The paths of Iran’s Foreign Policy change in 14th administration based on synthetic model of foreign policy change

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Associate Professor of International Relations, Faculty of Law, Political Science and history, Yazd University,Yazd, Iran.

10.48308/piaj.2024.236557.1571

Abstract

Introduction: With the success of Masoud Pezeshkian as the 9th President of Islamic Republic of Iran and the importance of recognizing the possible foreign policy changes in the upcoming four-year period (1403-1407), the main question of this paper is what will be the most important paths of the foreign policy change in this Period? In answer to this question, based on the “synthetic model of foreign policy change”, the hypothesis of this research is that there are three general paths for Iran's foreign policy change in the 14th administration (new alternative inputs from domestic or international sources, finding pre-existing inputs into the foreign policy decision-making apparatus and finally changes in narrative by foreign policy decision-makers. So, the main aim of this research is a theoretical aim, focusing on the paths of in Iran's foreign policy change during the 14th administration.
Methods: This research is explanatory research in which the data analysis will be through the adaptation of the proposed conceptual model with the case study. The conceptual framework of this research is focusing on the concept of " foreign policy change" and the theoretical models and literature about it. Research data have also been collected through virtual sources (English articles) and documents.
Results and Discussion: The research findings and the main argument of the proposed model of this research is that the foreign policy change can take place through any of the three paths. There are influencing variables under each of these paths. These variables, which include material and semantic variables and are located at domestic and international levels, determine the paths of change. For example, windows of opportunity, external shocks and events and new environmental pressures (incentives and punishments) are three important international and material factors in the form of independent variables and as new inputs. If these variables are understood by the mental framework of new foreign policy decision makers (mediating variable), they can cause changes in Iran's foreign policy (dependent variable). On the other hand, the different understanding of the new decision-makers in the 14th administration as the intellectual and cognitive influencing factors (independent variable and as new inputs) is important in creating different outputs of foreign policy (dependent variable). The second path examines the already existing alternative inputs to the decision-making apparatus of the 14th administration. If these inputs are not interpreted differently by new decision makers (intermediary variable), they can cause continuity or minor changes in foreign policy. The third path is through the manipulation of certain elements within the main narrative that the Iranian defines for themselves, by foreign policy decision makers, which makes the policy change legitimate and possible for the audience.
Conclusion: The first conclusion of the research is that for the accurate analysis of the possible paths of change in foreign policy of 14th administration, it is necessary to consider the elements of three paths simultaneously. On the other hand, any of these paths of change can lead to changes in the goals/tools or both in the direction of Iran's foreign policy. The extent of change can include radical change or minor changes in one or more specific areas.

Keywords

References

‒ Ashbee, E., & Hurst, S. (2020), The Trump Foreign Policy Record and the Concept of Transformational Change, Global Affairs, 6(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2020.1734954.
‒ Bevir, M., & Daddow, O. (2015), Interpreting foreign policy: National, comparative and regional studies. International Relations, 29(3), 273-287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117815600930.
‒ Blavoukos, S., & Bourantonis, D. (2014), Identifying parameters of foreign policy Change: An eclectic approach. Cooperation and Conflict, 49(4), 483–500. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45084273.
‒ Brazys S, Kaarbo J and Panke D. (2017), Foreign Policy Change and International Norms: A Conceptual Framework, International Politics, 54(3), 659–668. DOI:10.1057/s41311-017-0063-7.
‒ Cottam. M.L. (1986), Foreign Policy Decision Making: The Influence of Cognition. Boulder: West view Press.
‒ Doeser, F., & Eidenfalk, J. (2013), The importance of windows of opportunity for foreign policy change, International Area Studies Review, 16(4), 390-406. https://doi.org/10.1177/2233865913512117.
‒ Giddens, A. (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
‒ Goldmann, K. (1982), Change and Stability in Foreign Policy: Détente as a Problem of Stabilization, World Politics, 34, 230–266.
‒ Gustavsson, J. (1999), How Should We Study Foreign Policy Change?, Cooperation and Conflict, 34(1), 73–95. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45083937.
‒ Guzzini, S. (2012), The framework of analysis: Geopolitics meets foreign policy. In: Guzzini S (ed.) The Return of Geopolitics in Europe? Social Mechanisms and Foreign Policy Identity Crises. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.45–74.
‒ Haesebrouck, T., & Joly, J. (2021), Foreign Policy Change: From Policy Adjustments to Fundamental Reorientations, Political Studies Review, 19(3), 482-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929920918783.
‒ Haar, Roberta N and Jonathan J Pierce. (2021), Foreign Policy Change from an Advocacy Coalition Framework Perspective, International Studies Review, 23 (4), 1771–1791, https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viab044.
‒ Hermann, CF. (1990), Changing Course: When Governments Choose to Redirect Foreign Policy, International Studies Quarterly, 34 (1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600403.
‒ Holsti, K. (2016), Restructuring Foreign Policy: A Neglected Phenomenon in Foreign Policy Theory. In: Holsti K (ed.) A Pioneer in International Relations Theory, Foreign Policy Analysis, History of International Order, and Security Studies. Cham: Springer, pp.103–119.
‒ Holsti, K. J. (ed) (1982), Why Nations Realign. Foreign Policy Restructuring in the Postwar World. London: George Allen.
‒ Innes, A.J., Brent J. Steele. (2014), Memory, Trauma and Ontological Security. In Memory and Trauma in International Relations: Theories, Cases, and Debates, edited by Erica Resende and Dovile Budryte. London: Routledge.
‒ Jeffrey T. Checkel and Peter J. Katzenstein. (2009), The Politicization of European Identities, in Jeffrey T. Checkel and Peter J. Katzenstein (eds) European Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–25.
‒ Jervis, R. (1976), Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
‒ Keller, Jonathan W. (2005), Constraint Respecters, Constraint Challengers, and Crisis Decision Making in Democracies: A Case Study Analysis of Kennedy versus Reagan, Political Psychology, 26:835–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00447.x
‒ Lee, Y. W. (2012), Synthesis and Reformulation of Foreign Policy Change: Japan and East Asian Financial Regionalism, Review of International Studies, 38(4), 785–807.
‒ Levy, J. S. (1994), Learning and Foreign Policy: Sweeping a Conceptual Minefield, International Organization, 48(2), 279–312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028198.
‒ Matern, J. B. (2001), The Power Politics of Identity, European Journal of International Relations, 7(3), 349-397. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066101007003003.
‒ McCourt, D. M. (2021), Domestic contestation over foreign policy, role-based and otherwise: Three cautionary cases, Politics, 41(2), 173-188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395720945227.
‒ Morin J-F and Paquin J. (2018), Foreign Policy Analysis: A Toolbox. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
‒ Patterson, M and Kristen Monroe. (1998) Narrative in Political Science, Annual Review of Political Science, 1: 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.315.
‒ Pezeshkian, Masoud. (2024), My message to the new world, Tehran Times, https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/501077/My-message-to-the-new-world.
‒ Rasooli Saniabadi, Elham (2024), The Requirements of Iran's Foreign Policy in Types of International Order, Iranian Journal of Public Policy, 10 (1): 190-206 [In Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22059/jppolicy.2024.97828.
‒ Reiter, D. (1996), Crucible of Beliefs: Learning, Alliances and World Wars, Ithaca: Cornell University Press
. ‒ Riemer, O. (2024), Foreign policy and citizens’ ontological security: An experimental approach, The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 26(2), 211-235. https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481231218864.
‒ Roberta N Haar, Jonathan J Pierce. (2021), Foreign Policy Change from an Advocacy Coalition Framework Perspective, International Studies Review, 23 (4), 1771–1791, https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viab044.
‒ Rosati, JA. (1994), Cycles in Foreign Policy Restructuring: The Politics of Continuity and Change in US Foreign Policy. In: Rosati JA, Hagan JD and Sampson MW III (eds) Foreign Policy Restructuring: How Governments Respond to Global Change. Colombia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, pp.221–261.
‒ Rynhold, J. (2007), Cultural Shift and Foreign Policy Change: Israel and the Making of the Oslo Accords. Cooperation and Conflict, 42(4), 419-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836707082649.
‒ Schweller, R. (2011), The Future Is Uncertain and the End Is Always Near, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24(2).175-184. DOI:10.1080/09557571.2010.496848.
‒ Skidmore, D. (1994), Explaining State Responses to International Change: The Structural Sources of Foreign Policy Rigidity and Change. In: Rosati JA, Hagan JD and Sampson MW III (eds) Foreign Policy Restructuring: How Governments Respond to Global Change. Colombia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, pp.43–64.
‒ Snyder. R. Bruck H.W and B Sapin. (1962), Foreign Policy Decision Making: An Approach to the study of International Politics. New York: Free Press.
‒ Somers, M.R. (1994), The Narrative Constitution of Identity: A Relational and Network Approach, Theory and Society, 23: 605–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992905.
‒ Steele. BJ (2008), Ontological Security in International Relations: Self-Identity and the IR State. London: Routledge.
‒ Subotić, J. (2016), Narrative, ontological security, and foreign policy change. Foreign Policy Analysis 12(4): 610–627. https://doi.org/10.1111/fpa.12089.
‒ The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. (1980) in https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/133613, {In Persian}. ‒ Waltz, K. (1979), Theory of International Politics. London: Addison-Wesley.
‒ Welch, D. (2005), Painful Choices A Theory of Foreign Policy Change, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
‒ Wertsch, J.V. (2000), Narratives as Cultural Tools in Sociocultural Analysis: Official History in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia, Ethos, 28: 511–533. DOI:10.1525/eth.2000.28.4.511.
‒ Yang, Y. E. (2010), Leaders’ Conceptual Complexity and Foreign Policy Change: Comparing the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush Foreign Policies Toward China. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 3(4), 415–446.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics