Open AccessJournal Article
Religious Difference in a Secular Age: A Minority Report by Saba Mahmood (review)
TLDR
Vatanka et al. as discussed by the authors presented a complete picture of a very complex and unsettled relationship in a captivating way that constantly moves the reader through a tumultuous journey, describing the highly complex mental states of senior decision makers in Iran and Pakistan in a detailed and accessible manner.Abstract:
their Iran foreign policy, Zia employed two inconsistent and disingenuous discourses. While praising Khomeini for his Islamic solidarity he openly stressed the practical utility of tapping into Islam for political ends. After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Zia regretted that a xenophobic Iran and its paranoiac leadership could no longer be counted on for support. The situation in Iranian Balochistan placed further strain on the bilateral relationship. In retrospect, both Zia and Khomeini contributed to the Shi‘i-Sunni schism that survives to this very day. The idea of an Afghani-Iranian-Pakistani union was invoked in August 1988 by the new Pakistani army chief, Mirza Aslam Beg, albeit more as a very distant desire than a workable project and despite Washington’s disapproval of any collaboration between the two neighbors’ militaries. This book is a major contribution to the modest literature on Iranian-Pakistani relations. The author has presented a complete picture of a very complex and unsettled relationship in a captivating way that constantly moves the reader through a tumultuous journey. Vatanka describes the highly complex mental states of senior decision makers in Iran and Pakistan in a detailed and accessible manner. The research presented in his book is comprehensive, covering details that are obscure but of great significance. The private confessions of the leaders of both countries about each other and Zia’s complicity in the massacre of Palestinians in Jordan in September 1970 are just two such revelations. Furthermore, the book’s chronological structure enables the reader to view the changing dynamics of the relationship against the broader canvas of region and global geopolitical developments. This book is a must read for those wishing to gain a deeper understanding of the reasons behind the failed project to unite the three Islamic republics in Southwest Asia.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Defining Minorities: Mission Impossible? The Case of Hashemite Iraq
TL;DR: In the post-Ottoman context, while the concepts of millet and taʾifet were eventually replaced by that of "minorities" at different stages of the 20th century, the process was neither natural nor unanimous as discussed by the authors.