Ahmadinejad's Foreign Policy and that of Rouhani versus the United Nations (UN): A Comparative Analysis

Enter into foreign policy requires perception of rules and principles dominant over this field. In 21st century, attempt to forge stable and peaceful relations is considered a fundamental principle in foreign policy both in practice and theory. On the other hand, any bellicosity and war conducted by superpowers under the pretext for sustaining peace and security is also regarded as a principle in foreign policy. By the same token, configuration of the UN is one of the attempts for establishment of peace which owes its survival to the incidents of the World War II and the previous events. Elsewhere, the interaction of countries with the UN and its subsections is important. Meanwhile, in the IRI's foreign policy, it has been practically proved that the change of cabinet leads to change in attitude, pragmatism and thought in terms .of the UN Elsewhere, this study mainly deals with the question: What is the stance of the UN and its resolutions in the foreign policies of Ahmadinejad and Rouhani? Based on the conducted examinations, it is hypothesized that the main principle of Ahmadinejad's foreign policy was counteraction, exercise of unplanned policies and disinclination to deterrent strategies based on heroic suppleness concerned to the UN and also ignorance of its segments. However, Rouhani's foreign policy moves around moderation and seeks to meet national interests through putting dialogue to the fore and constructive interaction with the UN and its segments and counteraction in specific and rare conditions in the framework of the leader's directives. It is worth noting this study applies description- analysis as a method and gathers data on desk and on the internet.