Fareed Zakaria On Iran: Unpacking Decades Of Hostility

Marilyne Reynolds I 20 Jun 2025

The relationship between the United States and Iran is arguably one of the most complex and volatile in modern geopolitics, a tangled web of historical grievances, ideological clashes, and strategic rivalries. For decades, this fraught dynamic has been a central focus for foreign policy experts, and among the most insightful voices is CNN's Fareed Zakaria. Through his analyses on "GPS, The Global Public Square," Zakaria consistently dissects the intricate layers of the US-Iran conflict, offering a nuanced perspective on its past, present, and potential future.

His work often delves deep into the motivations behind both nations' actions, examining how historical events continue to cast long shadows over contemporary tensions. From the streets of Tehran to the corridors of Washington, the echoes of past confrontations resonate, shaping current policies and fueling fears of a wider Middle East war. Understanding this critical relationship, as illuminated by Fareed Zakaria, is essential for anyone seeking to comprehend the persistent instability in a region vital to global peace and security.

Fareed Zakaria: A Voice on Global Affairs
The Deep Roots of US-Iran Animosity
- The Shadow of 1979: Hostage Crisis and Beyond
- The Saddam Hussein Factor: Aiding an Enemy
Iran's Evolving Strategy: Aggression and Asymmetry
The Israel-Iran Nexus: A Volatile Core
- Proxies and Regional Instability
US Foreign Policy: Navigating the Iranian Conundrum
- Trump's "Fear of Missing Out" and Abrupt Shifts
Fareed Zakaria's Key Interviews and Insights
Economic Leverage and Global Interdependence
The Path Forward: De-escalation or Wider Conflict?

Fareed Zakaria: A Voice on Global Affairs

Fareed Zakaria stands as one of the most respected and influential voices in international relations and foreign policy analysis today. As the host of CNN's flagship foreign affairs program, "Fareed Zakaria GPS," he brings a unique blend of historical perspective, deep intellectual rigor, and accessible communication to complex global issues. His background as an editor at Foreign Affairs and Newsweek International, coupled with his extensive academic work, positions him as an expert capable of dissecting the nuances of international crises, including the persistent tensions surrounding Iran.

Zakaria's approach is characterized by a commitment to understanding the underlying motivations and historical contexts that shape geopolitical realities. He frequently interviews world leaders, policymakers, and scholars, providing his audience with direct insights from the decision-makers themselves. This dedication to informed analysis is crucial when examining a topic as sensitive and potentially explosive as the relationship between the United States and Iran, a subject he has consistently explored with remarkable depth and clarity over the years.

Personal Data & Biodata

Category	Detail
Full Name	Fareed Rafiq Zakaria
Born	January 20, 1964 (Mumbai, India)
Nationality	American
Education	Yale University (B.A.), Harvard University (Ph.D.)
Occupation	Journalist, Author, Political Commentator
Known For	Host of CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS," Columnist for The Washington Post
Key Themes	International relations, foreign policy, globalization, American power

The Deep Roots of US-Iran Animosity

To truly grasp the current state of US-Iran relations, one must journey back through decades of shared psychic and emotional scars. Fareed Zakaria often emphasizes that the present hostility is not a sudden eruption but the culmination of a long and painful history. The narrative of "why Iran hates America" is multifaceted, rooted in events that profoundly shaped Iranian national identity and perceptions of Western interference. This historical context is vital for understanding the deep-seated mistrust that pervades any attempt at reconciliation.

The Shadow of 1979: Hostage Crisis and Beyond

For Americans, few events are remembered with as much intensity as the 1979 embassy hostage crisis. As Zakaria notes, "Iran in the United States shared deep psychic and emotional scars going back years but none is remembered more by Americans than the hostage crisis of 1979." This incident, where 52 American diplomats and citizens were held for 444 days, appeared to many as an "irrational, furious attack," leaving the US wondering "why or how anyone would act this way." It cemented an image of Iran as an unpredictable and hostile actor, a perception that persists to this day. Yet, for Iranians, the revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis were a response to decades of perceived American interference, particularly the 1953 CIA-backed coup that overthrew democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and reinstated the Shah. This fundamental divergence in historical interpretation forms a bedrock of the ongoing animosity, a point Fareed Zakaria consistently brings to light in his analyses.

The Saddam Hussein Factor: Aiding an Enemy

Another critical, yet often overlooked, historical grievance that fuels Iranian resentment towards the US is America's support for Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran in the 1980s. While the US later fought against Saddam, its initial backing of Iraq during the devastating Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) is viewed by Tehran as a direct act of aggression and betrayal. This support, which included intelligence sharing and even turning a blind eye to Iraq's use of chemical weapons, cost Iran hundreds of thousands of lives and immense suffering. Fareed Zakaria frequently traces the current tensions back to this period, highlighting how "U.S. support for Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran" further solidified Iran's perception of America as an adversary, one willing to back even brutal dictators against the Islamic Republic. This historical wound contributes significantly to Iran's current aggressive posture, as it seeks to prevent similar vulnerabilities in the future.

Iran's Evolving Strategy: Aggression and Asymmetry

In the face of formidable external pressures, particularly from Washington and its regional allies, Iran has adopted a strategic posture that Fareed Zakaria describes as increasingly aggressive. This shift is not arbitrary; rather, it stems from a calculated decision by Tehran that "it has more to gain than to lose by pursuing an aggressive policy directed against Washington and its allies in the region." This "new and dangerous reality," as Zakaria points out, is primarily a response to what Iran perceives as a lack of coherent U.S. policy and a vacuum of power in the Middle East. With a conventional military that cannot directly challenge the might of the United States or Israel, Iran has masterfully employed asymmetrical means to project power and protect its interests.

This strategy relies heavily on a network of proxy militias across the region. As Zakaria explains, "Iran, being a relatively weak power, has used asymmetrical means through a series of militias allied with it — Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas, and groups in Iraq and Syria it has supported and supplied for years." These groups act as extensions of Iranian influence, allowing Tehran to exert pressure on adversaries, disrupt regional stability, and retaliate against perceived threats without direct military confrontation. This approach enables Iran to punch above its weight, creating a complex web of challenges for American foreign policy and its allies, making the task of understanding and responding to Iran's actions all the more difficult.

The Israel-Iran Nexus: A Volatile Core

At the heart of the current Middle East crisis lies the deeply entrenched and increasingly volatile rivalry between Israel and Iran. This relationship is not merely one of political disagreement but a profound ideological and existential struggle. As Fareed Zakaria often highlights, "Iran and Israel are sworn enemies." The rhetoric from both sides is stark: "Iran openly calls for the destruction of Israel, while Prime Minister Netanyahu has called Iran the greatest threat to the world." This mutual antagonism creates a constant state of tension, where any incident can quickly escalate, threatening to draw the entire region into a wider conflict. The stakes are incredibly high, as demonstrated by recent events where "Israel and Iran unleash deadly strikes on each other," with Israel's military identifying "missiles launched from Iran."

Zakaria's analysis frequently underscores how this animosity is not just a bilateral issue but a central driver of regional instability. He examines "why Iran is at the center of the crisis that has rocked the Middle East and the world when the terrorist organization Hamas brutally attacked Israel and took dozens of" hostages. This direct link between Iran's support for groups like Hamas and the subsequent eruption of major conflicts illustrates the pervasive nature of their rivalry. The fear of a full-scale regional war stemming from this core conflict is a recurring theme in global foreign policy discussions, making the Israel-Iran dynamic one of the most critical flashpoints in the world.

Proxies and Regional Instability

Iran's strategic use of proxy groups is nowhere more evident, or more impactful, than in its confrontation with Israel and America’s Gulf allies. These proxies—Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in Gaza, and various Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria—are not merely allies but integral components of Iran's regional defense and offense strategy. As Fareed Zakaria explains, these groups enable Iran, a relatively weaker conventional power, to engage in "asymmetrical means" of warfare. They allow Tehran to project influence, harass adversaries, and maintain a constant state of low-level conflict without directly exposing its own military to superior forces.

Hezbollah, heavily armed and politically influential in Lebanon, poses a significant threat to Israel's northern border. The Houthis, through their control of parts of Yemen, can disrupt vital shipping lanes and launch attacks on Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Hamas, as demonstrated by its brutal attack on Israel, remains a key player in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, often operating with Iranian backing. These proxies create a "tussle between Iran and America’s allies, Israel and some of the Gulf states," as Zakaria puts it, ensuring that regional tensions remain perpetually high. The effectiveness of this proxy strategy is a testament to Iran's adaptability and its commitment to challenging the regional order, making any path to de-escalation incredibly complex and fraught with peril.

US Foreign Policy: Navigating the Iranian Conundrum

The United States' approach to Iran has been characterized by shifts, inconsistencies, and a persistent struggle to find a coherent strategy. Fareed Zakaria has often critically examined Washington's handling of the Iranian challenge, pointing to fundamental flaws that have arguably exacerbated tensions rather than resolved them. He asserts that "the collapse of any coherent U.S. policy" is a primary factor contributing to the current "new and dangerous reality" where Iran feels emboldened to pursue aggressive actions against Washington and its allies. This lack of a consistent, long-term vision has created opportunities for Iran to exploit perceived weaknesses and push its agenda.

Zakaria urges policymakers to "consider the failure of Washington’s current approach." Whether it's the maximal pressure campaign or attempts at diplomacy, the results have often fallen short of expectations, leading to cycles of escalation and mistrust. The challenge for the US lies in balancing its desire to contain Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional influence with the imperative to avoid a direct military confrontation. The complexities of this balancing act are further compounded by domestic political considerations and the ever-present shadow of past failures, making the formulation of an effective US foreign policy towards Iran a daunting task.

Trump's "Fear of Missing Out" and Abrupt Shifts

Fareed Zakaria has specifically analyzed the motivations behind President Trump’s foreign policy, suggesting that a "fear of missing out" (FOMO) may have played a role in his decision-making, particularly concerning Iran. This concept implies a desire to be seen as decisive and to achieve a breakthrough, even if it means departing from established diplomatic norms or international agreements. Trump's abrupt withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) in 2018, despite objections from European allies, is a prime example of such a shift. As Zakaria observed, "President Trump may have done an abrupt about face on Wednesday on his so" many foreign policy positions, indicating a tendency towards sudden and unpredictable policy changes.

This unpredictability, while perhaps intended to keep adversaries off balance, also created instability and uncertainty. It allowed Iran to argue that the US could not be trusted to uphold agreements, thereby justifying its own aggressive actions. Zakaria's analysis suggests that such a policy, driven by short-term political impulses rather than long-term strategic coherence, ultimately undermined US credibility and made the situation with Iran even more precarious. The consequences of these abrupt shifts continue to ripple through the region, contributing to the ongoing tensions and the persistent threat of wider conflict.

Fareed Zakaria's Key Interviews and Insights

A hallmark of Fareed Zakaria's "GPS" program is his ability to secure interviews with key figures at the heart of global conflicts, offering unparalleled access and insight. When it comes to Iran, these interviews have been particularly illuminating, providing direct perspectives from both Iranian officials and their adversaries. For instance, Zakaria recently brought his audience interviews with "Iran's new president, Masoud Pezeshkian," and with "the former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair," offering diverse viewpoints on the escalating tensions in the Middle East.

In a crucial exchange, "Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian sat down with CNN's Fareed Zakaria to discuss the latest escalations between Hezbollah and Israel." These conversations are vital for understanding the official Iranian stance and their proposed solutions, or lack thereof, to regional crises. Furthermore, "Fareed Zakaria sat down with Iran’s acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani and pressed him on the CNN reporting of an alleged Iranian assassination plot against former President Donald Trump." This demonstrates Zakaria's commitment to holding powerful figures accountable and directly addressing sensitive allegations, providing viewers with critical information that shapes the narrative around Fareed Zakaria Iran relations. His interviews serve as a primary source for understanding the complex motivations and policy decisions of key players in this enduring geopolitical standoff.

Economic Leverage and Global Interdependence

Beyond military and political maneuvering, the economic dimension plays a crucial role in the US-Iran dynamic, a topic Fareed Zakaria has explored with considerable depth. Sanctions, tariffs, and trade wars are often the weapons of choice in this economic confrontation. However, as Zakaria highlighted in a Washington Post post tagged Iran, "You can’t bully a supply chain superpower." This insight, particularly relevant in an increasingly interconnected world, suggests that even powerful nations face limitations when attempting to exert economic pressure on others, especially those with significant roles in global supply chains.

The discussion often extends to the broader implications of sanctions, not just on Iran but on global interdependence. Concepts like "sanct," "swift," "trade," and "tariffs" become central to understanding how economic measures are deployed and their often-unintended consequences. The complexity is amplified when considering the roles of other major players like "China" and "Russia," who may offer alternative economic lifelines to sanctioned nations. Zakaria's analysis suggests that in a world reliant on "rare earths" and "chips," and where "soft power" is as crucial as military might, traditional economic coercion might be less effective than assumed. The interconnectedness of the global economy means that actions against one nation can ripple through entire supply chains, affecting everyone from the "Soviet Union" to the "Pope" (used metaphorically to represent diverse global actors), making the economic aspect of Fareed Zakaria Iran analysis particularly salient.

The Path Forward: De-escalation or Wider Conflict?

The hostile relationship between the United States and Iran remains a central concern for global stability, perpetually fueling "fears of a wider Middle East war." As Fareed Zakaria consistently underscores, the current tensions are rooted in a complex interplay of historical grievances, ideological differences, and strategic rivalries. The question that looms large is whether the cycle of aggression and retaliation can be broken, or if the region is destined for further escalation.

Zakaria's comprehensive examination of Fareed Zakaria Iran dynamics offers little room for simple solutions. He points to the dangers of a "collapse of any coherent U.S. policy" and Iran's calculated decision to pursue an "aggressive policy" through asymmetrical means. The constant state of friction between Israel and Iran, with their proxy networks, means that any spark could ignite a conflagration. The path forward is fraught with challenges, requiring nuanced diplomacy, consistent policy, and a willingness from all sides to de-escalate. Without a fundamental shift in approach and a genuine commitment to dialogue, the specter of a wider conflict will continue to hang over the Middle East, with profound implications for global security and economic stability. Understanding these intricate dynamics, as presented by Fareed Zakaria, is the first step towards navigating this perilous landscape.

Conclusion

The relationship between the United States and Iran is a labyrinth of historical wounds, strategic calculations, and profound mistrust. As we've explored through the lens of Fareed Zakaria's insightful analyses, this is not merely a political standoff but a deeply entrenched conflict shaped by events spanning decades, from the 1979 hostage crisis to US support for Saddam Hussein. Zakaria consistently highlights how Iran's evolving strategy, its use of asymmetrical warfare through proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas, and the volatile Israel-Iran nexus all contribute to a region perpetually on the brink of wider conflict.

His critical examination of US foreign policy, including the unpredictable shifts under the Trump administration, underscores the urgent need for a more coherent and consistent approach. Through his unparalleled interviews with key figures like Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani, Fareed Zakaria continues to provide invaluable context and direct insights into this complex dynamic. Understanding the economic pressures, the limitations of sanctions, and the intricate web of global interdependence further reveals the multifaceted nature of this challenge.

Ultimately, the work of Fareed Zakaria on Iran serves as a crucial reminder that resolving this deeply entrenched hostility requires more than just military might or economic pressure. It demands a profound understanding of history, a nuanced appreciation of motivations, and a commitment to strategic, long-term diplomacy. The future of the Middle East, and indeed global stability, hinges on how this critical relationship evolves. What are your thoughts on the future of US-Iran relations? Share your perspectives in the comments below, and consider exploring more of Fareed Zakaria's analyses on CNN's "GPS" for deeper insights into global affairs.

Berggruen Institute

Fareed Zakaria - The Washington Post

Redefining Progress With Purpose