IS is not necessarily a freak of nature (Re-post from Babewyn @ ello.co)
… but possibly, just possibly, part of a broader more long term strategy to force Iran to give up it’s unequivocal antagonism toward the West in a similar way to how pressure from the USSR in the early 70’s swayed China toward a less adversarial stance toward the US and the West.
Here a quote that points in this direction taken form Rita Miller’s article in The Guardian on Kissinger’s 2014 book World Order:
The author’s own orchestration of the opening of relations with China gives an extra piquancy to his views on Iran: if the US can engage with one isolated regional superpower, why not another? Yet although he gives a detailed and nuanced account of Iran’s sense of its own imperial heritage over the centuries, he argues unequivocally that Tehran today is not Beijing in 1972. The China of the cultural revolution was vulnerable to the USSR and therefore needed to befriend the US to balance its enemies: “No such incentive is self-evident in Iranian-western relations.” Perhaps, but the kaleidoscopic changes of this summer may have changed the situation with regard to Iran, too, as Islamic State in Iraq and Levant is a threat to Tehran as well as to the west. Furthermore, the Iranian regime, however nasty it is, has the capacity for change (as the election of President Rouhani makes clear), and also shows no signs of collapsing (unlike Syria or Iraq). Realism might mean seizing the opportunity for a reorientation in the region that was not evident even a short while ago.
: Rita Miller: World Order by Henry Kissinger – review. In: theguardian.com (home›culture›books). On: 1 Okt 2014. Last viewed: 30 Jul 2015.