A Theorical Approcach to U.S Policy toward Islamic Revolution of Iran and Islamic Awakings in Middle East

One of the main and considerable points about America’s approach in Middle East after playing role its role performance in this region, especially after WWII, is to determine a coherent strategy free of contradiction toward “Freedom” or “Stability”, “Democracy” or “Security” in the countries of this region. This topic has such significance for White House that Washington always had been forced to confront with a difficult paradox within the six recent decades: the first side of this paradox is US real commitment to principles of freedom and democracy such as the the “right to Self -Determination”, “the right to vote” for citizens of middle east at the expense of comig independent and even anti- American groups and goverments to power. The second side of the paradox mentioned is establishment of arbitrary and unaccountable goverments under America’s influence irrespectful to the citizen’s principal rights in Middle East. On this basis, this article firstly is going to answer this question: Which side of the two paradoxical sides mentiond above, have been chosen by US practically in its stretegy for Middle East? Secondly, how this practical commitment has resulted in Washington common policy toward Iranian Islamic revolution (1979) and recent Islamic awakenings in Middle East? The main hypothesis of this article is that preference of Stability to Democracy in the approach toward Middle East within the past six decades has been resulted in America common foreign strategy toward Iranian Islamic revolution and recent Islamic awakenings in Middle East.