Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs
Volume:5 Issue: 1, Spring 2014

While during the last few decades developed countries were the main buyers of Iranian export items, in the last couple of years, the developing countries have become the primary destination of Iranian exports. It can be argued that a strategic shift has occurred in the Iranian export orientation. Exploration of the reasons for such a reorientation is of importance.The aim of this research is study of the impacts of international trends on the Iranian export orientation with the emphasis placed on non-oil exports. The primary question of this study is: what factors have contributed to the change in Iran’s export orientation? The hypothesis posed in response to the question is that: the trend of power transition in the international political economy and intensification of the West’s sanctions against Iran constitute key factors in the change. Analyzing Iran’s export data, the authors have reasoned that a turn has occurred in the orientation of Iranian export. They have discussed the rise of emerging powers in the international political economy as well as the escalating tension between Iran and the West (manifested in international sanctions) as the two main factors that have contributed to this reorientation. In their point of view, the change in Iran’s export orientation is probably permanent which will leave an important imprint on the geopolitical and geo-economic status of Iran.

This paper aims to highlight the linkage between domestic public policy and international bargaining power in the realm of science and technology policy. To do so, it constructs a model hybrid of two independent theoretical frameworks: Advocacy Coalition Framework by Paul Sabatier and Double Edged Diplomacy by Peter Evans. The main question to answer is how policy learning at the national level can occur as a result of the factor of enlightenment according to the Advocacy Coalition Framework and the second question is how this learning stretches to the foreign policy sub-system and invigorates the capacity of negotiating team for providing more innovative package of technical instruments or the so-called “win-set”, according to the Double Edged Diplomacy. This hybrid model is applied to the case of nuclear policy/ diplomacy of Iran. Thus, the objective of the paper is twofold: first, it takes on an analysis of the domestic nuclear policy change or readjustment in Iran that has been produced by policy learning. The second objective is to explain how this domestic learning factor overflowed to the foreign policy sub-systems and has provided the country with a new approach to the nuclear negotiations with foreign partners.

The Israel lobby in Washington is a network of organizations and community groups dedicated to influencing American policy towards the Middle East. Their success and access has made them the model for lobbies on Washington’s Capitol Hill and US Government. Long known for successfully influencing American policy towards the Middle East, the lobby now faces its strongest challenge in history at a time when it is also facing what it considers a historically significant issue. The interim accord between Iran and members of the P5+1 have led to turmoil in Washington over the wisdom and plausibility of President Obama’s diplomatic approach and about the softening of the current US posture towards Iran. In this debate, powerful conservative groups, a number of key Democrats, and the Israel lobby have been pit against progressive groups and Democratic elected officials in the Senate and the White House. In this article, I will briefly look at the history of the Israel lobby in America and explore its evolution as well as investigate the factors that, over time, caused it to take on a hard-line posture and drift towards the right. I will explore the tactics and strategies that the Israel lobby – the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in particular – has undertaken to influence the outcome of events and undermine the possibility of diplomatic conflict resolution. Finally, I will examine the pitfalls and challenges hard-line pro-Israel groups face in effectively pursuing these policies and the long term harm they expose themselves to in alienating progressive and pro-peace groups.

Undertaking research on the political economy of sanctions in Iran covers a wide area of study. In a research project, relevant data and key questions can be collected in order to organize them methodologically and write a book on this issue. In this article, within the conceptual framework of political economy, interactions of a few variables involved in the sanctions on Iran are studied. First, the article explores the immoral aspect and consequently illegal aspect of sanctions as an American policy tool to coerce Iran’s behavior regarding its legal right of nuclear enrichment. Then the article sheds light on economic impacts of the sanctions through examples. It also discusses political impacts of the sanctions and practical experience of how Iranians tackle these restrictions. It finally proposes an alternative way to change this hostility dominated environment of the Iran-US relations. This article concludes that As sanctions remain over a prolonged period they tend to become even less effective in achieving their political objectives; the sanctioning countries consequently tend to impose additional, more extensive sanctions, which only promotes further radicalization in both the sanctioned and sanctioning countries. The only way to stop this vicious cycle is for both sides to negotiate in good faith and with open minds.

Does Iran, which is known in political science literature as a developing, oriental and ancient country, have specific, examinable and predictable models in a way that can be applied to foreign policy studies? In this study the author intends to analyze six models of Iranian foreign policy between the two revolutions (from the constitutional to the Islamic); these patterns have been fluctuating dialectically between an idealism embedded in the Iranian grieving ontology and realism as it relates to the international environment. At the beginning, the nostalgic worldview of Iranians that is a reflection of their subjective collective constructs is analyzed. Then counter-scientism and anti-positivism in Iranian epistemology is studies. The outcome of these two is the absence of realism as the most significant paradigm of foreign policy. In order to prove the assumption, six models of Iranian foreign policy will be briefly assessed with the aim of demonstrating how the unconsciousness of Iranian ancient civilization and mystical and severely anti-science and anti-reality covers have given life to an anti-reality which has caused Iranian foreign policy patterns to be infused with unwarranted idealism. The dialectic between the two different atmospheres, however, has given way to creative models; and the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been efficient and taken the initiative in their design, implementation and assessment.

India and Israel share many common characteristics such as having emerged from a colonial past of the British Empire, and having a parliamentary system which encompasses moderate and radical forces. In spite of this shared background, for nearly four decades, India did not show interest in establishing complete diplomatic relations with Israel, and in general supported and voted for defense of the Palestinians and the Arab Middle-Eastern governments and for condemnation of Israel in world bodies such as the United Nations. However the broad changes in the world stage arising in the 1990’s such as the break-up of the Soviet Union, the occupation of Kuwait by Iraq and the subsequent crisis in the Middle-East, the rise of the price of oil, the reduction in the remittances sent back to India by the returning Indian workers from Arab countries, and also the change of the political climate in India, the increase in support for the right wing (B J P) all changed the direction of the attitudes of most Indian politicians towards Israel. But developing Indo-Israel relations does not affect Indo- Iran’s relations.

The US-UK special relation has always been an attractive and important issue in international relations. The pro-American tendencies of the British and their partnership with American policies as opposed to being willing to more clearly align with the EU and other European countries, have raised various questions in the minds of scholars. Now, considering that David Cameron’s Premiership is coming to an end and the next year’s election in the UK and also the different challenges which Barack Obama faced in foreign affairs during his presidency along with his declining popularity in the US, this paper is going to find out whether the Anglo-American special relations have already came to an end or not. At the end, the Anglo-American dispute over Iran would be also examined. The Constructivism theory of international relations has been used here to analyze data which have been gathered from library sources and various other internet resources. It is concluded that the Anglo-American special terms which started after the Second World War and were deepened in the Cold War, have lost its strength in one way or another – especially after Bush-Blair era- and is waiting for a new shape with the change of British Premiership.