Foreign Policy from Khatami to Ahmadinejad There is One Foreign Policy in Iran, which is Khamenei's Foreign Policy
This Article is part of an MA thesis: "Iran Wilayat al Faqih System of Governance and Public Policymaking" which tried to investigate the challenges that public policy in Iran is facing under Wilayat al Faqih system of governance. The article here deals with foreign policy making in Iran f rom Khatami to Ahmadinejad in regards to both Iran regional roleand Iran-U.S . relations. It sheds light on the challenges that are facing Iranian foreign policy making which can affect both the regime and the ideology of Wilayat al Faqih itself. It also, discusses series of problems that are challenging the authority of the supreme leader which resulted in a power struggle between the supreme leader (representative of the Wilayat al Faqih institution) and the president (representative of the Republican institution) inside the system of governance when it comes to policymaking. The contradictory roles between both is a result of the president limited power in formulating foreign policies, together with his ideological preferences that is different from the supreme leader. The Article concludes by stating that such power struggle between the offices may impact Iran's domestic policies but not Iranian foreign policies, as Iran is becoming a regional power.
The Persian Night: Iran Under the Khomeinist Revolution
Who really rules Iran today? Are the men in official positions merely puppets activated by hidden hands? How are decisions made in a system that appears so chaotic at first glance? Is the current political structure doomed to conflict? These are some of the questions that Amir Taheri addresses in this riveting and timely book. An anatomy of one of the most secretive regimes in the contemporary world, The Persian Night traces the historical, religious, cultural, and political roots of the Khomeinist revolution and analyzes the way it has grown into a pseudo-religious ideology over the past three decades. Taheri dissects a regime that has hijacked a nation of seventy million people and mobilized its resources for global "holy war" against the United States and its allies. From Khomeini's "divine mission" to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's messianic campaign in the name of the "Hidden Imam," Iran is on a trajectory towards war. The Persian Night looks into the actual links between the Islamic Republic and terrorist networks including al-Qaeda and Hezballah; the reality of the Iranian nuclear program; the Islamic Republic's war-making capabilities and strategies; and the origins of the three Khomeinist phobias--women, Jews, and the United States. But as Taheri demonstrates, Khomeinism is not Iran. Today there are two competing Irans: the one manifested in the negative Khomeinist energies that have dragged the nation into its dark night; the other drawing from the long and celebrated history of Persian culture while extending a friendly hand to the West. Successive U.S. administrations, along with most European governments, have failed to understand the reality of the Khomeinist regime and at times have even aided its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, including a nuclear arsenal. Taheri provides a set of imaginative suggestions for more effective ways of dealing with Iran.
Ideology and pragmatism in Iran's foreign policy
This essay hypothesizes that the tension between religious ideology and pragmatism has persisted throughout Iranian history. The Iranian Revolution simply put it on graphic display in the contemporary period. The essay also suggests that the dynamic processes of cultural maturation seem to be shifting the balance of influence increasingly away from religious ideology toward pragmatic calculation of the national interest in the making and implementation of foreign policy decisions. The obvious implications of all this for US-Iran relations are mentioned. The balance of ideology and pragmatism in the making of Iranian foreign policy decisions has been one of the most persistent, intricate and difficult issues in all Iranian history, from the sixth century BC, when the Iranian state was born, to the present time. For example, in assessing the decisions of Cyrus the Great for maintaining peace in the Iranian "world state," Adda B. Bozeman suggests that pragmatism rather than ideology dictated Cyrus's decisions.1 In my own works over the past half a century I have tried to hypothesize that the conundrum of the relationship between ideology and state interest has challenged Iranian policymakers ever since the establishment of the Safavid dynasty in 1501. Here, however, I would like to ask questions about the ideology-pragmatism challenge by drawing concrete examples from the pre-Islamic as well as Islamic periods of Iranian foreign policy. Richard N. Frye's seminal works on ancient Iran inspire me to do so.2 Within the limited scope of an essay, of course, even raising questions in the broadest strokes is quite an intellectual challenge. But the overarching purpose of this essay is only to suggest that the tension between ideology and interests in foreign policymaking has persisted throughout Iranian history. PRE-ISLAMIC EXAMPLES In her classic Politics and Culture in International History, Bozeman suggests that Cyrus succeeded in establishing not only the first world state, but also the first "international society" in large part because he was motivated by prudence rather than ideology in making policy decisions.3 Cyrus established a cosmopolitan state at a time when "the tyranny of empires plagued the fabric of community life everywhere." In such a world, she continues, "the Persian Empire, vaster than any preceding empire west of China, attained universal peace for some two hundred years in a large part as the result of tolerant respect for the cultural diversity of the subjugated peoples...." Cyrus's political prudence more than religious ideology underpinned his law. Richard Frye notes that Cyrus's law, which predated the Roman law, allowed the religious laws of Egyptians, Babylonians, and Hebrews to stay in force. The testimonies of ancient commentators seem to attribute Cyrus's observance of the practical circumstances in decision-making to his personal character. Herodotus testifies to his "statesmanship and liberality." Xenophon's Cyropeadia finds Cyrus "deserving admiration," above all, for honoring his people "as if they were his own children."4 Of course, the Bible reveres Cyrus for liberating the Jews from Babylonian captivity. Even the temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt in the fifth century BC "with Persian assistance."5 To this day, Iraqi Jews trace their origins to his liberation policy. It is significant that in accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, Shirin Ebadi proudly declared to the world on December 10, 2003 "I am an Iranian, a descendant of Cyrus the Great" and "I am a Muslim."6 This showed that a quarter of a century of "Islamization" had failed to undermine the strong attachment of the Iranian people to their pre-Islamic cultural heritage, including its concern with human rights. Also, as will be seen, despite the Islamist zeal in the early phase of the Iranian Revolution, the Iranian foreign policy-makers never stopped taking into account national interest in making pragmatic decisions. …