"The 1953 Coup in Iran."
Abrahamian shows how much more there is to know about the role of the United States and the United Kingdom in organizing the 1953 coup against Muhammad Mossadeq. The CIA report "leaked" by The New York Times in April 2000 was in fact a sanitized history written by the late Donald Wilber as "a handbook for future coups" -- and most CIA material remains locked up. After carefully combing all available information, especially declassified British documents, the author describes the coup's planning and execution as well as the many unsavory Iranian characters who were recruited, such as the notorious gang leader "Sha`ban the Brainless." Bent on overthrowing Mossadeq, the British brought in the United States after President Eisenhower's election in November 1952. "Planted" news stories depicting Mossadeq as unstable were pervasive. In addressing the argument that intervention was needed to prevent Iran from falling into communist hands, Abrahamian shows that neither the British nor the Americans actually viewed the leftist Tudeh Party as an imminent threat. Anyone seeking to understand a turning point in Iran's history -- or the role of clandestine actions in world politics -- should consult this painstakingly researched and forcefully presented article.
Related
Every president since Richard Nixon has recognized that ensuring stability in the Persian Gulf is a vital U.S. interest. In its first term, the Clinton administration attempted to deal with the twin dangers of Iran and Iraq through a strategy of "dual containment" that kept both countries boxed in with economic sanctions and military monitoring. Dual containment, however, is more a slogan than a strategy, and far too blunt an instrument to serve American interests in the Middle East. The United States must employ a more nuanced approach, keeping the straitjacket on Saddam while seeking improved relations with Iran.
The debate over how to deal with Iran's nuclear program is clouded by historical amnesia. Nuclear proliferation has been stopped before, and it can and should be stopped in this case as well. Unfortunately, with Tehran -- as with some of its predecessors -- the price for Washington will be relinquishing the threat of regime change by force.
How to prevent nuclear proliferation is once again topping the U.S. security agenda. But few decision-makers are seriously considering what a postproliferation world would look like, even though such a world would inevitably require rethinking many of the policies that the U.S. government and others now take for granted.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.