Alright, after a bit of a vacation it is time for the return of our previously and heretofore regular column "What Not to Read." Today, we turn our ire on Hossein Askari, Professor of International Business at George Washington University and part-time Iran analyst. 

Askari recently wrote a piece for Foreign Policy Magazine titled "Iran On the Edge" in which he argues that the current regime in Iran is on the brink of collapse:

"The country's economy is also in dire straits. The regime has put off reforms for three decades, blaming sanctions for its self-inflicted failures. Inflation is running at an annual rate of 20-25 percent. Unemployment is around 20 percent and on the rise. Iran's foreign exchange reserves have declined rapidly, to an estimated $40 billion. Tehran can no longer pay the bills, keep the regime's corrupt sycophants satisfied, and deliver a minimum level of subsidies to poor Iranians to keep the lid on political dissent."

Normally, I choose articles written either by blithering idiots or raging ideologues to attack. Askari is neither. Instead, he falls in the a third category of pundits I like to call "microwave analysts." These are the guys who take an idea--which may have originally been a good one--and reheat the damn thing so many times, in so many situations, that is just makes you want to vomit. (See about 90% of Thomas Friedman's work for a prime example.)

Click for more ---->

Professor Askari has been predicting the demise of the Iranian regime for quite some time. For example back in December, 2008 he predicted that low oil prices would bring Iran to its knees:

"Preoccupied with day-to-day survival and short-term popularity, the regime in Tehran has foregone policies to achieve sustained economic growth and development. Still, until recently, it had been able to leverage its oil revenues to stay in power: Consumer subsidies kept the lid on domestic dissent, lucrative contracts rewarded cronies and a rapid credit expansion spurred an unbelievable real estate bubble. Meanwhile, an essentially fixed exchange rate helped the rich to take their money out of the country and prevented import prices from going up. But now the regime is out of maneuvering room."

Anyone see a pattern?  Paint a dire picture of Iran's economy, state that this weakness will bring down the mullahs (or Ahmadinejad, of Khamenei; Askari never seems quite sure of who is in power) and then suggest that the Obama administration should speed up this process by putting more financial pressure on the regime. 

It’s a true joy to know that no matter how the situation changes in Iran, we can always count on Hossein Askari to provide the same diagnosis and the same prescription.

In addition to being warmed over mush, there are serious problems with Askari's analysis. Namely, he over-estimates the influence of economics while under-estimating the complexity of domestic Iranian politics. Askari writes about Iran as if it is a simple equation and all Obama has to is take the metaphorical chalk and do the math. The reality is that a popular uprising in Iran, at least one inspired by Iran's economics,  is highly unlikely primarily because there is no one to lead this movement. And sanctions, which Askari advocates, will in no way serve to make this pipedream a reality.

The crisis today in Iran is the result of an elite conflict that has little to do with the concerns of the average Iranian. The recent nuclear negotiations (which are notably absent from Askari's analysis) have made these cleavages more apparent. On one side there are the pragmatic conservatives led by the Larijani brothers. On the other growing reformist movement led by Moussavi and Co. Both of these camps have been extremely critical of Ahmadinejad's attempt to engage with the West.  It is this ongoing political struggle, not Iran's weak economic performance, that will determine which Iran will emerge from the current crisis.