The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Book-talk: Enduring Hostility: The Making of America’s Iran Policy

Dalia Dassa Kaye sitting at a desk. A blue CMES waterbottle in the forground.
Dalia Dassa Kaye. Photo: Linus Edlund

How has one of the most enduring rivalries in international politics persisted for more than four decades—and why has it proven so difficult to change?

At a recent CMES book talk, Dalia Dassa Kaye presented her book Enduring Hostility: The Making of America’s Iran Policy. Drawing on interviews with policymakers, she argued that US–Iran tensions cannot be understood by looking at Iran alone, but must also be examined through the lens of American politics and decision-making.

A conflict that endures

Kaye highlighted that US–Iran hostility has now lasted longer than the Cold War. Despite major geopolitical shifts, US policy has repeatedly relied on isolation, containment and pressure, even though successive administrations have explored possible openings to Iran. These initiatives, however, have not resulted in lasting change.

A key explanation lies in political framing. Iran has long been portrayed in US discourse as a “rogue” or “evil” state, which narrows the range of politically acceptable policy options. Advocating engagement can therefore carry domestic political risks, making diplomatic initiatives difficult to sustain.

Missed opportunities and recurring patterns

Kaye pointed to several moments where cooperation appeared possible but ultimately failed. Following the attacks of 11 September 2001, US and Iranian officials engaged in coordination against the Taliban. However, this opening collapsed after Iran was included in the “axis of evil”, halting further progress. Earlier attempts, including during the Reagan administration, were also undermined by domestic political constraints and controversies.

These patterns, she argued, reflect the influence of US domestic politics, where elections, bureaucratic dynamics and competing factions shape foreign policy decisions. The US withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear agreement (JCPOA) was similarly driven more by domestic considerations than by strategic recalculation.

Escalation and uncertainty

Recent developments mark a shift from containment to more direct confrontation. Where earlier administrations sought to avoid direct conflict with Iran, recent actions have crossed longstanding policy boundaries, moving the relationship into what Kaye described as “uncharted territory”.

A persistent dilemma

The discussion also highlighted how misperceptions and limited understanding of Iran have contributed to repeated cycles of escalation. In the current context, traditional political constraints appear weaker, and the risk of further escalation, while still uncertain, cannot be dismissed.

Kaye concluded that the underlying drivers of US–Iran hostility remain in place, suggesting that tensions are likely to persist despite the high costs and growing global implications.

About: Dalia Dassa Kaye (external link)

Read more about the book (external link)
 

Event: Book Talk | Enduring Hostility: The Making of America’s Iran Policy

Date: 28 May 2026

Time: 13:15–14:30

Location: CMES seminar room, Finngatan 16, Lund

Speaker: Dalia Dassa Kaye