Themes in Persepolis

In our interactive oral we discussed the cultural and contextual considerations of Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi. During our discussion we discussed the Iraq and Iranian War and I found this discussion quite intriguing and engaging. The interactive oral gave me a unique opportunity to understand Persepolis in extra detail as we explored several different ideas and themes. Our discussion began by finding out what ignited the war between the two countries. Through discussing this, we gathered that he relationship between the governments of Iran and Iraq were steadily on the improvement in 1978. Despite Iraq’s goal of regaining the Shatt al-Arab, the Iraqi government seemed to initially welcome the Iranian Revolution, which Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlav was seen as a common enemy. there have been many cross-border disputes, largely at Iran’s instigation. Ayatollah Ruhollah asked Iraqis to revolt against the Ba’ath government, which was received with considerable anger in Baghdad. When Khomeini refused Saddam’s negotiations by preparing an Islamic revolution in Iraq, Saddam was alarmed.

Saddam’s goal was to demote Egypt from its status as ‘the leader of the Arab world’ and to establish a government over the Persian Gulf. He saw Iran become increasingly weaker because of revolution, sanctions, and international isolation. Saddam had paid a lot in Iraq’s military since his defeat to Iran in 1975, buying large amounts of weaponry from the Soviet Union, France and Britain. By 1980, Iraq managed to create an army by having 200,000 soldiers, 2,000 tanks and 450 aircraft.

On the 8th of March 1980, Iran announced it was removing its ambassador from Iraq, downgraded its diplomatic ties, and demanded that Iraq do the same. The following day, Iraq declared Iran’s ambassador persona non-grata, and demanded his removal from Iraq by the 15th of March. Iraq before long took the properties of 70,000 civilians believed to be of Iranian origin and expelled them from its territory. This caused tensions between the two nations to increase further.

Thus, began the Iran-Iraq war. In April 1980, Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz was almost assassinated in which Saddam claimed that the Iranians were responsible. As Iraqi Shi’as began to respond to Ayatollah Khomeini’s call for revolt, Saddam began to take heavy measures, and it got to the extent that Iraq’s top Shi’a Ayatollah, was hanged in April of 1980. However, Iranian calls for the end to monarchy in the Middle East gave Kuwait and Saudi Arabia no choice but to begin sending billions of dollars to help Iraq. By doing so they did not want to see Iranian-style Shi’a revolution spreading southward. On June 20, 1982, Saddam Hussein called for a ceasefire that would return everything to the pre-war status quo. However, Ayatollah Khomeini rejected the proffered peace, calling for Saddam Hussein’s removal from power. The Iranian clerical government began to plan their assault on Iraq, despite the objections of its surviving military officers. On July 13, 1982, Iranian forces made their way into Iraq, heading for the city of Basra. The Iraqis, however, were prepared. They had long trenches and bunkers dug into the earth, and Iran soon ran short on ammunition. In addition, Saddam’s forces unloaded chemical weapons against their opponents. The Iranian army were quickly reduced to mere numbers as a result of suicide attacks. Children were sent to run across mine-fields, clearing the mines before the adult Iranian soldiers could hit them, and instantly become martyrs in the process. Saudi F-15s retaliated for attacks against the kingdom’s shipping by shooting down an Iranian plane in June 1984. On land, the years 1985 to 1987 saw Persia and Asian nation initiate and counter offensives, but either side not gaining much territory. The fighting was full of bloodshed, as tens of thousands were killed on each side in days.

In February of 1988, Saddam unleashed the ultimate missile in one of Iran’s cities. Simultaneously, Iraq began a significant offensive plan to push the Iranians out of Iraqi territory. Worn down by eight years of fighting and the incredibly high toll in lives, Iran’s revolutionary government began to consider accepting a peace deal. These events that were mentioned during the discussion made me relate to similar events that Marjane described in Persepolis. Through Persepolis, Marjane details her story, by discussing Saddam Hussein’s attack of Iran that sparked anger and hostility which resulted in the people increasing their patriotism and love for their country.

Overall, it was an interesting discussion, as I was also able to share information about this topic which interested the class and I learnt about the revolution and how it not only played a big role in Iran’s history but how it also reflected on Satrapi and her novel.

How Persepolis Challenges Common Perceptions of Iran

In the years since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, the country of Iran has built up some very negative reputations in the West. The actions of certain extremists cause the world to associate Iran with terrorism, corruption, and production of deadly weapons. This is represented in President George W. Bush’s 2002 State of the Union Address, when he classified Iran as part of the “axis of evil”. However, the vast majority of the Iranian people are not evil terrorists. They are real people who also oppose the views of their country’s leaders. This is highlighted in the graphic memoir Persepolis, by Marjane Satrapi. Satrapi writes about her experience of living in Tehran during and after the Iranian Revolution as a means to confront certain stereotypes about her country. Persepolis aims to show the world that Iran is not an axis of evil, but rather a country of good people masked by the actions of those in charge. In Persepolis, Marjane Satrapi challenges the West’s common perceptions of Iran as a country of terrorism and chaos by highlighting events from the Iranian revolution and how they affected the common citizen. She uses her own life story to defy certain misconceptions about Iran while increasing the reader’s knowledge about Iranian culture.

Countries all across the world express unfavorable views of Iran. The Pew Research Center conducted a survey in 2013, titled “Global Views of Iran Overwhelmingly Negative”, regarding citizen’s around the globe and their opinion on Iran. According to the survey, the country’s image worldwide is strongly negative. For example, 88% in France and 59% in Britain claim to have negative feelings toward Iran. North America is not much different, as roughly 70% in the U.S. and Canada express an unfavorable opinion on Iran. There are a variety of reasons why these countries have unfavorable views towards Iran, one specific reason highlighted in the survey shows that many believe that the government of Iran does not respect the personal freedoms of its people. Satrapi was a victim of this mistreatment, as the Western ways of her family caused her to seek safety in Austria in 1984. Other reasons come from the association of Iran with terrorism and pursuit of nuclear weapons. Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979, the government of Iran has supported certain terrorist groups, “seeing them as a form of power projection and a way to undermine enemies as well as a way to help like-minded groups become stronger” . As their support for terrorist groups offer benefits within their own country, these militant groups oppose many foreign nations, especially the United States. Their dependence on terrorism creates an image of Iran as a threat in the eyes of the rest of the world.

What tends to go unnoticed is not Iran’s support for terrorist groups, but their efforts to fight against terrorism. Across the world, much emphasis is consistently placed on Iran’s involvement in terrorism, yet the country has also done much to fight against a variety of terrorist groups. As a result of Iran’s many problems with terrorism, they have learned to develop sophisticated counterterrorism mechanisms. Tehran’s counterterrorism organizations have been vital in combatting some of the most dangerous terrorist groups, such as ISIS. This helps Satrapi’s argument in Persepolis proving that not all Iranian citizens are evil and corrupt as the world perceives them to be.

Much of this negative thought towards Iran stems from the words of President George W. Bush. Iran’s linkage to terrorism prompted President Bush to classify the country into an “axis of evil”. President Bush’s ethos strongly influenced public perceptions of Iran and the Eastern world. He used this metaphor in his 2002 State of the Union Address, which took place in the year following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Following these attacks, counterterrorism became a primary concern to the United States government. Therefore, all countries associated with terrorism were a potential threat. In the article “What the Axis of Evil Metaphor Did to Iran”, Daniel Heradstveit and G. Matthew Bonham explain the impact of the axis of evil metaphor on Iranian self-image, as well as how people have understood the metaphor. This metaphor changed the way the West views Iran, but also changed the way Iranians view themselves. A problem with this metaphor is that it refers to entire countries, rather than just their leaders. The innocent people of Iran did not want to be viewed as evil, yet the metaphor refers to them in the same context of the extremists. The world is pressured to believe that Iranians are inherently evil, although this is not the case for a majority of the country. Marjane Satrapi is a prime example of a citizen who is affected by these stereotypes. Recognizing the growing disapproval of her country, Satrapi writes the memoir Persepolis to contest these common perceptions.

The use of a memoir helps Satrapi to bring credibility to her story. Memoirs are “the closest we can get to living another person’s real story”. Therefore, the reader can better understand the culture of Iran from the stories of people who lived in it. In contrast of news and television, Persepolis shows the reality of life in Iran from a primary source. Information found in the media sometimes contains bias or omits certain details, whereas Persepolis is a story of truth. Satrapi depicts her life in Iran with much detail and authenticity. She uses her memory of certain traumatic, as well as peaceful, events to give the reader a sense of what it was like living through the Iranian Revolution. Persepolis helps the reader grasp the dynamic of the culture in Iran and how it differs from common public opinion around the world.

The author of Persepolis, Marjane Satrapi, wrote the memoir partly to show the world that Iran is not what it is made out to be on the news and in the media. Satrapi was born in Rasht, Iran, in 1969. She lived in Tehran for years under Islamic extremist leaders such as Reza Shah and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. As a child, she witnessed the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the terror that went along with it. As a victim of the repressive regimes, she has a story to tell about living in Iran at that time. She claims that while living in France in 1994 she would see news about Iran, but it never represented her experience of living there. Satrapi had to justify why it is not negative to be Iranian for almost twenty years prior to writing Persepolis. However, she recognizes that if she based her knowledge solely on news stories, she would also believe that everyone was evil. This was her motivation to write Persepolis, to show that there is good and evil everywhere. As an Iranian, Satrapi recognizes that the image of Iran across the globe is not entirely accurate. She has sympathy for the innocent people of Iran who have lost their lives or have suffered under these regimes, as she states that “an entire nation should not be judged by the wrongdoings of a few extremists”. That being said, Persepolis is a tool that offers a different perspective of Iran than what is commonly portrayed. Much can be learned about the people of Iran and their culture from Satrapi’s experiences.

There are many instances throughout Persepolis that challenge the common view of Iran in the Western world. The government of Iran is strongly criticized, yet the people and culture are represented positively. Satrapi grew up in a family that was “very modern and avant-garde”. She was taught from a young age to think freely, and to speak her mind even when her thoughts go against social norms. Her parents also opposed the Shah’s regime, as her mother would protest in the streets against the veil. They continued to protest leading up to the revolution, especially after the fire at the Rex Cinema in Abadan. In this catastrophic event, nearly 400 people were burned alive. They tried to escape, yet the doors were locked from the outside. Reports after the incident made the Iranian people suspicious that it was the Shah’s regime that was responsible. This event is depicted in Persepolis on page 15, and Satrapi is sure that it was the Shah who caused this disaster. She includes this event in Persepolis to portray a time when the Iranian government became violent against their own citizens. The innocent people of Iran are not evil, they are victims of evil. The event caused the Iranian people to become angry towards the Shah’s regime. Satrapi’s parents, along with many other citizens, began to demonstrate protests every day against the Shah. It is evident that the Iranian people have had enough violence and corruption in their own country, and they want change. This shows us that the citizens of Iran are against the evil of their leaders, as is the rest of the world.

Like every country, Iran contains bad people as well as good people. Later in Satrapi’s life, after her return to Iran from living in Austria, she began to make connections with like-minded classmates. These people became friends to Satrapi, as they would visit each other frequently. Satrapi became close with these people, and as time passed, she “became conscious of the contrast between the official representation of [her] country and the real life of the people”. She recognizes that the evil of Iran’s leaders is not represented in the country’s citizens. They did not choose to be born in a country of terrorism and evil, so they have no choice but to fight against the unfair regimes. As Satrapi had fun with her friends and partied frequently, they had to be aware of the guardians of the revolution. Even in their own homes, they were not safe. They quickly got used to frequent invasions of their parties, but they were constantly forced to pay fines. In order to simply have fun, Iranian citizens must be secretive. This secrecy causes the people of Iran to be shielded from the rest of the world. These citizens may be good people that can make a difference, yet they spend their lives in fear of their leaders. From the perspective of an American, it is hard to imagine living in a country where the people’s rights are limited. Persepolis shows the world that the Iranian people are not responsible for the country’s evil, it is the ones with power that cause the problems.

Iran has been viewed negatively across the world for many years. This is due to a variety of reasons, mostly because of the oppressive regimes during and after the Iranian Revolution. Since the revolution, Iran’s leaders have cemented Iran as a country of terrorism and evil. The Western world is scared of Iran and views them as a threat to their freedom. What tends to go unnoticed is the backlash that this terror has on the citizens of Iran. Marjane Satrapi notices the public opinion of Iran and wants to show the world that the country is not what it is made out to be on the news. She has lived through the terror of the 1979 Iranian Revolution and does not want to be classified along with the leaders that caused that terror. Therefore, she wrote Persepolis as a means to show the struggles of Iran’s people and hopefully change the minds of its readers. The memoir complicates a vision of Iran as an “axis of evil” by describing the country from a different perspective. In the future, we should not simply believe what we hear on the media, we should seek to understand an issue fully before making our assumptions.

Education in Persepolis

Persepolis is a completed autobiographical series by author Marjane Satrapi that shows her upbringing in the war-torn city of Tehran, located in Iran. The citizens of Tehran were subjected to years of war and religious extremism. The environment of her childhood in Iran had changed her personality. This will be the central theme of this paper.

In order to explore how the author’s life had been shaped by the Islamic revolution, we must understand the background information surrounding the unrest in the city of Tehran. In multiple occasions, we had witnessed different forms of corruption, religious extremism and sexism. The situation was substantially worsened due to riots and protests which led to numerous deaths. The theory that the author’s personality was vastly affected by the war is plausible.

The author had shown bravery on many occasions in her childhood. Such attributes will be discussed at great length in the following sections of the paper. The author’s story can be studied psychologically because of the sudden change of environment for the author. She moved from the war-torn city of Tehran to the relatively peaceful country of Austria. This change of environment caused her to be socially awkward and unforgiving in some cases.

The city of Tehran had endured years of war and oppression. An observation made was how divided the city of Iran appeared on the favourability of governance. The constant battle between imperialists and communists in Tehran resulted in the king being overthrown. The crucial aspects during the time of the coup and the battle with Iraq were the

Using these factors, we will try to understand the effect each of these aspects played into shaping Marjane Satrapi. We will try to research and understand each of these factors by studying historic events and draw conclusions from each of these factors.

Mohammed Reza Pahlavi Overthrown

The revolts leading up to the downfall of the Shahanshah Pahlavi was the first experience of political violence that the author had seen. It was a historic event.

The Pahlavi dynasty was the last ruling house of the Imperial State of Iran from 1925 until 1979 when the Persian monarchy was overthrown and abolished as a result of the Iranian Revolution. The dynasty was founded by Reza Shah Pahlavi in 1925, a former brigadier-general of the Persian Cossack Brigade, whose reign lasted until 1941 when he was forced to abdicate by the Allies after the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran. He was succeeded by his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last Shah of Iran.

The Pahlavis came to power after Ahmad Shah Qajar, the last Qajar ruler of Iran, proved unable to stop British and Soviet encroachment on Iranian sovereignty, had his position extremely weakened by a military coup, and was removed from power by the parliament while in France. The Iranian parliament, known as the Majlis, convening as a Constituent Assembly on 12 December 1925, deposed the young Ahmad Shah Qajar and declared Reza Khan the new King of Imperial State of Persia. In 1935, Reza Shah asked foreign delegates to use the endonym Iran in formal correspondence and the official name the Imperial State of Iran was adopted.

Following the coup d’état in 1953 supported by the United Kingdom and the United States, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s rule became more autocratic and was aligned with the Western Bloc during the Cold War. Faced with growing public discontent and popular rebellion throughout 1978 and after declaring surrender and officially resigning, the second Pahlavi went into exile with his family in January 1979, sparking a series of events that quickly led to the end of the state and the beginning of the Islamic Republic of Iran on 11 February 1979.

The overthrow of the Shah came as a surprise to almost all observers. The first militant anti-Shah demonstrations of a few hundred started in October 1977, after the death of Khomeini’s son Mostafa. Rohullah Khomeini was the former supreme leader of Iran. The Shah had employed secret police, named NAVAK. Mostafa’s death is widely regarded to be the actions of the NAVAK. Thus, the revolution had started gaining momentum after the incident.

Another incident that was mentioned in the graphic novel was the burning of the Cinema Rex, what happened on 19 August 1978, killing at least 420 civilians. The event started when four men doused the building with aeroplane fuel before setting it alight. The attack was responsible for triggering the 1979 Iranian Revolution which saw the overthrow of the Iranian monarchy. It was the largest terrorist attack in history until the 9/11 terror attacks.

The ruling Pahlavi dynasty initially blamed ‘Islamic Marxists’ for the and later reported that Islamic militants started the fire, while anti-Pahlavi protesters blamed SAVAK, the Iranian secret police, for setting the fire.

On 19 August 1978 at the Cinema Rex in Abadan, Iran, hundreds of people were watching The Deer when, at 20:21, four men barred the doors of the cinema and doused it with petrol from a can. The fire started outside three entrance doors to the main hall after the attackers allegedly dropped a match into the petrol. The attackers then fled and blocked the doors from the outside. Some people attempted to escape by the roof.

The author’s parents were politically active at this time. They discussed politics at home in front of the young author. This was also the first event, after which we saw the author’s parents get involved in the revolution.

The Black Friday had been mentioned in the comic Persepolis. It was the first time that Marjane had decided to participate in the revolution. It was Marjane’s first direct political involvement. She was only nine years old. She went to the protest with her maid Mehri. Black Friday will forever be engraved in Iran’s history as a very significant day to overthrow the monarchy. On 8th September 1978, the Shah’s military shot at the protesters, killing 88 people and injuring 205 to 8000 people. This incident had ended any “hope for compromise” between the protesters and the Shah.

Even though the Shah had stated that the Islamic Marxists were responsible for the arson of the Rex Cinema and 86 people died on Black Friday, the citizens of Tehran did not trust these sources. This points to growing distrust among the civilians to their autocratic ruler.

Education under the Pahlavi dynasty

Education is a very important theme in Persepolis. Under the Shah’s rule, we witness education being used as a propaganda tool. The author’s school teachers also suggested that the Shah was chosen to be the ruler of Iran by God. This was a very effective method as we observe the author discussing the idea with her father. The literacy corps took place over the White Revolution, which occurred under Muhammad Reza Pahlavi. It was believed by the government that the majority of the population was illiterate and the Literacy Corps was an attempt to change the statistics. The program included hiring young men who had a degree in secondary education to serve in the Literacy Corps and involved teaching children between the ages of 6 and 12, and of which had not attended 2nd-grade education, to read. The goal is to improve literacy in Iran in a cheap and efficient manner, which they also believed would improve workmanship. 200,000 young men and women participated in the Literacy Corps, teaching 2.2 million boys and girls and over a million adults. In many cases, the volunteers would continue to work as educators after their conscription ended.

The Literacy Corps were accused of involving propaganda techniques in their education. However, the educated people of Tehran were cautious of such techniques. The author believed that the Shah was appointed by God. The author’s father was quick to inform the author about the Shah.

However, the goal of education was ‘an aristocracy of culture’, producing small numbers of technocrats, but not nurturing thoughtful and critical individuals. Rote learning was dominant, and the curriculum was imposed by foreign knowledge and expertise, becoming irrelevant to the cultural and socio-economic aspects of the society, as well its basic needs and demands. This meant that the universities simply could not produce the human resources required by the country. This educational policy provoked the young generation to protest strongly against the foundation of the regime. Eventually, the universities became the centre of political activities and were instrumental in the all-encompassing changes that occurred in 1978 and 1979 – the Islamic Revolution.

Persepolis Movie Versus Book

The big argument with all the books that have turned into films or the reverse is the similarities and differences between them. On most films, they say based off the book, so they do not have to exactly copy word for words what the book says. In this case with the graphic novel Persepolis the film sticks to the novel’s storyline. There are some minor differences in detail though.

Marjane Satrapi’s autobiographical graphic novel shows the events in history that she went through, with her own experience to show is how the Iranian war and Revolution impacted her. The graphic novel uses black and white characters to allow the reader to imagine more and decide for themselves what it could have looked like, but in the movie the first and last scene are in color.

The film stays true to the storyline of the book. It has the same graphic feel since the book was a graphic novel. One of the first differences you will notice is when the book opens it starts off chapter one with Marji at ten years old wearing a veil and the movie opens up with her in an airport she looks for the flight Tehran and when she sits down she then starts reminiscing on her childhood.

The chapters within the book are just small bits and pieces of hand-picked events of Marji’s life. The film just makes the chapters into flow into a story instead of having only bits of it. Another difference is that the book follows around Marji’s life but the film shows Iran’s history so it is missing a lot of the scenes where Marji is in Austria, and in the movie it only shows you a small peek of her traveling through Eroupe. The next is that there is a big part of that where Marji is living with a bunch of homosexuals and her mother comes by. In the book Marji’s state of mind was affected by this and it is never talked about in the movie.

Looking back to the film and the novel, discovering that there have been two chapters that were thrown out and did not appear in the movie at all. The two that were not in the movie were, The Letter and The Jewels. In the chapter ‘the Jewels’ there is a confrontation between Mali and Mrs. Satrapi as well as other women in a grocery store; in the store Mali feels she’d rather lose to the Iraqis instead of having her own kind insult her. In chapter ‘The Letter’ Marji’s dad, Satrapi, is not for the relationship between his maid and his neighbor. He explains that he does not like it because the love that they have should not be happening because of the differences in social class. In my opinion these two chapters should have been included in the movie because the chapters play a crucial role in the themes in the book. For example when her father is not happy with the relationship between his neighbor and his maid shoes the theme about social class.

Death is something the character Momo is obsessed with in the novel. Momo is a friend of Marji’s while she is in school in Vienna, also Marji’s “first kiss.” There’s a scene in the film where Marji is with Momo at a heavy metal rock concert and starts dancing with the audience. The scene shows that Marji is removing herself from the Iranian society, and this argument is further compounded by the fact that she appears to be in the bar from France.

Essay on War in ‘Persepolis’

Individuals experience childhood in various conditions and as they develop, their environment impacts them from numerous points of view. In Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis, she is a 10-year-old who lives in Iran that has encountered groundbreaking occasions, for example, the Islamic Revolution which happened in 1979, and the Iranian and Iraq war in the 1980s. Marjane utilizes these occasions and showed them as a realistic novel for the honor-winning diary, Persepolis. Satrapi’s realistic novel Persepolis is a bildungsroman on the grounds that it investigates the loss of blamelessness and change from youth to adulthood, showing the development of the hero.

Envision moving out of the home you experienced childhood in, compelled to proceed with your puberty alone in light of the fact that your condition is getting excessively perilous and your folks are beginning to fear for your wellbeing. This was one of the numerous encounters Marjane Satrapi shares in her realistic novel journal Persepolis. In spite of the considerable number of perils during the Islamic Revolution, numerous individuals chose to remain in Iran. Persepolis is a diary of her adventure as she grew up during the Islamic Revolution of 1979, and a war between Iran and Iraq. During the Revolution, the Shah is supplanted by the Ayatollah who is authorizing severe laws. She shares the entirety of the battles she confronted living in a nation where individuals were exceptionally traditionalist while she was constantly a frank and cunning youngster. Marjane Satrapi gives her readers what her adolescence comprised of and how all that helped her become the individual she is today. The journal Persepolis investigates how Marjane Satrapi’s loss of guiltlessness and high school resistance lead to her personality coming to fruition.

Persepolis is a bildungsroman in light of the fact that she encounters a loss of honesty at a youthful age. Marjane portrays how she read about a relative she was truly near who had died. ‘ That was my last meeting with my beloved Anoosh, [ title of newspaper] Russian Spy Executed'(70). This shows how at a youthful age she was hearing the words, execution, and war and how those words influenced her since they were utilized to depict somebody she thought about. Every one of these circumstances and depictions is something that no one ought to be comfortable with at her age, yet Marjane is growing up hearing these terms consistently. Notwithstanding that, Marjane grows up hearing those depictions as well as at a certain point, during the Iraq war in 1984, encounters seeing somebody she knew dead after a rocket from Iraq had hit the young lady’s home. “The bracelet was still attached to I don’t know what, no scream in the world could have relieved my suffering and my anger” (142). Here, she sees the dead collection of one of her school companions that lived in her neighborhood after the road was besieged. Relatively few children or even grown-ups have ever needed to encounter that in their life and to her high school self, seeing that certainly had an effect on her life. That gives her a loss of blamelessness and in the end, prompts her young resistance.

Persepolis is a bildungsroman in light of the fact that she shows young defiance as she experiences childhood in a nonideal domain. Marjane shares a circumstance where she chose to play hooky with more seasoned understudies, attempting to follow in their thoughtless conduct. ‘Hey there’s the bell, don’t you have class?… I wasn’t a chicken so I followed them (111). This shows how growing up she was effectively controlled into doing inappropriate things to demonstrate that she was a radical. Exhibiting high school resistance. She additionally shows resistance when she hits the head after she attempts to remove the gems she cautioned her about. ‘ With all the jewelry you steal from us, you must be making a pile of money… [other student speaking] Marji hit the principal'(143). She shows high school resistance in light of the fact that despite the fact that she knew the outcomes of carrying her adornments to class once more, she would not like to acknowledge them. In the long run, when she saw the master plan she figured out how to develop and gain from all that she encountered in her life.

In end because of Marjane’s adolescent insubordination and loss of blamelessness experiencing childhood in Iran, this diary, Persepolis, is a bildungsroman. What Marjane Satrapi trusts that her readers detract from the diary of her youth is, changing their point of view on Iran. Numerous individuals have a specific point of view whenever Iran is referenced, and this diary encourages you to see the viewpoint of individuals that have chosen to remain and live in Iran in spite the considerable number of occasions that were happening. All through this diary, Marjane shows readers the battles of experiencing childhood in Iran, yet additionally shows how every one of those encounters accompanied exercises and they prompted her to be the individual she is today.

Persepolis’ and ‘Fun Home’: Comparative Analysis

When I think of the word Innovative, I think of words such as ideas, creativity, imaginative, truth, and originality. I believe being innovative as a writer is being able to create creative, original, thoughtful, content that readers can relate to or experience as they read the story. A piece of writing that can help a reader make connections to characters or themes in a creative way and also experience emotions fall into innovative writing. Being innovative is trying to add meaning to your writing, and making readers think deeply about the text so that they can understand the central idea. This can be achieved by using literary tropes in our writing such as irony, metaphors, synecdoche, hyperbole, and many more. Persepolis and Fun home are both well-written Graphic novels that touch on sensitive real-life topics that many people are able to relate to. However, reading both stories I feel that Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home is more innovative than Persepolis, as her use of literary references, literary elements, and narrative structure makes the story more compelling. It also gives us insight into how Alison Benchdels thought process was throughout the story.

Both novels provide us with content that makes readers able to empathize with the author’s experiences. Persepolis takes us through Marjane’s childhood and adult years during the Islamic Revolution. It begins by showing the reader how a ten-year-old girl, Marjane, believes that she will be the last prophet. The author shows herself having conversations with God, where she hopes that soon there will be equality in Iran and violence would stop. As the story continues we are able to see how gradually, Marjane begins to rebel against the rules the Shah had made in the country. When a woman was told to wear veils, she went out doing the opposite, she was kicked out of her school after a confrontation with one of her teachers and began skipping classes. In the end, her parents think it is a good idea to send her to Austria as Iran is no longer safe. Fun Home, is also about the author Alison Bechdel’s tragic story of coming out as a lesbian at the age of 19, whilst finding out from her mother that her father Bruce had carried many affairs with boys. He was involved in sexual relationships with the gardener, the children’s babysitter, and whom her mother had always known but had kept quiet. Due to this, she tells Alison that she asked Bruce for a divorce. A few weeks later Bruce ends up committing suicide by standing in front of an oncoming truck. Alison mourns that she was not able to speak to her father about his sexuality and his shame towards it. Furthermore, the story continues showing Alison’s journey as she tries to learn more about her father’s closeted life, and ambitions especially, as they relate to her own.

Comparing both of these novels. I find the content in Alison Bechdel’s writing a lot more innovative as the story does not only focus on her experiences. We get an insight into her mother’s experience from her marriage life to where she is now. We also find out how her father Bruce, also struggled with his sexuality which leaves Alison wanting to find out more since she is also able to relate. By this, we are able to slightly gain perspective from each character in the book which enables us as readers to understand what they felt. Bechdel’s story really shows us how Alison grows along the way. She struggles with her identity because she feels society puts expectations on us to be a certain way. Her father Bruce always tried to make her more “girlish” and was hard on her to act like one. Further, in the story, we realize that the reason he was so hard on her was that she was his way to express his own femininity since Bruce was also struggling with his identity.

Between Persepolis and Fun Home, I noticed that Persepolis includes a lot more political issues in her memoir since it does take place during the Iranian Revolution. The author’s purpose for writing this novel was to change the view westerners perceived Iran as. She is trying to inform readers that a whole country should not be judged by an action of a few misguided individuals. “The juxtaposition of visual and verbal constructs a nuanced text that obliges readers to rethink previous concepts about Iran, about childhoods, about memory, and strategies of self-representation. It also gives the author fuller control of her subject – herself – as her life writing act involves actual, though stylized, self-portraiture.” (Davis)

Satrapi uses juxtaposition when she shows the four women who are against and for the veil protesting their beliefs. Her visuals show the four women in the veil with their eyes closed. By this, she is trying to convey to the readers that these women believe that wearing the veil is the right thing to do and that it is true. “They believe that what they know is real and true, but in reality, they are ‘blinded’ by tradition and their eyes are physically and metaphorically shut to what is the actual truth.” (Anderson) Overall, Satrapi uses visuals to convey her feelings, and memories to readers, whereas Bechdel uses visual, literary references, and tropes to bring further meaning to her text.

Persepolis is written in the form of a graphic autobiography whereas Fun home is written as a Graphic memoir. A graphic autobiography is when the author shares their experience in a chronological manner. For example; in Persepolis, the author starts from her childhood days, leading the readers into her adolescence, and then adulthood, etc. Whereas, a memoir shares a specific memory, taking us on a rollercoaster of emotions and feelings. This can be seen in Fun Home, as Alison shares her experience of self-identity and loss. The reason I find Bechdel’s form in Fun home to be more innovative is the way she delivers her stories by using language that is well-educated. Her love for literature reflects her writing as we see many references to famous literary writers such as Henry James, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and more. Using Literary references is an excellent way to gain readers’ attention as it can help them understand stories by reading analogies. A reader might come across a familiar literary work that may help them understand and remember the story since they can make connections between the two stories. Whereas, Satrapi focuses on images more than writing. Her use of images is a way for her to tell her story through her pictures, each one being part of her memory. Though this is a unique way to deliver a story, personally I think it makes it slightly less exciting to read since you are not able to comprehend fully what the author is trying to make us experience.

In Fun home, when we learn about her mother’s experience, the references to Henry Jame’s Portrait of the Lady helped me bring up similarities between the two. “If the taming of the shrew was a harbinger of my parent’s later marriage, henry James the portrait of a lady runs more than a little parallel to their early days together.” (Bechdel 70) The author tries to show us the comparison between her mother and Isabella Archer. There are many comparisons to make between the two, however, this allows us as readers to make connections and further remember the story better.

The subject matter in both novels touches on similar themes such as identity, death, family, gender, and more. Bechdel and Satrapi share their stories through visuals and literary tropes that make the readers analyze further the meaning of their texts. Fun Home talks about self-identity and the struggles that Alison went through from society putting out expectations on how an individual should be. Similarly, Persepolis shows how Marjane is struggling for freedom in her own country Iran. The leaders of Iran during the time made many rules that were taking away the freedom of people and causing misconceptions about Iran and religion. Persepolis and Fun Home are innovative in their own way, as the authors are sharing their own stories and problems they went through over time. However, Bechdel’s narrative structure stands out more since she focuses on one memory, yet covers many themes that are relevant in our society today. Whereas Satrapi takes us on a journey from her childhood days to her adolescence whilst covering relevant themes as well.

Bechdel and Satrapi were able to use innovative techniques to make their stories stand out. I believe Satrapi’s story can be understood just by looking at the detailed images, whereas Fun Home had a lot of writing, such as the panels, literary references, and dialogue between characters, which shows that even without the images her story would work well. Overall, both Persepolis and Fun Home were well-written novels that cover themes that are still relevant in our society now. The stories are written in ways people can relate, and connect to. With the use of literary references, tropes, and a catching narrative structure, Fun Home by Alison Bechdel, in my opinion, was an innovative story compared to Persepolis.

Why Did Marjane Satrapi Write ‘Persepolis’: Essay

Persepolis, Marjane Satrapi’s graphic novel, sheds light on a perspective of middle eastern women not explored previously by western audiences. Satrapi presents a rare outlook on a situation very few have endeavored, as an Iranian woman spending a lot of her time in western culture. Dissatisfied with how Iranian women were portrayed in western cultures, Satrapi challenges these stereotypes by offering a new perspective. In her words, “From the time I came to France in 1994, I was always telling stories about life in Iran to my friends. We’d see pieces about Iran on television, but they didn’t represent my experience at all. I had to keep saying, ‘No, it’s not like that there.’ I’ve been justifying why it isn’t negative to be an Iranian for almost twenty years. How strange when it isn’t something I did or chose to be?” (Satrapi, “Why I Wrote Persepolis” 10). Satrapi, having first-hand experience with both eastern and western cultures & feminism, interprets the female Iranian perspective in a way that can properly be digested by western audiences. Satrapi displays how systematic oppression of a minority, in this example women, can lead others to be victims of stereotype threat and completely succumb to the molds placed for them in society even if it is not their own; displaying as well how difficult breaking through the glass ceiling set in place for them can be.

Mary Louise Pratt, describes this novel as an autoethnographic text, claiming Persepolis acts as “a text in which people undertake to describe themselves in ways that engage with representations others have made of them” (Pratt 35). Persepolis, which depicts Satrapi’s life up to this point, displays an almost unseen understanding of representation. As one theorist has argued, “In discussing Persepolis in relation to the theme of women and space, we will draw upon a framework suggested by Pollock for reading the work of women artists…Pollock refers to three spatial registers: first, the locations represented by the work (and, in particular, the division between public and private space); second, the spatial order within the work itself (concerning, for example, angles of vision and other framing devices); and third, the space from which the representation is made, including the working space of the artist, and more generally the social and psychic space within which she is located, and within which her work is received” (Miller 39). This quote illustrates to a tee how Satrapi chooses to engage her readers, utilizing what Miller refers to as the ‘third space’, having the readers activate the social and psychic space of their cognitive skills and reflecting on their own experiences.

Satrapi seems to be using nego-feminism perspective in Persepolis to display properly describe how she feels about the treatment of Iranian women in their culture while sounding unbiased and rational. In a sense she is acknowledging there are circumstances that she understands are the reason women are treated the way they are in her culture, but not to say there is not mistreatment as well. Lois Tyson has a well-put explanation of perspective of this in her novel, Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide, stating “Feminists don’t deny the biological differences between men and women, in fact, many feminists celebrate those differences. But they don’t agree that such differences as physical size, shape, and body chemistry make men naturally superior to women: for example, more intelligent, more logical, more courageous, or better leaders.” (Tyson 82) Since Satrapi chooses to narrate her story this way, she essentially reclaims her identity as well as how she and the women of her culture are represented and gains the ability to properly explain to the audience how she viewed life as a woman growing up in her home. Since this is an illustrated novel, Persepolis also has the form of visual communication, which allows Satrapi to use images of privileged characters whose backgrounds match or relate to western audiences which resonates much deeper. Satrapi begins her tale as a child allowing the narrative of middle eastern culture to be shifted, by displaying a nurturing and kind home life echoing values similar to western cultures.

Satrapi is an advocate for children to become world travelers and properly garner of understanding of what it’s like to be immersed in other cultures stating; you cannot hate what you know.” (Satrapi, “Why I Wrote Persepolis” 11). While Satrapi had the privilege of studying abroad she acknowledges that those resources are not available to all, and how privileged and fortunate she was to have the experience. Satrapi wrote this book to share with people who could never properly understand what it’s like to grow up in a middle eastern culture without an insider’s view, to give them a lens of what it’s like in an easy-to-digest format. While illustrating and writing from a child’s perspective it also alludes to the understanding that most western audiences might have of how Iranian women are treated. Her childhood perspective reflects how privileged she truly was, with the understanding for most westerners being middle eastern women are oppressed and have little to no freedom, Satrapi is able to build a bridge and highlight the similarities between both cultures. Satrapi is also challenging what she deems to be as appropriate and inappropriate for herself, something that most westerners fail to understand is that not all women, or men, in fact, succumb to the mold set in place for them by their government, peers, and family. This is illustrated when Satrapi states, “Then came 1980: the year it became obligatory to wear the veil at school. One thing that’s important to note is that only women wear the veil. The boys’ clothes change, but they’re never as restrictive as a veil. Couldn’t they at least make the boys wear a propeller beanie or something?” (Satrapi 4) Here displays the common acceptance amongst both western and Iranian cultures. Women are expected to cover up to protect themselves from men. “We’ve often said or heard it said about a male exhibiting overly or inappropriately aggressive behavior..” (Tyson 104) It’s a common theme amongst cultures that the ‘boys will be boys’ stereotype runs rampant and instead of checking our men in place, we shield our girls to what we deem as acceptable.

Many of Satrapi’s actions in Persepolis demonstrate her self-possession. Even as a child, she demonstrates a facility and freedom of speech that embodies American values. Throughout the book, she independently moves on her own, is unafraid to speak her mind, works for social activism, and endeavors to create an equal world for all. Overcoming Western stereotypes that women have no voice in Muslim countries in the Middle East, Satrapi easily marries and gets divorced. Echoing these thoughts, Miller explains that one should “interpret the book within a liberal-humanist framework, according to which ‘Marji is just like any other teenager in the West’ but one whose normal rebelliousness over dress codes is transformed in the context of Iran into resistance to the fundamentalist theocracy” (Miller 45). Satrapi’s outspokenness allows her to express herself and her strong sense of what is right. In supplying pictures of a world in which Muslim women can express themselves in similar ways to Western women, Satrapi utilizes Western feminism as a means to make apparent notions and embodiments of Eastern feminism.

Quoting Western feminist philosophers and feminists (mainly Simone De Beauvoir, in the chapter “Pasta”) Satrapi as a protagonist develops her own perspective and shows experiences where she broke through expectations that were set for her. Once she established a framework in which readers could sympathize with their own Western perspective, she included experiences in which, while still relevant to Western politics, she fought political traditional values on behalf of “modernity.” For example, in “The Convocation,” as an adult, she designs a new school uniform that once limited her self-expression into one that was more accommodating of personality: she created an outfit with a short head scarf and wider trousers, instead. In this circumstance, Satrapi sympathized with Westerners in a way that is thought-provoking: “[the veil] has been co-opted both into the ‘Western narrative of Islam as oppressor and West as liberator’ and into the alternative narrative of ‘the essentialness of preserving Muslim customs, particularly in regard to women, as a sign of resistance to imperialism.’ It may be argued that Satrapi colludes with the first of these narratives by portraying the imposition of the veil solely as a coercive measure introduced by an Islamic regime that had usurped the victory of the surprise against the Shah” (Miller 42). This example demonstrates her facility for expression and changing her situation, ultimately showing that Iran has become less strict than Westerners might assume.

The values Satrapi chooses to espouse as a protagonist also reflect certain Western values. In the first chapter, she explains that she “was born with religion” (Satrapi, Persepolis, 6). She devotes herself to her religion and serving God, frequently talking with him while she is preparing to sleep. Satrapi is also very proud of her nationalism, as evidenced by “The Vegetable.” One could easily tie the symbolism of religion and nationalism with certain Calvinist values that have manifested in American culture. For Satrapi as a protagonist, faith is very important to her. Satrapi as a protagonist is also extremely family-oriented, prioritizing her nuclear family over many aspects of her life. For example, her character moves back to Iran to be with them, she shows her rejuvenation from time with her mother, and ultimately chooses Iran and her family over some aspects of her self-expression, including being able to show her hair and ankles. In this way, like many Western stories, family factors into Satrapi’s creation of her own identity (Miller 47). Lastly, Satrapi includes her own focus on educating herself as a reoccurring value for her protagonist in Persepolis.

Quoting Mary Louise Pratt, “where there are legacies of subordination, groups need places for healing and mutual recognition, safe houses in which to construct shared understandings, knowledge, claims on the world that they can then bring into the contact zone” (Pratt 40). In Persepolis, Satrapi used the subordination she saw demonstrated in the media about Iran to fuel a powerful story that Westerners could empathize with, further demonstrating that identities as a strong, independent woman and feminist with family values cannot be separated by also being a Muslim Iranian. Satrapi uses a language expressed by pictures in a way that echoes Monsoon and Bennaifer, welcoming the Western reader into her own personal world in order to demonstrate the similarities and differences between the two of them. These pictures allow the reader to construct their own emotions in response to the striking black-and-white pictures that tell the story. This expression of her world fits the definition of nego-feminism–giving and taking from her reader, in providing them sympathetic perspective coupled with experiences very different from what many Americans know and will ever experience (Naemeka 357). Further, Satrapi seeks to provide a different gaze, in Lacan’s terms, instead of “entering into the scopic regime of the European city unveiled, [Satrapi saw] herself being seen in a new way, and this gaze rearranges the very dimensions of her body. And in that distortion, she feels herself to be disintegrating and at the same time recomposing in alignment with a new image” (Gokariksel & Secor 196). She used the perspective conceived of by Western viewers, the one that had been created by her, and used it to demonstrate her similarities and independence. Instead of being forced into a new image, Satrapi chose to create her own and changed Western perceptions in doing so.

Works Cited

  1. Gökarıksel, Banu and Anna Secor. The Veil, Desire, and the Gaze: Turning the Inside Out. Signs, 40, 1 (Autumn 2014): 177-200.
  2. Miller, Ann. “Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis: Eluding the Frames.” Johns Hopkins University Press: L’Espirit Createur, Vol. 51, No. 1, Spring 2011: 38-52.
  3. Nnaemeka, Obioma. “Nego‐Feminism: Theorizing, Practicing, and Pruning Africa’s Way.” Signs, Vol. 29, No. 2, Winter 2004, 357-385. Online.
  4. Satrapi, Marjane. The Complete Perspolis. New York: Pantheon Books, 2004. Print
  5. Satrapi, Marjane. “Why I wrote Persepolis: a graphical novel memoir: writer Marjane Satrapi faced the challenges of life in post-revolutionary Iran. She used the graphic novel format to tell her unique story.” Marjane Satrapi. Writing!, Nov-Dec, 2003, Vol.. 26(3), p. 9(5) Cengage Learning Inc.

What Is the Theme of ‘Persepolis’: Essay

As long as there is injustice in the world, there will be voices of protest. People who stand up against their oppressors, whether it is apparent or not. For instance, in Marjane Satrapi’s Autobiographical Graphic Novel Persepolis (2000), she shows forms of silent protest towards the Iranian regime. Similar themes of protest to Persepolis can be seen in an extract of Maya Angelou’s “Still I Rise” a poem about the hardships of overcoming prejudice.

Page 131 of Persepolis shows that Marjane and her family are clearly opposed to many aspects of the regime, Marjane demonstrating this through small rebellions and protests. In the first four panels, Marjane says “I put my posters up in my room, I put my 1993 bikes on… and my denim jacket with the Michael Jackson button…”. This shows that not only is Marjane opposed to the regime (as posters, denim jackets, and western objects are banned) but she is proud of it, and the consecutive panel transitions and use of ellipsis convey that she has rebelled in more ways than one. In the first panel, Marjane can be seen as ‘headbanging’ conveyed through emanate, which is a common move in contemporary rock, punk, and heavy metal music, something the regime is also strictly opposed to. In the second panel, she is drawn posing alongside western icon Kim Wilde, which also contrasts the way Iranian women are expected to cover up. She is wearing her Michael Jackson pin in the fourth panel, showing her support of western culture despite the regime’s hostility.

However, on page 133 Marjane is confronted by two ‘Guardians of the revolution, a group of people whose job it was to protect the revolution from ‘counter-revolutionaries’. In contrast to Marjane, the two guardians are dressed in full black chadors, as well as being drawn as tall and overpowering, making Marjane seem small and vulnerable. The two guardians have furrowed brows, and when they are introduced, one of them has a shadow cast over her face, making it apparent to the reader that these women are a threat. In their speech bubbles, they accuse her of dressing ‘punk’, belittling her about her denim jacket, tight jeans, and her Michael Jackson button calling him the ‘symbol of decadence’, meaning corruption and self-indulgence, further enhancing the reader’s negative impression of them. They also treat Marjane extremely roughly as shown through emanate, tugging on her headscarf and calling her a ‘whore’. Throughout this interaction, Marjane had no choice other than to lie in order to avoid arrest, so she makes excuses such as ‘i’m on my school’s basketball team and her jeans ‘shrank’. The use of two exclamation and question marks in some of the panels (including the ‘shrank’ one) emphasizes how aggressive the guardians of the revolution are, as well as the increasing tension as the conversation goes on. She is eventually taken to the committee. It can be seen in these pages that Marjane faces much injustice because of her resistance to the regime.

In the poem ‘Still, I rise’ by Maya Angelou, similar themes to these pages of Persepolis can be seen. In its second stanza, Angelou writes “Does my sassiness upset you? Why are you beset with gloom? ‘Cause I walk like I’ve got oil wells pumping in my living room.” The use of simile comparing Angelou’s walk to that of someone who has “oil wells” in their living room conveys how prideful she is, as oil is an extremely valuable substance and something to be proud of having access to. In relation to Persepolis, Marjane proudly displays her western objects and memorabilia, as seen through her hanging up the posters her parents brought her in her room, as well as wearing forbidden clothing such as her jacket and jeans. The line “Does my sassiness upset you?” also relates back to Persepolis, as the guardians of the revolution are infuriated by Marjane expressing herself through banned items, just as the people Angelou is referring to in her poem are infuriated by her “sassiness”.

In the sixth stanza, Angelou says “You may shoot me with your words, you may cut me with your eyes, you may kill me with your hatefulness, but still, like air, I’ll rise”. The metaphors used in this stanza convey the great injustice Angelou faces in a descriptive and dynamic way. For instance, somebody glaring at her is referred to as “cutting(ting)” her with their eyes. This shows how deeply harmful injustice is to Angelou, comparing it to being cut by whoever is glaring at her, a serious and damaging crime. This can be related back to pages 133 and ??? of Persepolis, as Marjane is shown hate and injustice by the guardians of the revolution. However Angelou also ends this stanza (as she does with the rest of them too) with “…still, like air, I rise”, showing that she tries her best to not let these hateful actions essentially ‘bring her down’. This can be seen reflected in Marjane, as even though the guardian’s actions affect her negatively in this chapter, throughout the rest of the book, she continues to express who she wants to be, despite it going against the regime and potentially getting her into trouble.

To conclude, both Marjane Satrapi and Maya Angelou both portrayed themes of protest and rebellion in their respective works. This has been achieved through language and visual techniques, both Persepolis and still I rise received public acclaim for their success in depicting protest and rebellion.

Ideas on Revive Iran Nuclear: Analytical Essay

Research of the IRI nuclear program in the context of international and regional security should be implemented with the involvement of primarily realistic tradition – classical realism and neorealism. After all, realism in a broad sense is the direction of the theory of international relations, which focuses in detail and comprehensively on issues related to power, weapons (including nuclear), as well as security. At the same time, classical realism emphasizes the level of actors, and neorealism – at the level of international systems.

Power politics prevail in the Middle East region because of its fluid geopolitical configuration and potential change in the regional balance of power. Therefore, Waltz’s theory of neorealism about nuclear weapons as the most effective security guarantee, a specific ‘weapon of peace’ best reveals the topic of the report. According to Kenneth Waltz, nuclear weapons can contribute to stability and reduce the possibility of developing full-scale conflict between the countries that possess them[footnoteRef:1]. R. Rauhhaus agrees that the presence of nuclear weapons in two states can reduce the likelihood of armed conflict between them, but emphasizes that the likelihood of armed conflict is higher if one state possesses nuclear weapons and the other does not[footnoteRef:2]. [1: 2. Kenneth, N.W. (1981) The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May be Better. Adelphi Papers. 171. London: International Institute for Strategic Studies. [Online] Available from: https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/waltz1.htm] [2: Rauchhaus R. Evaluating the Nuclear Peace Hypothesis: A Quantitative Approach // Journal of Conflict Resolution. 2009. Vol. 53 № 2 (April). P. 258–277.]

The example of the Middle East is characterized by dynamic interactions of international actors. In our time, the Middle East is an explosive region, since there is a protracted acute regional conflict – the Arab-Israeli one; conflicts between many Muslim states; here are the largest strongholds of international terrorism; the region, as a world energy storehouse, is the focus of the interests of global players; Israel is outside the NPT regime and possesses nuclear weapons. However, according to some realists, the nuclearization of Iran could lead to stability in the Middle East region. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the world community fears an uncontrolled nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Stephen Walt denies this and cites North Korea and Israel as examples. The testing of their nuclear weapons did not provoke neighboring countries to start developing nuclear weapons. He explains this by the fact that nuclear weapons in no way enhance the status of the state, but only ensure non-interference in its internal affairs, and reduce external pressure on the country [footnoteRef:3]. [3: Walt, S. (2009) Iran, arms races, and war. Foreign Policy. 1st October. [Online] Available from: https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/01/iran-arms-races-and-war/]

Opponents of nuclear proliferation fear that the new nuclear powers will not have a responsible attitude towards nuclear weapons, which could lead to accidental launches, theft, or other accidents with nuclear weapons. Kenneth Waltz refutes this argument by the fact that, over the 50 years of the existence of nuclear weapons, such incidents have happened, but did not lead to casualties or great material damage. Scientist also claims that the new nuclear countries will have a small number of weapons and materials, sufficient for deterrence, which is not so difficult to keep track of. There are also fears that violating states will begin to cooperate with terrorists. However, the Iranian government, like any other, will seek to maintain its power; therefore, it does not make sense to transfer expensive and dangerous weapons to forces that cannot be controlled[footnoteRef:4]. [4: Sagan, S. & Waltz, K. The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate Renewed. 3rd edition (W.W. Norton & Company, 2012)]

Also, realists refute the arguments about the irrationality, danger, and potential brutality of Iran. R. Takei emphasizes that in most direct clashes with enemies, Iran behaved cautiously. For example, in the Iran-Iraq war, Iran refrained from using chemical weapons, while Iraq used them. R. Takei explains Iran’s desire to acquire nuclear weapons by the fact that it is surrounded by enemies, and the United States, by imposing economic sanctions and putting pressure on Iran, only provokes it to develop nuclear weapons[footnoteRef:5]. [5: Takeyh, R. (2003) Iran’s Nuclear Calculations. World Policy Journal. 20(2). [Online] Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40209856?seq=1]

The nuclear program involves the use of two main components – the peaceful atom and nuclear weapons. Iran’s nuclear program has been declared peaceful from the beginning. On 5 March 1957, an agreement was signed with the United States on cooperation in the peaceful uses of the atom under the Atom for Peace program. In 1967, the country even had its Center for Nuclear Research, but Shah’s regime showed no interest in developing nuclear weapons, and in 1968 signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, thus joining the ranks of non-nuclear states. Iran has thus, Iran undertook by the Article 2 NPT, not to manufacture or purchase nuclear warheads and explosive devices and not to accept any assistance in their production. This, in turn, allowed the state to fully engage in the development of a peaceful atom. The 1973 oil crisis accelerated Iran’s nuclear program and established the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), the main function of which was operational control over Iran’s civilian nuclear program.

After the revolution and the overthrow of Shah’s power on November 15, 1979, the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran was finally approved. It does not define non-nuclear status states, but also not prohibited from developing a nuclear program. The stabilization of the situation after the revolution and the Iran-Iraq war gave significant impetus to the development of the military and nuclear sphere. Concepts such as self-reliance, ‘holy defense,’ and export of the revolution first entered the military lexicon during the Iran-Iraq War and were codified as doctrine in the early 1990s.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Iran began negotiations with companies in Switzerland, the Netherlands, China, and the Soviet Union to purchase uranium enrichment technologies and produce heavy water. After the collapse of the USSR, IRI’s cooperation with Russia intensified. At the same time, Iran’s relations with the United States and the IAEA have deteriorated, accusing the Iranian government of pursuing secret nuclear weapons projects. By the mid-2000s, there had been a relative liberalization of relations between Iran and the West in the nuclear field. IRI has temporarily suspended the implementation of uranium enrichment programs, and an agreement has been reached on the further development of peaceful nuclear technologies.

Iranian President Ahmadinejad (2005-2013) defended his vision of Iran’s right to use nuclear energy. Statements and resolutions of the UN Security Council on Iran (since 2006) demanding the suspension of uranium enrichment and processing have not yielded any results, so there are grounds for imposing sanctions on this country. And in early 2007, the United States significantly considered the military solution to the conflict with Iran not only because of the need to forcibly stop the development of nuclear and missile programs but also given Iran’s support for international terrorism. On May 17, 2010, the Iranian government signed an agreement with Turkey and Brazil to exchange enriched Iranian uranium for nuclear material suitable for scientific use. Because of this, the UN Security Council voted 12 votes in favor of Resolution 1929 (2010), which provided for new sanctions on IRI. In early 2012, the attitude of several countries to Iran deteriorated again, threatening Tehran with new sanctions. At the same time, the United States and France did not rule out the start of hostilities against Iran, and Australia and Japan were preparing in case of war to assist the United States. However, Iran did not make concessions but instead suggested the possibility of closing the Strait of Hormuz in the event of new sanctions by the West.

In Iran’s negotiations with the United States and EU members from 2006 to 2012 on the use of nuclear energy, nuclear fuel, and other components of the nuclear program, Tehran has consistently stated that it will continue to develop peaceful nuclear energy and defend itself in the nuclear field despite the threat of sanctions. In the event of further unfair pressure from the international community, Iran has declared its readiness to terminate its participation in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. A compromise on Iran’s nuclear program was hampered until the election of Iran’s new president, H. Rouhani, on June 4, 2013. At that time, a document was signed that provided an international influence on Iran’s nuclear program, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)[footnoteRef:6]. But in 2018, the United States announced its withdrawal from the JCPOA and the resumption of sanctions against Tehran, due to the imperfection of this document. The victory of Democrat Joe Biden in the presidential elections in November 2020 has become a new hope for improving relations with Iran, but the provocative murder of Iranian nuclear physicist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, which official Tehran blames on Israel and the United States, casts doubt on the possibility of a return to negotiations between the two countries. [6: Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Vienna, 14 July 2015: Letter dated 16 July 2015 from the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council // UN Security URL: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N15/225/49/PDF/N1522549.pdf?OpenElement]

Despite Tehran’s assurances to the international community that the country’s nuclear program has an exceptionally peaceful purpose, the US and their European allies, as well as certain Middle East states, including Israel, are concerned about Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons. The situation around the Iranian nuclear program has been on the brink of war several times, each time going back to the diplomatic way, the negotiations taking place while the realization of tough sanctions on Iran by the international community. Therefore, the prospect of developing the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program as an example of the nuclear non-proliferation regime is an important factor determining international security not only in the Middle East region but in the world as a whole. Also one of the features of Iran’s nuclear program is that a lot of states at different stages of its development were involved in it.

K. Waltz identifies three main ways to resolve Iran’s nuclear question. The first solution involves the West’s use of force through sanctions and diplomatic pressure to force Iran to curtail its nuclear program. The second decision is to envisage deterring Iran ‘one step’ from testing a nuclear charge, but while maintaining the possibility of its implementation. At the same time, Iran will not be the first country to have a complex nuclear infrastructure, but will not have a nuclear bomb. The third decision will have negative consequences. This is Iran’s continuation of the military component of its nuclear program, its creation of a nuclear charge, and its testing. Such an approach by Tehran is likely to lead to military intervention by Israel and the United States. Waltz believes that the threat to Iran’s nuclear program is somewhat exaggerated, particularly in the area of Iran’s ability to hand over nuclear weapons to terrorists[footnoteRef:7]. [7: Waltz, K.N. (2012) Why Iran Should Get The Bomb. International Affairs. July/August 2012. [Online] Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23218033?seq=1]

D. Harrison Smith believes that efforts to coerce Iran into altering its foreign policy have failed due to a lack of understanding of the extent to which Iranian national identity affects its attitudes toward nuclear development and openness to cooperating with Western powers. In this sense, mutual animosity and confrontational engagement continue to prevent the achievement of any meaningful diplomatic progress. Attempts to force Iran to change its foreign policy have failed due to a lack of understanding of Iran’s national identity and its openness to nuclear development and openness to cooperation with Western nations[footnoteRef:8]. [8: Harrison Smith D. Reinterpreting Nuclear Consequences: Realism, Constructivism, and the Iranian Crisis. URL: https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1007&context=ipe_theses]

M. Kroenig, a strong advocate of preventive strikes against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, argues that Iran’s strategic objective in acquiring a nuclear capability“ is to deter an attack on itself from the United States and to a lesser degree Israel.” Tehran is aware that a nuclear deterrent has been the only proven way to repel a U.S. attack. Nuclear proliferation theorists have introduced the concept of nuclear latency to describe a state’s capacity to have sufficient resources to support a weapons program [footnoteRef:9]. [9: Kroenig, Matthew. 2014. A Time to Attack: The Looming Iranian Nuclear Threat. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan p.32]

Nuclear weapons are a superb deterrent for states that feel threatened by rival powers. Simply put, no state is likely to attack the homeland or vital interests of a nuclear-armed state for fear that such a move might trigger a horrific nuclear response. S. Walt and D. Mirsheimer reject the neoconservative position that nuclear Iran poses a threat to US security and call the main motive of the United States in preventing the nuclearization of Iran’s unwillingness to allow it to become a regional hegemon. In a debate with Sagan, Waltz exposes the true motives of the United States as follows: rogue states that possess nuclear weapons will be able to deter the strong, but they will be unrestrained. As a result, the United States will no longer be able to ‘just take and intervene,’ as has happened in Iraq. This argument reaffirms the defensive nature of nuclear weapons. Thus, in the Middle East, if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the situation may stabilize, as Israel’s military power will be balanced and the position of the antagonists will be fixed at the stage of inadmissibility of hostilities. The only way to resolve disputes will be through a negotiation process[footnoteRef:10]. [10: Mearsheimer J. Nuclear-Armed Iran Would Bring ‘Stability’ but Risks // PBS. URL: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/nuclear-armed-iran-would-bring-stability-but-risks ]

Strategies focusing on isolation and sanctions cannot produce the desired non-proliferation effect. Progress in normalizing US-Iranian diplomatic relations could be the start of an Iranian reversal. The United States and the international community must provide concrete opportunities for Iran to increase its diplomatic recognition. The result would be a kind of nonnuclear “status accommodation” for Iran in world politics. Also, the United States and other countries could help increase Iranian participation in international organizations such as the World Trade Organization, which is a priority for Iran. If the US aims for Iranian reversal, it would do well to honor US commitments to sanctions relief made in the JCPOA as a means to reduce Iran’s ostracism. Military engagement with the Iranian military and the Revolutionary Guards, drawing on the experience of humanitarian operations, could increase interest in non-nuclear routes to international prestige. States might also consider prudent educational and material support to civil society organizations [footnoteRef:11]. [11: Andrew Prosser, Much Ado about Nothing?: Status Ambitions and Iranian Nuclear Reversal. Strategic Studies Quarterly Vol. 11, No. 2 (SUMMER 2017), pp. 26-81]

Therefore, offensive realism can be explained why the United States wants to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear deterrent. A great power that is a hegemon in its region, such as the United States, will intervene in other areas of the world to prevent the rise of another regional hegemon. Defensive realism explains the desire to acquire nuclear weapons because of the state’s fear of an attack. The defensive realist policy of Iran exacerbates the U.S. offensive realist policy, which in turn creates further reasons for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon in the first place. Interestingly, both policies feed into one another in a way that is best captured by the concept of the security dilemma, which is referred to as a situation wherein one state’s investment in its security increases another state’s insecurity. Iranian reversal requires reducing Iran’s perceived security threats. The policy of defusing conflicts in the Middle East and ensuring security in Iran must be more effective than the threat of military force.