Iranophobia and the hardliners delusion

The laziest word in Western commentary on Iran is not “theocracy,” “proxy,” or even “threat.” It is “hardliner.” Its compulsory twin, of course, is “moderate.” Together they form one of the most intellectually threadbare binaries in contemporary foreign-policy discourse: a childish morality play masquerading as analysis, a vocabulary of caricature presented as expertise. The terms do not clarify Iranian politics; they flatten it. Worse, they do political work. They convert a complex debate inside the Islamic Republic into a fairy tale for foreign consumption, one in which “moderates” long nobly for Washington’s embrace while “hardliners” snarl irrationally at the gates of diplomacy. It is a taxonomy built less for understanding Iran than for absolving the United States of understanding it. […]