Strategic Policymaking of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Response to U.S. Actions in Southwest Asia (2001–2021)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Political Science (Public Policymaking), South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor, Department of Law and Political Science, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Over the past two centuries, West Asia has consistently been a site of intervention by extra-regional powers such as Portugal, Britain, and the United States. These global powers have pursued hegemonic strategies and sought to implement regional power-building models. Consequently, coalition-building has always been a key tactic used by these external actors to secure regional dominance. This is because, unlike regions such as Africa, West Asia has not lent itself to direct colonization or sustained control by foreign powers. In response, regional states—especially Iran—have sought to calibrate their strategic policies to the presence of great powers in order to safeguard their national security. In periods when Iran’s strategic policymaking has faltered, geopolitical pressures have intensified. This study investigates how Iran’s strategic policymaking in the face of U.S. regional activities has been shaped by the structural features of the international system and the behavioral pattern of new regional actors. The key question is: What mechanisms has the United States employed to implement its regional policies in West Asia, and how have these affected the security environment and, by extension, the Islamic Republic of Iran? The hypothesis is that, as a global power playing a crucial role in international politics, the United States employs aggressive regional strategies in the region. International relations theorists broadly concur that great powers strive for "regional hegemony," which requires the application of a model of “regional power-building,” the use of “coalition-building and balancing tactics” against regional actors, as well as an aggressive measures by the United States in the region. In response, Iran has adopted the role of a “regional power” and embraced a strategic posture of resistance to counter America’s offensive policies. Iran's strategy is grounded in “asymmetric conventional deterrence” within Southwest Asia. To test this hypothesis, in the context of a balance between Iran and the United States as two players, the study applies the theory of offensive realism to identify the conflicts between them and to assess how Iran has countered U.S.-led initiatives. The research ultimately aims to analyze and compare the national power indicators of the U.S. and Iran in Southwest Asia. Assessments indicate that while the U.S. has pursued the role of a "global power," Iran has asserted itself as a "regional power." Since any global power should promote its dominance in a regional environment, signs of conflict have emerged within Iranian and U.S. strategic policymaking.

Keywords

References

Booth, K. (2000). Security in Anarchy: Utopian Realism in Theory and Practice. International Affairs, 67(3).
Buzan, B. (2000). The problem of national security in the Third World. In E. Azar & C.-I. Moon, National security in the Third World (Research Institute for Strategic Studies, Trans.). Research Institute for Strategic Studies. [In Persian]
Cohen, S. (2008). Geopolitics of the world system (A. Kardan, Trans.). Abrar Moaser. [In Persian]
Daragahi, B. (2011). Some see the hand of Iran in Syria’s crackdown. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from:   https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2011-may-10-la-fg-syria-iran-20110511-story.html
Elman, C. (2011). Realism. In P. Williams (Ed.), An introduction to security studies (A. R. Tayyeb, Trans.). Amirkabir. [In Persian]
Fukuyama, F. (2019). Identity: The demand for dignity and the politics of resentment (L. Kazemipour, Trans.). Raman Sokhan. [In Persian]
Gharayagh Zandi, D. (2005). Asymmetric war: The puzzle of power and fear. Defensive Strategy, 3(7), pp. 14-32. [In Persian]
Ghasemian, A., & Fallah-Nejad, F. (2008). The United States’ preventive war strategy against Iraq under scrutiny. Political Studies, (2), pp. 68–81. [In Persian]
Lewis, B. (2019). Faith and power: Religion and politics in the Middle East (J. Mohseni Darreh-Bidi, Trans.). Ashian. [In Persian]
Mearsheimer, J. (2019). The great delusion: Liberal dreams and international realities (M. Barati & D. Rahimi Ashtiani, Trans.). Cultural Institute of Abrar Moaser. [In Persian]
Schelling, T. (1980). The intimate contest for self-command. Public Interest, 60(94).
Snyder, G. (2005). Contemporary security and strategy (H. Mohammadi Najm, Trans.). Publication of the Command and Staff College of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. [In Persian]
Uniacke, S. (2007). The False Promise of Preventive War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walt, S. (1987). Origins of Alliance. New York: Cornell University Press.
Waltz, K. (2019). Man, the state, and war: A theoretical analysis (M. R. Rostami, Trans.). Sales. [In Persian]
Political Science
Volume 27, Issue 4 - Serial Number 108
October 2024
Pages 249-280

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics