خلاصة:
U.S foreign policy toward Iran had been so uncertain and variable since the beginning ofthis relation, but alongside fluctuations, some kind of consistency is distinguishable. Untilthe Islamic revolution of 1979by the Iranian people, Iran was playing a major role in theU.S. anti-communist strategy in the Middle East. U.S grand strategy was based on itsconfrontation with USSR and Iran was the key for controlling the Middle East and processof underpinning Iran’s power as a liberal ally in the region was at the core of U.Sconsiderations in Iran. After the 1979 revolution, Iran’s priority had changed as a regionalactor and it no longer identified itself as a member in the Western coalition based onAmerican foreign policy. On the other hand, U.S. also stopped to identify Iran as a friendand started to demonize the new role Iran was playing in the Middle East and the world.By having these trends in mind, a very fundamental, important question strikes the mind:Did U.S has a turning point in its foreign policy toward Iran after the 1979 or the principleof its foreign policy was fixed and only tactical changes occurred? In order to answer thisquestion I’m going to examine the history of U.S foreign policy toward Iran, particularlythe post-revolutionary period. This analysis will be conducted according to the Copenhagenschool definition of security and concept of securitization. This theoretical frame workbrought us a comprehensive understanding of security and also a relative, usefulcategorization of security strategy in foreign policy. Different methodological approachescould be used in these frameworks but in this research I have used the discourse analysismethod to explore the subject of research. Conclusion of the research shows us thatAmerican strategy toward Iran covers both permanent and variable factors but thepermanent element was the key and variable factors made changes only in tactical level.
ملخص الجهاز:
Understanding the main goal and true strategy of foreign policy of each country, despite the different ways of declaring publicly their official goals which is a main subject for political scholars, political science, international relations, geopolitics etc.
like other countries could be seen as an actor in international relations that targets various objectives in its foreign policy during each administration but always identify grand National interest for itself which almost shapes its grand strategy toward the key issues.
Figure 1: Threat construction framework / According to these reasons securitization in the most proper theoretical framework to understand the American foreign policy toward the Iran since the 1979 to 2013.
Securitization More than a new epistemological level in analyzing security or mixed roots of its school, securitization is a process in which an ordinary subject (Normal policy) in international relations will become a security threat (politicized) that requires the military to deal with.
Political and military securitization: In the Reagan era the administration of United States of America first of all continued the Carter way to securitized Iran and was in fear about Iran’s revolutionary role in The Middle East.
Political and Military securitization: Clinton Doctrine for foreign policy in both East of the Middle East and West of this region (Israel and Arabs peace talk) tightly linked with Iran, so Iran during Clinton’s presidency was a big problem for interests of the United States in the region.
S. relations with Iran as a rouge state and a supporter of terrorism and American foreign policy was War on Terror (Bush, 2001).