

By Brent Lollis

As the chess game continues to play out between the U.S. and Iran, it is important to understand that neither of the two players is monolithic. Both the U.S. and Iran have numerous factions of varying strengths vying for dominance. Each wants to control or influence the debate within their respective debate arenas. The U.S.-Iranian relationship is, at the moment, best characterized as being in a state of "neither war nor peace." Such an indeterminate form of relationship is, of course, difficult to maintain. It is far more stable to put the relationship onto a more determinate path - whether it is the road to war or the one to peace. It may be that keeping the U.S.-Iran relationship in this "neither peace nor war" state is too difficult to control and will, within the year, move forward onto one of these two roads.