The Concept of Balance in The Political System of Iran, Case Study: Post- JCPOA Performance

The decision-making and policy making process and the factors influencing the foreign policy orientation in the Islamic Republic of Iran after JCPOA was an ambiguous and sometimes contradictory and unreliable implementation. This action is most affected by the multiplicity of institutions, the involvement of non-state actors, and the personalities of power relations. Although there is a general consensus with the complexity within the system, the continuation of dual sovereignty and parallel institutions leads to the emergence of a specific, complex and interconnected structure consisting of the leadership, the presidency, the military-security forces and the Supreme National Security Council and the Security Commission National and foreign policy of the Islamic Consultative Assembly. Along with them, an informal network based on personal relationships as well as the influence of religious figures has also been effective in the functioning of formal institutions in the field of foreign policy. Despite the definition and clarification of the structure of foreign policy decisions in the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the lack of a comprehensive foreign policy decision making structure in which the framework, position and role of each institution, brokerage, and certain individuals The fact is undeniable. Accordingly, the question of the article is whether there is political balance and political consensus between the institutions of power in the major political issues in the field of foreign policy in a political structure called the Islamic Republic of Iran? The hypothesis of the article is based on this principle. The Islamic Republic of Iran suffers from a political imbalance and the consensus of power institutions over foreign policy issues, for example, the choice of a kind of national security strategy in the post-JCPOA that has been addressed in this study.