Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs
Volume:12 Issue: 1, Winter-Spring 2021

This paper examines US general election debates to discover whether or not the Republican and Democratic candidates equally present Iran as a major US foreign policy issue. Petrocik’s Issue Ownership theory was employed as the theoretical framework of this paper. The Issue Ownership theory asserts that since American voters perceive the Republican and Democratic parties to handle different sets of political, social, and economic issues better than their opponents, each party will highlight and emphasize issues that they are regarded to own during elections. In this regard, Petrocik’s theory predicts that since the Republican party is perceived to handle foreign policy and national security-related issues better than their Democratic opponents by American voters, their candidates are more likely to bring up foreign policy-related issues while Democrats are more likely to avoid such issues during presidential campaigns. Overall, 13 US general election debate transcripts from among the 16 General debates held from 2004 to 2016 were selected for analysis using the Critical Case Sampling approach. The analysis, which utilized the Critical Framework Analysis method, resulted in seven major thematic categories concerning Iran: nuclear program, threat, sanctions, negotiations, war, Iran’s influence, and sponsorship of terrorism. The study finds that although Republican candidates did present Iran as a major foreign policy issue more frequently than their opponents in US general election debates, there was an element of convergence on Iran. Therefore, contrary to what the Issue Ownership theory would have predicted, the Democrats did not typically avoid nor show any hesitancy in talking about Iran.

During the Iran agreement from 2011 to 2015 a pro-Iran deal campaign has started in the U.S. Critical questions for Iranian are: who were these people? Who funded them? From whom do they get their information? This study tried to answer these questions by following the pro-Iran deal actors from 2011 to 2015 in the United States. Therefore, a couple of actors were found who were in favor of the Iran deal. The work then followed the money and information transformation data of these pro-Iran deal actors. The article got into a socio-diagram of the interrelation of pro-deal funders and actors with the help of NVIVO 12 software. It also followed the role of the Obama administration in this network. The social network theory of power by Castells (2007) was used that indicates the importance of the social network in gaining discourse power to program-specific networks according to the interests and values of the programmers. So, with the help of theory, the article concluded that the Obama administration programmed a significant network to have the influence and the power to seal the deal in the U.S.; besides, the network tried to influence Obama policy toward Iran. The articles also categorized the supporters of the deal into eight groups: institutions in the prevention of nuclear weapons, the Iranian community, political advocacy groups, religious groups, think tank associations, Jewish institutions, those related to the Obama administration, and free funders.

The US presidential election has always been influenced by the competition of candidates in the context of explaining domestic and foreign policy issues and providing solutions to overcome the crises ahead. During the election campaign in the field of foreign policy, several issues are raised. These include threats from Russia, China, North Korea, and the Islamic Republic of Iran. In the present article, the issue of Iran in the 2020 US presidential election has been examined in two levels: strategic imagery and tactical approaches. The question of the present study is what are the similarities and differences between the issue of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the foreign policy of Biden and Trump during the election campaign at both strategic and tactical levels? In response to this question, the following research hypothesis is proposed. In Biden and Trump's campaign policies at the level of strategic explanation, the Islamic Republic of Iran is in a similar situation in terms of being at the macro level of security threats, but at the level of tactics and methods of dealing, Trump seeks to score points all at once in the form of pressure policy. It was maximal, and Biden sought to take advantage of transatlantic multilateralism and gradual and gradual scoring by criticizing Trump's approach. The data collection method in the present study is documentary and the analysis method is descriptive-descriptive.

After three years of enduring the immense failures and fallouts of the US “maximum pressure” sanctions imposed on Iran in the aftermath of the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) in 2018, the Biden administration has signaled an important shift by promising to conduct a foreign policy that leads with diplomacy. The EU-brokered negotiations that have already taken place during the first half of 2021, although encountering some tactical obstacles and lack of momentum, nonetheless offer grounds for cautious optimism that the JCPOA can be rescued and that the return of all signatories to full compliance with the terms and conditions of the deal can be secured.The critical question that this article addresses is what are the key imperatives required for a durable outcome of the upcoming negotiations. This research is based on a critique of the failures of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” sanctions from the Ethical </em>or Just War </em>theoretical framework and the Utilitarian </em>and Realist </em>perspectives. The research methodologies are critical observation and empirical analysis. The article’s survey of the historical trajectory of US sanctions against Iran also supports this critique by clearly demonstrating that during periods of US over-reliance on sanctions to the exclusion of other foreign policy tools, including those of diplomacy, political engagement, and economic incentivization, successive administrations failed to advance their foreign policy goals and objectives vis-à-vis Iran. The article argues that rescuing Iran's nuclear deal and restoring its advantages for all signatories will require the implementation of essential US policy changes. It will also be necessary for the EU foreign policy establishment to direct its efforts to reinforce Biden’s inclination to return to the JCPOA in good faith with demonstrable full commitment to the terms of the original deal.

This article examines the security relations between Europe and the USA in the framework of NATO and during the Bush and Obama administrations. The author tried to show that the security relations between Europe and America started from the time of absolute dependence of Europe on Washington and, later on with the development of the European Union and also NATO, this dependence has gradually turned into mutual strategic cooperation. On the other hand, Europe attempts to form a defensive and security structure independently of the United States and mainly in the framework of NATO, which has led to an improvement in the defense treaties between the Eastern European countries. It seems that Europe seeks to play an equally important role to the USA and is using NATO as a powerful tool for this purpose. In fact, by developing its relations with NATO, the EU is trying to show the capabilities of Europe in crisis management and to make itself independent of the USA. However, America’s attitude towards NATO across the Atlantic is sometimes different, and conservative and democrat governments in America prefer either a mutual coalition or an American initiative.

This article focuses on the concept of national role, which is defined as the perception of foreign policymakers of the position of their nations in the international system. The main argument of this paper is that Joe Biden, as the 46th President of the United States, offers a new definition of the national role, which is different from Trump's definition. This national role is made up of elements and ideas that are necessary to understand US foreign policy toward other states, including how to deal with Iran. So, the main question of this paper is “what is the new national role that Biden defines for American identity? What are the most important elements that constitute this new national role? and According to these elements, what can we expect from Biden's administration's foreign policy orientation towards Iran? The research findings show that according to the new perception, the most important national role defined by Biden for the United States is: “respected and moral leadership”, a role that has been severely damaged by Trump's isolationist policies and the most important elements that constitute this new national role are: strengthening alliances, especially with Europeans, emphasizing public opinion satisfaction, using all US capabilities in the form of smart power, selective engagement, multilateralism and institutionalism, liberal internationalism, and diplomacy. This article is a descriptive-analytical article using case theory and the method of data collection is based on the existing literature and virtual data.

Georgia has experienced many developments since independence because of the presence of Russia and the West in this country, which has played an important role in making a balance of power between Russia and the West. Therefore, examining the factors that have made Georgia's role important will help to identify the issue. So, the main question in this article is what is the role of Georgia in the balance of power between Russia and the West and its impact on Iran's national security? Our hypothesis is, the role of Georgia is important in the balance of power between Russia and the West due to its unique geopolitical position and its pro-western policies, and this orientation has an important impact on Iran's national security. The hypothesis has been investigated according to the assumptions of Kenneth Waltz's balance of power theory and Mackinder’s geopolitical theory. Findings show that Georgia, as a small country, has felt threatened by Russia and has tried to join the Western structure, which has highlighted Georgia's role in the balance of power between the two sides. The West has used the energy resources of the Caspian Sea to supply its energy and Georgia is playing a key role in this process, which jeopardizes Russia's policy of monopolizing Europe's energy supply. Thus, the Western military presence in Georgia and Russia's monopoly policy to supply energy to the European Union has a negative impact on Iran's national security. The research method is descriptive-explanatory.

By the advent of various political currents on the realm of power, Iran has witnessed the emergence of sub-discourses that preserve the principles and propositions of the Islamic Revolution's discourse but differ in the subordinate propositions and inter-discourse developments. The latest is a “Moderationist sub-discourse” that has overcome other sub-discourses as the eleventh state started working in Iran. An important aspect of these sub-discourses is the impacts on foreign policy, especially toward the neighboring countries. In this way, Georgia gets significant importance due to its geopolitical features and the great deal of historical, cultural, and civilizational commonalities to Iran. However, due to regional and international changing conditions along with coming up various foreign policy sub-discourses, the relations between the two countries have had lots of ups and downs. On the other hand, after the Russo-Georgian 2008 war, the Russian Federation has exerted great influence on the Georgian foreign policy; including the relations with Iran. Therefore, this paper seeks to answer the question, regarding Russo-Georgian 2008 war, how the Moderationist foreign policy discourse has affected the Iranian-Georgian relations? Findings of the study show that the presence of Moderationist sub discourse of Hassan Rouhani affected Iranian foreign policy and the pessimistic subjective impressions of the Georgian leaders towards the previous Iranian government regarding Russia`s 2008 invasion of Georgia. As a result, we have witnessed relative improvement in the relations between two countries in 2013-2017 compared to the relationships of the 2008-2013 period. This research uses the descriptive-analytical method.

The success of Developmental State in East Asia once again has proved the role of the state in the process of development and shed light on the weakness of Neoclassic theories in their emphasis on the role of the market as a balancing force. One of the necessary variables for the formation of a developmental state is the international context. Like many states in East Asia, the path toward development in post-revolution Iran seems to be through the formation of a developmental state in the context of the existing international system. But the reality is something different. Therefore, the objectives of the present paper are 1 - to study the relationship between the international context and formation of the developmental state in Iran; 2 – to study the role of the United States in the process of formation of the developmental state in Iran; 3 – to study the means the US has employed to block the formation of a developmental state in Iran; and, 4 – to study the role of Iran’s foreign policy behavior in the formation of the developmental state. The main question of the present paper is what are the international obstacles to the formation of a developmental government in the Islamic Republic of Iran? The main hypothesis of this paper is: International context, US hegemonic status in the international system, and various political and economic obstacles and sanctions imposed by the US have prevented the formation of a developmental government in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The findings of the research sustained the hypothesis of this study.

Iran, despite great geopolitical and geo-economics potential, faces many complex internal and external predicaments due to its independent foreign policy and lack of dependence on international powers. On one hand, the cooperation of other actors with the severe US sanctions against Iran also seems to be influenced by Iran's independent policy. On the other hand, the change in power relations has shown the signs of the emergence of new world order. In such a circumstance, some believe that Iran can enjoy greater security and enhance its international standing by shifting its orientation toward the new great power. Accordingly, the present study seeks to identify and explain the uncertainties affecting Iran`s orientation in the evolution of the international order. The hypothesis is that the drivers of the nuclear agreement or disagreement, the lifting of sanctions against Iran or Iran bypassing the sanctions on the one hand, and the existing critical uncertainties, the anti-Iranian policy of the United States, and the pessimism and mistrust between Iran and the United States, on the other hand, affect Iran's orientation in the changing conditions of the global order. The research aims to examine the conditions and tools of Iran in maintaining an independent and active foreign policy. The research method in this article is a combination of the analytical-explanatory retrospective method with a futuristic approach based on scenario building.

This article has chosen the theoretical framework of ontological security to explain the impact of Salafism on Saudi Arabia's Middle East policy. The question is why Saudi Arabia has moved towards more support for the Taqlidi Salafist movement over the past decade, and what the identity and security implications of this support have been? The argument of the article is that the role and position of Salafism in Saudi Arabia's Middle East policy should be considered as a continuation of the historical alliance between Al-Saud and Al-Sheikh, which has played an important role in maintaining the identity and security of this actor. But the internal dynamism of the Salafi discourse, the emergence of regional rivalries, and the emergence of the so-called global counter-terrorism literature have shifted the discourse into Saudi Arabia's Middle East policy, leading to differences in identity and security with other Salafi, Sunni, and Islamism currents. The findings of the article show that between 2011 and 2020, Saudi Arabia placed Taqlidi Salafism as a pragmatic current with a conservative reading and close to the official institution of Wahhabism at the center of its Middle East policy, especially in Yemen and Libya. The present article is based on explanatory-analytical approach and the required information has been collected by library method and internet sources.

The importance of coherent foreign policy is due to the foreign policy's impact on countries' survival, development, stability, and security. Different individuals, institutions, organizations have different roles in foreign policy under any conditions in different political systems. This article presumes that foreign policy is the continuation of internal and domestic policy. The present study aims to explain foreign policy by highlighting different and diverse decisions and policies. This article includes a conceptual framework, a section that will explain realistic and idealistic policy, mental foundations of utopian and real policy-making in the Islamic Republic of Iran, an explanation of the foreign policy, and finally the conclusions. The main question is: what effect had a plurality of ideas and multiple structures on Iran's foreign policy in the period (2013-2021)? The hypothesis of the research using analytical and explanatory methodology is: During the period (2013-2021), the plurality of ideas and multiple structures as a roadmap has played an important role in the coherence and orientation of Iran's foreign policy. Moreover, Iran’s foreign policy decision Making is the result of semantic plurality, structural multiplicity, and different expectations from foreign policy.

The main goal of this article is to examine the evolutionary process of organizing and advancing China's military relations and arms diplomacy towards Iran. China is now recognized as the most prominent rising power of Asia-Pacific in the international balance of power. In this regard, the authors of the present study, using the formal statements of china`s officials and analyzing documents, have sought to answer this question “what factors affect the formulation and furtherance of China's arms cooperation with Iran”? The hypothesis put forward to answer this question by the present study suggests that “Analyzing China's approach towards military diplomacy and arms cooperation with Iran can be divided into three separate time frames; Since 1979 to 1990, through military cooperation with Iran and besides earning profits and overcoming technological underdevelopment, Beijing sought to contribute to a more balanced distribution of power in West Asia. Until 2012, China adjusted its military engagement with Iran due to the mounting importance of the US parameter in its foreign policy, but since Xi Jinping took office in 2013, China-which now sees itself as a major power-has pursued a more strategic approach towards military ties with Iran.