I'm actually pretty picky when it comes to books about Iran, since I've read so many. In fact, of the dozens I've read I can only think of three or four that I would recommend wholeheartedly.

This one I would strongly recommend, but only in parts: specifically, the first third and the last fifth. You can skip everything in between.

When I first started reading "The Persian Night," I was captivated and thought it was easily going to make my list of top 5 books about modern Iran. That's because the first third or so is about the logical implications of Shi'ite Islam, the tents of which putatively govern modern-day Iran. There you'll learn about such things as Khomeini's excellent Arabic, the views of Persians toward the Arabs, the unquenchability of Shi'ite Islam's Zoroastrian underpinnings, the tradition of the sayyeds, etc.

Great stuff. Well written and engaging.

And the final few chapters are also worth reading, as they feature the spooky but eerily logical Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who, in his previous incarnation as Mayor of Tehran, actually had the streets widened in preparation for all the traffic that would attend the coming of the Mahdi. Yes, you'll be glued to your chair reading about that guy's kooky beliefs.

But the middle part of the book gets bogged down and bears skimming. For me, the section from chapter 12 to 23 (inclusive) was a bit of a struggle to get through. It's concerned with the internal politics of Iran and the changing political structure of the Khomeinist machine. For those who are familiar with this subject, the information won't be new, shocking, or terribly useful. For those who aren't, what is there will be of little interest compared to what comes before and after.

I would like to note one other thing: Amir Taheri, the author of this book, is an exiled secular Iranian intellectual based in London and persona non grata of the regime. If you take a dip into the grace, humor, and deft writing of "Persian Night" and then listen to an interview with Mr. Taheri, the author's clunky diction and limited vocabulary will convince you that he had to have had some serious assistance writing giant swaths of this book. The yawning gulf between his speaking skills and his writing skills cannot otherwise be explained.

Incidentally, this was first published about A MONTH BEFORE the Mousavi election riots of summer 2009.

These days the world watches with a mixture of surprise and admiration as millions of Iranians risk imprisonment, injury and death to defy a discredited regime that has tuned their country into an Islamic concentration camp.
This historic insurrection is foretold in the last chapters of Amir Taheri's new book, a truly prophetic work of political scholarship.
Written in 2008 and published last spring, the book reads as if it were commenting what is happening right now. However, this is not the only reason why "The Persian Night" merits special attention. It is especially important because it sets the historic, cultural and sociological scene for the drama that has been unfolding in Iran over the past 30 years.
The author, himself an Iranian offers much needed insight into the way the Persian mind works, sometimes with results that are utterly surprising for outsiders.
He also refutes some clichés, for example about Ahmadinejad, the disputed president, being a mere tool of the "Great Leader" Ali Khamenehi. Taheri also shows that Khamenehi is something more than the strait-laced fanatic many supposed Iran experts in the West portray him, and for that reason even more dangerous than we assume.
No one could know when the Islamic regime will collapse soon. However, Taheri's book shows that the regime's collapse is inevitable. Therefore, this book could be regarded as an epitaph of the Islamic Republic.

This is the best backgrounder on the regime that controls Iran today. It is a must read for anyone looking for the detail, nuance, and conflicts in the regime.

There are things to like about this book. For those less familiar with history of the current Iranian regime, this is good stuff. It introduces all of the major players and builds a story of how they came to power, who controls what, and provides a glimpse into its complicated machinations.

The author's central argument is that the current Iranian government is driven by a messianic, extreme version of Shi'ism which renders it mostly impossible to reason with. For the author, negotiation, dialog, and so on are mostly in vain because they appeal to things to that are irrelevant to these objectives.

But surely this can't be the whole story. Other authors have offered completing views on this idea (Bob Baer's "The Devil We Know" for example), that the regime is in fact driven by a rational, calculating decision making process intended to spreads its influence and domination over the middle east. This is a very different view of what drives this regime, but the author never really considers such arguments. Both are probably oversimplifications (I suspect it's some combination of the two--largely depending on which aspects of the regime we're talking about). I think a thorough analysis of what drives this regime to take the actions that it does and makes the decisions that it does would try to take account of both of these: the religious zealotry of some in the regime, and the militaristic hegemonic ambitions of others.

Finally, the author has some startlingly prescient remarks in the final pages of the book, explaining why this regime is much weaker than it might first appear, and that there is revolution once again fomenting in the country. After the recent revolt/protests related to the 2009 election, it practically reads like an explanation for it after the fact--I think this demonstrates the degree to which the author thoroughly understands this country.

In short, this is interesting, I learned something from it, but if you pick this book up be aware that you're getting a sort of "neo-con" picture of Iran that tries to build the argument for isolation and positive efforts for "regime change" and destabilization, and he doesn't really consider all of the angles. Such arguments are troubling in light of recent questionable adventures in other countries (see Iraq). I'm don't think the author is really suggesting that other countries ought to intervene militarily (although it might be tempting for some to draw such conclusions), but this raises the question: what is he really suggesting we do?

This is an outstanding introduction to the recent history of Iran and the fascist tyranny that has ruled this ancient people for 30 years. Among other things, Taheri explains the real difference between Shiism and Sunni Islam. They are quite major differences and I can see why the split has never been resolved. It is at least as big a difference as that between the Catholic Church and the various Protestant churches. For example, in Shiism the role of mullahs and the ayatollahs has been expanded and that of the Quran and even Mohammed are diminished. An analogy might be the role of saints in the Catholic Church vs the spare emphasis on Bible study among Protestant sects. The Sunnis would play the role of the Protestants.

He also makes clear that the rule of Khomeini had little to do with the precepts of the Shiite faith as he seemed more interested in power and dictatorial rule. As the years have gone by, the Iranian people have become privately much more secular as they are forced to appear devout on public. Since the American overthrow of Saddam in 2003, those who remain devout have turned to Ayatollah Sistani for spiritual guidance and the Iranian city of Qom has declined in importance as a religious center. This, of course, is contrary to the vigorous efforts of the regime to build centers of worship. President Ahmadinejad has recently complained that no new mosques have been built in Tehran. Actual attendance at services has declined as the mullahs have been discredited by their corruption.

Another recent trend has been the rise of illegal trade unions, culminating in the 2004 bus drivers strike and the appearance of "Iran's Lech Walesa," Mansour Osanloo. Taheri describes similar organizing by teachers and women's groups. Many union leaders have been arrested or killed.

Taheri points out that the regime in Iran bases its entire foreign policy on anti-Americanism and there is no possibility of a "grand bargain" with America. In the waning days of Bill Clinton's presidency, he became convinced that a breakthrough was possible, beginning with a "casual handshake" with the Iranian president at the UN. Clinton stationed himself in the corridor where the supposed handshake was to occur but the Iranian never showed up. They had decided humiliating Clinton was more valuable to their cause. The invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam gave them pause and, for two years, they suspended uranium processing and their nuclear project. Once Bush appeared to weaken in any intent to overthrow the regime, they resumed processing and in 2005 the election of Ahmadinejad signaled full speed ahead.

The events of 2009, following the fraudulent election of Ahmadinejad, suggest that Taheri is correct about what is going on in Iran. This book gives a nice history of modern Iran, from the constitution of 1908, which established a secular government and which is suspended while the Khomeini regime is in power, to the recent changes since the book was published. Even the election of 2005 was suspicious since Ahmadinejad was supported by only 12% of voters in polls. Election turnout has declined as people gave up on any ability to modify the dictatorial regime. Ahmadinejad ran as a reformer and against many of the corrupt clerics who have enriched their families while discrediting the religion they represent. He did have genuine support on that issue but not enough to win the election without the heavy hand of the regime. The 2009 election was even more obviously a fraud and the uprising followed.

Taheri was a newspaper editor in Iran before the overthrow of the Shah and obviously no friend of the present regime. Even so, the history he relates has been confirmed by others. The Wikipedia article on his biography lists a number of attacks on him but most of them seem to be written by defenders of the regime. For example, he is accused of not being sufficiently supportive of Khatami's "reform movement." Events since then suggest Taheri was correct. The book is a valuable window into the Iranian regime and I highly recommend it. It is also very readable.

I lived in Tehran 1975-77 and got out just before the Shah did. I learned one extremely valuable political lesson while there: I was ambivalent about the Shah. One day I'd wake up and think he was doing a pretty good job for his country; the next day, I'd wake up and think he was a filthy tyrannical scoundrel. By the end of two years, I'd worked myself around to thinking that, in any case, the Shah could be replaced because nothing could possibly be worse.

Bzzt. Wrong. Persians made the same error as the Cubans did with Castro; they carelessly assumed that nothing could be worse than the corrupt regime of Batista, and were they ever wrong! They're been saddled with Fidel Castro for 50 years now. In Tehran, the Khomeinists are still going after 30 years.

While I have always loathed the "religious" gang in Tehran, Amir Taheri has all the gory details in this book. He begins with the rather startling statement that the "Islamic Republic of Iran" is a TRIPLE LIE, since the government is not a republic, not Islamic, and not Iranian.

Well, I won't dwell on the fact that the government is not a "republic." I never thought it was, and the liberal columnists who thought it was have been rudely awakened by the events of 2009. (I wonder whether the "newly awakened" include Bill Clinton, who crazily imagined that Iran was a more vibrant democracy than the USA. Taheri documents this extraordinary fact; one wonders what Bill Clinton's wife thinks, now that she is Secretary of State.)

But "not Islamic?" Surely you jest, Mr. Taheri! If any government on earth represents Islam, surely the theocrats in Iran do! Right?

Wrong again. First, the ruling clique are Shi'ites, and the vast majority of Muslims are Sunni Muslims who hate the Shi'ites. On top of that, any candidates for "Supreme Leader" must come from the "Twelver Shi'ites," those who believe in the Twelve Imams and the future coming of the Twelfth Imam. (Sunni Muslims have no truck with Imams.) On top of that, Khomeini tried to get himself declared an Imam (Wow! Thirteen, as of last week!!) and failed, but still wrote in the Constitution that the Supreme Leader is allowed to suspend the rules of Islam when necessary!!

Can anyone say "heresy?" What would you think of a Pope who insisted that he could suspend the rules of Christianity when necessary? Would you tend to think that he was a wise ruler, or an absolutely certifiable control freak who thinks that his professed "religion" is whatever he decides it is, on a day-to-day basis?

Well, OK, the "Islam" of the Iranian theocrats may be zany, but at the very least they are (duh) IRANIANS (duh). How can you possibly deny that?

Don't ask me: ask Khomeini, who has attacked the very idea of Iranian nationalism tooth-and-nail at every opportunity, who lost his temper (he was good at that) when someone suggested celebrating the Persian New Year, who tried to make Arabic the language of preference and thought of razing Persepolis. If you think Khomeini was any sort of "Persian," you make a serious error: he was the head of a world-wide ISLAMIC movement which happened to be located in (where are we today?) oh yes, in Iran.

To sum up so far: this is a fascinating book, full of tales of "how to become a mullah" (grow a beard, put on a turban, climb into a mullah's robe, and voila! The former pistachio farmer becomes President of that "Islamic Republic of Iran" ten years later and also the richest man in the country....

This prescient book is MUST reading for anyone even vaguely interested in Iran, including the guy currently in the White House. According to Taheri, Iran right now is "a heaving volcano." For twenty years, the theocracy was a government that could not be overthrown, but that is no longer the case. Of course, governments do not overthrow themselves: someone has to do it. But it seems quite obvious that America should be on their side.

Or are we still more concerned about a Jew building a house in Israel, then about religious maniacs building nuclear weapons in Iran?

Highest possible recommendation!!!!

This book details the history and rationale of the Khomeini-led cult that has taken over the Iranian nation. It explains the Regime's fascistic outlook in detail, and contrasts its actions with historic Iranian and Islamic tradition. It is an eye-opener. Even though I feel relatively sophisticated on the Middle East, this book adds detail and depth, as it shows the thuggish non-Islamic method and danger posed by the Khomeinists to be wide and very real. (The similarities in methods of control of the regime and Hitler's early Nazi period, after ascension but pre-invasions of neighbors, is eerie. It is likely not accidental that it is so, based on what the author describes as fixations of the leaders of the regime on Israel, Jews, and Western nations.) This book is a very worthy addition to our understanding of what goes on in Iran, the threat and ambition of the current rulers, and also of Iran's historic interrelations with the Arab, Western and Ottoman world.