Mark referred to this article, written by his old pal Boris Johnson, mayor of London, when he asks why the Supreme Leader is railing against Britain. It’s not that Boris is smoking what Helene Cooper is smoking; it’s more that the mayor commits the traditional Western political sin of seeing everything through a contemporary frame-of-reference.

America may be the Great Satan, but the Iranian government (and often the people) see America as far too naïve, and Britain as more devious. With all due respect to The Nation’s Robert Dreyfuss, formerly the Middle East editor for Lyndon LaRouche’s magazine, the theory that Queen Elizabeth II is behind all evils isn’t that great a stretch to Iranian officials, who are more conspiracy-minded. Before the current round of protests, the Iranian regime blamed Britain first and foremost for unrest in Khuzistan and bombings in Baluchistan. Historically, the reason the Shah turned to the United States was that we were seen as a neutral power. We weren’t the only ones: Desperate to break out from sufffocating British influence, the Shah first turned to Belgium, but a Belgian official’s prank photograph of himself dressed up like a mullah sparked outrage, I believe back in 1905.

In the 19th century, Iranians believe that Britain conspired with Zill as-Sultan, uncle to Shah Nasir al-Din Shah, to divide Iran. The Iranians rose in protest to both the Reuters Concession in 1872 and the Tobacco Regie in 1890. Both Britain and Russia divided Iran into zones of influence in 1907. Britain and Russia conspired to oust an American financial advisor early in the 20th century for fear that the Americans would make Iran too independent and lessen British (and Russian leverage). The Anglo-Persian Agreement in 1919, while never ratified, sparked outrage as Iranian nationalists realized it would turn Iran into a virtual British protectorate. For all Obama apologizes for the coup against Mohammad Mossadegh, let’s not forget the idea was not the CIA’s, but was done at the behest of the British government.

The point is not that the British government should apologize. Diplomacy by apology can get rather silly. Rather, the point is that it is always important to understand the context in which the other side thinks before ascribing blame or believing Khamenei is turning on Britain because Obama’s rhetoric has swept Iranians off their feet.