Discerning Iran: Exploring the Motives for Iranian Foreign Policy

By Sohaib Perwaiz
Cornell International Affairs Review
2007, Vol. 1 No. 1 | pg. 2/2 |

Case Study of Iranian Foreign Policy The Nuclear Energy Program in Perspective

In his article “Dealing with a Nuclear Iran,” Kori Schake raises some interesting questions about Iran’s nuclear energy program. He notes,

The Iranians have the indigenous technical ability, and possibly nuclear material, to build nuclear weapons right now. They can do it if they want to, and we [the US] know so little about their program they could likely achieve it without detection. The question is why they're so intent on detection.14

In answering this question, we look to the arguments already made in this paper. The Iranian regime is inflating the nuclear energy issue by bringing it to international attention and then being defiant about American demands, because they realize the more aggressive the US government becomes, the more the Iranian people will rally behind the regime, and validate its right to government despite falling legitimacy on other fronts in the domestic political scene.

Returning to the regime’s strategy of using sociological forces, we see how the nuclear threat can raise both nationalism and the specter of uncertainty. In a speech to students in the Iranian city of Shiraz, Ahmedinejad declared, “The Iranian people will stand firm on the nuclear issue to acquire all their rights, will continue solidly to reach the summits of perfection and will raise their fists to insist on their rights!”15

By tying Iran’s nuclear energy project to its inevitable growth as a regional power, the regime has tactfully connected the nuclear program to the Iranian people’s profound sense of nationalism. Because the program is the regime’s pet project, it has cemented its own position as the leader of the nationalistic movement.

But more than inciting nationalism, the propagation of the nuclear energy issue is also a strategic distraction from the other things chipping away at the Iranian regime’s authority. In his article on the Iranian reform movement, Muhammad Sahimi notes that,

He [Ahmedinejad] has used the U.S – created nuclear crisis not only for inciting Iranian nationalism, but also for distracting people’s attention from Iran’s vast economic, social, and political problems, as well as attempting to suppress Iran’s democratic movement… By creating an unnecessary crisis over Iran’s nuclear program, the [American] Administration has played right into the hands of Iran’s hardliners.16

Where the Iranian regime couldn’t claim to be democratic or progressive, it can now claim to be nationalistic simply because of its defiant policy on its nuclear energy program. The defiance has triggered an even more aggressive stance from the US, which predictably has fed into the uncertainty factor in Iranian society.

When the American government denounces the Iranian regime for its nuclear energy program, it heightens an already deeply embedded mistrust for American policy. Since the regime boldly stands up to the Americans, they gain support from their threatened people. The regime is automatically elevated from the position of detested oppressor to patriotic savior. “The conservatives need an external enemy to preserve their power,” says Mohammad Reza Khatami, a leading reformist and younger brother of the former president.17 As long as the regime can guarantee (or at least pretend to do so) Iranians protection from foreign aggressors, their legitimacy will be tied to the feeling they are needed and will trump subversive democratic movements such as those of Mr. Khatami. Seeing all they have to again from their aggressive foreign policy agenda, with regards to the nuclear program or anything else, the risks involved in pursuing such a strategy seem to be worth it.

Other Perspectives

Let us now turn our attention to the popular realist perspective on Iranian foreign policy. Realism rests on the assumption that states are autonomous unitary entities that act to maximize security and power. In terms of Iran, the realist assumption is that Iran is challenging the global hegemon (the US) because it is a rising power faced with a security dilemma. Indeed, after years of political and economic turmoil, Iran has become relatively stable in the last few years, at least relative to the Islamic Republic’s past performance. Moreover, it has increased ties with Eastern powers such as China, India, and Russia and in turn has acquired international recognition. Its oil (now crossing $70 a barrel) has supplemented its influence and growth as well. Despite its growth however, the Iranian state faces a security dilemma because it has got several hostile neighbors, namely American soldiers on both eastern and western borders (Iraq and Afghanistan) and Sunni Arab states which are opposed to a strong Persian-Shiite state dominating the Middle East. Because of the conflicting nature of Iran’s growth and its security dilemma (one is propelling it forwards while the other is holding it back), realists would assume Iran is bound to challenge the current International system and attempt to remove the security threats by challenging the US and threatening its regional allies. Though this reasoning reaches the right conclusion, the method of deduction is slightly flawed.18

The first flaw in the realist argument is of the security dilemma. If anything, Iran’s security dilemma has thinned over past few years. It strengthened its alliances with Arab partners such as Syria, Lebanese Hezbollah, and the Palestinians, through aid and defense agreements. It has also won massive “street appeal” in its Arab neighbors (despite being a Shiite minority in the Muslim world) because of its Islamist propaganda, forcing Arab governments to take a more conciliatory approach. Moreover, the American soldiers on Iranian borders have helped Iran get rid of three potential hostile fronts: the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Baathists in Iraq, and the Americans themselves because of their diminished military capacity.

As for Iran’s aspirations to become a regional power, it can do so much more easily by cooperating with the US than by antagonizing it. The US and its European allies have already offered Iran many economic and political incentives for giving up (or at least opening up) its nuclear energy program. These incentives involve a greater role in Iraq, lifting of economic sanctions, and developmental aid. As Kori Schake points out, “If maximizing its presumed security objectives were the Iranian government’s plan, taunting the US, Israel, and Europe with an overt nuclear program would seem to put at risk at least some of the gains Iran is already achieving at very little cost.”19 Indeed, if maximizing growth and influence was the objective the Iranian state would be behaving much more cautiously; and here lies the core drawback of realist assumptions. The “Iranian State” isn’t acting to maximize its power interests, because there is no such autonomous entity. The Iranian state is merely a representative institution of its ruling clerical elite who are pursuing their high stakes adventures for gain at home and the strengthening of their domestic legitimacy.

Drawing Conclusions: What We Know and What We Can Predict

To conclude, let’s review the claims made in this paper. We started our discussion on the assumption that Iranian foreign policy has been aggressive towards the US, and then set out to explore motives for such a policy. This paper worked within the Liberal Theory context, because it takes into account the political hegemony of the clerical interest group within Iran, and can thus be used to understand Iranian foreign policy through the perspective of that interest group’s motives. Moreover, we saw that the Iranian clerical regime is losing legitimacy within the domestic context because of a diminished selectorate and public frustration. This lack of legitimacy has provoked the regime to manipulate nationalistic sentiment and propagate uncertainty to create a demand for its services as a government, and in the process fill the legitimacy void. Such a strategy has, because of Iranian sociological reasons, involved an active foreign policy opposed to the US. The most important lesson to be drawn here is that in analyzing Iran, we must take into account the Iranian regime’s priorities. This will most likely be the decisive factor in Iranian foreign policy in the near future. As long as an aggressive foreign policy against the US, or any other “Western” nation for that matter, provides legitimacy to the Iranian government at home, it will continue to pursue it. In fact foreign policy, for lack of legitimacy at home, will continue to be the raison d’être of the Iranian regime.


References

Abrahamian, Ervand. “Iran” Joseph, William A., Mark Kesselman, Joel Kriegger, eds Introduction to Comparative Politics. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2007

Ahmedinejad, Mahmoud. Shiraz, April 16, 2007.

“All at Sea over Iran” The Economist (2007) EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Boroumand, Ladan. “Iran’s Peculiar Election: The Role of Ideology” Journal of Decomocracy. 16.4 (2005)

Ehsani, Kaveh. “High Stakes for Iran” Middle East Report (2003) EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 20, 2007.

Farhi, Farideh. “Crafting a National Identity amidst Contentious Politics in Contemporary Iran” Iranian Studies. 38.1 (2005) EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Halliday, Fred. “Iran and the Middle East: Foreign Policy and Domestic Change” Middle East Report (2001) EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Hoveyda, Fereydoun. “Iran and America.” American Foreign Policy Interests. (2006) EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Kupchan, Clifford. “Iranian Beliefs and Realities.” The National Interest. (2005) 108 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Moravcsik, Andrew “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics” International Organization, 51.4 (1997). 513-23.

Pilger, John. “IRAN” New Statesman (2006) EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 20, 2007.

Rezai, Ali. “Last Efforts of Iran’s Reformists” Middle East Report. (2003) EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Sahimi, Muhammad. “Leave Us Alone, Iranian Reformers Say” Progressive. (2006) 21 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Samii, Abbas William. “Ethnic tensions could crack Iran’s firm resolve against the world.” The Christian Science Monitor. 98.128. (2006) EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.

Schake, Kori. “Dealing With A Nuclear Iran” Policy Review. (2007) 3 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 30, 2007.

Sherman, Steve. “IRAN” New Internationalist. (2004). EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 20, 2007.

Taheri, Ali. “Getting Serious About Iran: For Regime Change.” Commentary. (2006) EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 20, 2007.

Vakil, Sanam. “Iran: Balancing East against West” The Washington Quarterly. (2006) JSTORR. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 20, 2007.


Endnotes

  1. Moravcsik, Andrew “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics” International Organization, 51.4 (1997). 513-23.
  2. Abrahamian, Ervand. “Iran.” Joseph, William A., Mark Kesselman, Joel Kriegger, eds. Introduction to Comparative Politics. (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2007)
  3. Taheri, Ali. “Getting Serious About Iran: For Regime Change.” Commentary. (2006) EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 20, 2007.
  4. Sherman, Steve. “IRAN” New Internationalist. (2004). EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 20, 2007.
  5. Rezai, Ali. “Last Efforts of Iran’s Reformists” Middle East Report. (2003) EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  6. Boroumand, Ladan. “Iran’s Peculiar Election: The Role of Ideology” Journal of Decomocracy. 16.4 (2005)
  7. Rezai, Ali. “Last Efforts of Iran’s Reformists” Middle East Report. (2003) 45 EBSCOHOST. Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  8. Farhi, Farideh. “Crafting a National Identity amidst Contentious Politics in Contemporary Iran” Iranian Studies. 38.1 (2005) EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  9. Kupchan, Clifford. “Iranian Beliefs and Realities.” The National Interest. (2005) 108 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  10. Samii, Abbas William. “Ethnic tensions could crack Iran’s firm resolve against the world.” The Christian Science Monitor. 98.128. (2006) EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  11. Ibid.
  12. Hoveyda, Fereydoun. “Iran and America.” American Foreign Policy Interests. (2006) 16 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  13. Farhi, Farideh. “Crafting a National Identity amidst Contentious Politics in Contemporary Iran” Iranian Studies. 38.1 (2005) 19 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  14. Schake, Kori. “Dealing With A Nuclear Iran” Policy Review. (2007) 3 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 30, 2007.
  15. Ahmedinejad, Mahmoud. Shiraz, April 16, 2007
  16. Sahimi, Muhammad. “Leave Us Alone, Iranian Reformers Say” Progressive. (2006) 21 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 21, 2007.
  17. Quoted in: ibid.
  18. For a discussion of the Realist Perspective see: “All at Sea over Iran” The Economist (2007)
  19. Schake, Kori. “Dealing With A Nuclear Iran” Policy Review. (2007) 6 EBSCOHOST Princeton U Library: Princeton, Apr 30, 2007.

Suggested Reading from Inquiries Journal

"When can we expect a pro-Western, pro-business government in Iran?" asks a US government official in the quasi-fictitious film Syriana. Today, it is highly probable that the same question is still being asked by anxious diplomats the world over. Iran’s nuclear aspirations, domestic repression and vast oil reserves have posed concern to both Western powers and its Arab neighbours. The resulting stigma which surrounds Irant&mdash... MORE»
Advertisement
Russia and Iran have a long history of being geographic neighbours, rivals, competitors and partners - a history which has coined mutual expectations, stereotypes and interactions. Still present in the Iranian collective... MORE»
The balance of terror created by the presence of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) on the Korean peninsula has escalated the sense of uncertainty in East Asia, jeopardizing both the region’s security and progress towards political and economic cooperation. The persistent efforts of North Korea in the development of nuclear... MORE»
Nuclear weapons are the most powerful and destructive weapons held in the aresenals of any modern states. Since the creation of the nuclear bomb, many have feared that a nuclear war could lead to the end of life on earth as we currently know it. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) is the central organisation... MORE»
Submit to Inquiries Journal, Get a Decision in 10-Days

Inquiries Journal provides undergraduate and graduate students around the world a platform for the wide dissemination of academic work over a range of core disciplines.

Representing the work of students from hundreds of institutions around the globe, Inquiries Journal's large database of academic articles is completely free. Learn more | Blog | Submit

Follow SP

Latest in Political Science

2017, Vol. 9 No. 10
Political philosophers and theorists alike continue to debate if more enlightened populations would be of value or not. This piece will contribute to that dispute by claiming that an enlightened populace is integral to the progress of free-societies... Read Article »
2017, Vol. 9 No. 07
There has been extensive debate over the past few decades regarding the criteria by which we should measure distributive justice. In conceiving a just state of affairs it is imperative that we determine the most appropriate measure of the distributions... Read Article »
2017, Vol. 9 No. 06
Similarly to many European countries, the Swedish population often perceive their history as an epoch of homogeneity: a time when every Swedish citizen was believed to have had the same ethnic phenotype, spoken the same language, believed in the... Read Article »
2017, Vol. 7 No. 2
Published by Clocks and Clouds
Although terrorism has been present in the world for centuries, it is only since the 1980s that suicide terrorism has become an object of study for academics and an existing concern for government professionals. While discourses on suicide terrorism... Read Article »
2017, Vol. 7 No. 2
Published by Clocks and Clouds
This paper examines the reasons behind people's different views of defining what "patriotism" is. Three multivariate linear regressions were performed to determine the causes behind an individual's level of patriotism. Two of the regression models... Read Article »
2017, Vol. 7 No. 2
Published by Clocks and Clouds
The relationship between party system fragmentation and voter turnout is not entirely understood in contemporary political science literature. It is often assumed that party system fragmentation is a primary driver of proportional representation... Read Article »
2017, Vol. 7 No. 2
Published by Clocks and Clouds
Over the last couple of decades, women-spearheaded social movements have mobilized to leave a lasting impression on civil societies across the globe. The Arab Spring challenged old ideas of oppressive regimes and signaled possibilities for change... Read Article »

What are you looking for?

FROM OUR BLOG

How to Manage a Group Project (Video)
"Should I Go to Graduate School?"
Finding Balance in Graduate School