Kayhan Barzegar

Introduction

        What role does "regionalism" have in Iran's foreign policy strategy? Some prevailing views inside Iran assert that due to different power and political structures, as well as cultural and social differences between Iran and regional countries, especially the Arab Middle East, it is either very difficult or of little benefit for Iran to focus on regionalism as a foreign policy strategy. While accepting such arguments, I maintain that a corollary of such a perspective is passivity in Iran’s foreign policy and a weakening of its regional and international standing. The Middle East of the post-September 11 and Iraqi crises, is transforming into a new political and security order in which all regional players are trying to establish their “new roles.” In order to institutionalize its regional role, and increase its strategic significance in the relations with great powers, Iran needs to expand cooperation, interactions, and building coalitions with states in the region.

    Tilting the scales in favor of a regionalist approach in Iran’s foreign policy will not only be beneficial, but is key to realizing Iran's national and security interests. Such a strategy, however, should be based on creating a “balance” in the various geographic-geopolitical, historical-civilizational, and political-security approaches of Iran’s foreign policy. It should also be centered on establishing relations with various geographical regions and political-security and economic sub-systems. This argument has important policy-making implications for Iran. During the past decades, inattentiveness to regionalism in foreign policy has dealt irreparable blows to Iran’s security and national interests. The most prominent examples are the empowerment of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the loss of economic, political and security opportunities in the region, and new security challenges posed by the presence of foreign powers, especially the United States, across Iran's national boundaries. In contrast, focusing on regionalism and expanding interactions with nations and states in the form of economic, political and security coalitions will provide Iran with opportunities to play its economic and political role in the region, prevent further threats, and increase Iran’s bargaining power in the relations with great powers.

Conceptual-Historical and Theoretical Framework

1. Conceptual-Historical framework

      Iran’s historical, geopolitical and political-security status in regional and international security system is such that require its policy-makers to adopt various approaches in the conduct of Iran's foreign policy. Focusing on regionalism, there are three main approaches in Iran’s foreign policy: geographical and geopolitical approach; cultural-historical approach; ideological and political-security approach. During past decades, Iran’s foreign policy has faced a challenge to equate these three approaches. This challenge is mainly related to the existing theoretical discrepancies over the priority of focusing which regional subsystems of the Arab Middle East, Central Asia and the Caucasus, the Persian Gulf, and South Asia in the conduct of Iran's foreign policy.

       Such a contradiction can be interpreted as the challenge between regionalism and globalism for orientating Iran's regional relationship and foreign policy. Some experts of Iran's foreign policy studies tend to agree that equating the two elements of geopolitics and ideology has been the main challenge of Iran's foreign policy in the course of history (1) and reached to its climax during the Islamic Republic. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s and the emergence of new states in Central Asia and the Caucasus, some other experts focused on the necessity of concentration on historical-civilizational approach for conducting Iran's foreign policy. (2) Focusing on regionalism in Iran's foreign policy has had different turning points.

First, the Pahlavi regime; during this regime, Iran did not believe in concentration on regionalism. As a result, Iran’s political-security and even economic role in the Middle East, especially the Arab Middle East, was defined to be marginal. In the respect, Iran’s involvement with the political-security issues of the Middle East focused on the Arab-Israeli peace process and overall Arab-Islamic issues would engage Iran with issues that had less relation with Iran’s national and strategic interests exposing unnecessary challenges to Iran’s foreign policy. On the other hand, the Soviet Union was by the time the prevalent power in Central Asia, the Caucasus and Afghanistan and therefore Iran was incapable to operationalize a cultural-historical approach regarding its civilizational domains of foreign policy orientation. Meanwhile, the Shah’s regime did not believe in taking advantage of the element of religion and ideology in Iran's foreign policy. (3)  Therefore, it can be argued that Iran’s foreign policy was mainly focused on the geographical and geopolitical approach during that time and the Persian Gulf region was the main focus of Iran’s active political-security and economic presence.

Second, the 1979 Islamic Revolution; the advent of the Revolution in Iran was also a turning point in the concentration on regionalism based on  enhancement of the ideological approach in Iran's foreign policy. The nature of Iranian Islamic Revolution was such that the new Islamic government was inevitably obliged to concentrate on the Shia ideology and consequently associate Iran with the Arab and the Islamic world’s issues. Contrary to the past decades, now concentration on regional issues could contribute to the enhancement of Iran's foreign policy. Major issues in the Middle East such as the Arab-Israeli peace process and struggle against global arrogance thereby battle against the dependent Arab states were of the issues that directly associated the Islamic Republic of Iran to regional issues. At this time therefore Iran withdrew from its traditional marginal role and gradually became the most active actor especially in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East at large. Following the termination of the Iran-Iraq war given the construction necessities, however, Iran's foreign policy gradually concentrated on the developmental and economic approaches.

Third, the collapse of the Soviet Union; this event was another turning point to concentrate on the civilizational-cultural and historical approach in Iran's foreign policy. The emergence of newly independent states in Central Asia and the Caucasus, which in terms of historical-civilizational entity, as well as Islamic culture were tied up to Iran and the Middle East, created a situation that Iran for the first time prioritized the expansion of relations with northern and eastern neighbors. Throughout the 1990s, scholars of Iran's foreign policy studies concentrated on various approaches to find ways of expanding Iran’s ties with the new states of this region and generally speaking the necessity of Iran’s active presence in these countries. During this time, the concentration of Iran’s foreign policy on the issues of central Asia and the Caucuses resulted in a new round of economic, political-security, and cultural rivalry between Iran and other major regional actors such as Turkey and Russia over expanding their role and influence in these regions. This development also led to redefining the role of these major regional actors in Iran's foreign policy and national interests. (4)

Fourth, the September 11th events; finally another turning point was the 9/11 attacks to the United States followed by the occupation of Iraq by American forces in 2003, which somehow enhanced the adaptation of political-security approach in the conduct of Iran's foreign policy. With the presence of American forces in Iraq which was a threat to Iran's security and national interests, along with the formation of a new political-security order in Iraq in which the role of the Shias and the Kurds was strengthened in the power and political structure of Iraq, the need to focus on building coalitions with friendly factions and governments in Iran's regional policy became inevitable. Iraq’s political-security developments have to great extent affected the existing political-security trends in the Arab world and especially in the Persian Gulf and therefore necessitated Iran’s active presence in the regional issues. Iran active presence in the region’s politics was due to establishing its “political-security roles” in the time of the region’s transformation into a new order. (5) Therefore, concentration on the three geographical-geopolitical, civilizational-historical, political-security and ideological approaches has always had specific conceptual and theoretical grounds in the conduct of Iran's foreign policy. 

2. Critical viewpoints on regionalism

  Critics of such a regional focus in Iran maintain that the structure of power, politics and culture in Iran is such that they render any focus on regionalism in the country’s foreign policy practically useless. These viewpoints can be summarized as follows:

● Impossibility of making coalition with regional states

    This perspective tends to agree on the impossibility of making any coalition with regional countries. This viewpoint maintains that the structure of power and politics in Iran and the ideological nature of the Iran's government which gives priority to supporting Muslims and liberation movements on the one hand and the power structure in the Arab world on the other dash any hope of coalition-building and advanced cooperation in the region especially with Arab countries. From this perspective, as a Shia state with a minority Sunni population in its frontier areas and whose ancient history is based on nationalism, Iran is sharply distinguished from its neighbors. Compared with its neighbors, Iran is also a forerunner and forbearer of political thoughts in the region. Meanwhile, the features of Iran's cultural and economic systems are quite distinct from those of its northern and eastern neighbors. In fact, Iran and its neighbors can not complement each other's economic-cultural systems. As one of the advocates of this perspectives puts, "due to these basic differences, Iran has never been able to make coalition and integration with Arabs in the south, Turks in the north, and India and Pakistan in the east and has therefore remained a unique country with its own specific behavior." (6)

● The globalization and technological importance of the West

Advocates of the “globalization” trend criticize the enhancement of regionalism in Iran’s foreign policy. They focus on the importance of globalization and technological significance of the West, arguing that in the process of globalization and development, Iran needs expanding ties with the centers of science and wealth-creation in the West. From this perspective, forming regional coalitions or Iran’s involvement in political and security issues of the Middle East, such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, in a contradictory way will only go to further complicate Iran’s relations with the West and will impede the country’s development. One of the advocates of this perspective maintains that the most important theoretical challenge in Iran's foreign policy is the lack of a systematic framework in Iran’s relations with the Western world. (7)

From this perspective, “in order to facilitate the achievement of its macro objectives such as economic development and playing an active role in the region, the Islamic Republic of Iran is required to establish a logical relationship with major powers especially the United States.” (8) “Western world is the main source of power at the global level and many problems in Iran’s relations with its neighbors are rooted in the lack of a systematic cooperation between Iran and the West.” (9) This perspective perceives the globalization trend as a process which sooner or later will involve all countries including Iran. (10)

● Cultural and social discrepancy and Iran’s loneliness in the region

The third perspective emphasizes the cultural and social differences between Iran and regional countries and the fact that Iran is alone and unique in the region. From this perspective there are deep cultural, social and historical divides separating Iran and neighboring Arab countries which make any form of continued cooperation in political, security, and economic fields impossible. The proponents of this view argue that Iran does not have reliable relations with any Arab country and following the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, it has experienced the most turbulent period of its relations with the Arab world. There is still a lot of pessimism which prevents Iran from fostering closer ties with its Arab neighbors. Such pessimism with respect to Iran's regional aims and strategies similarly exists on the Arab side.

      From this perspective, Iran is ethnically, ideologically, and politically alienated from Arabs. Meanwhile, the legitimacy crisis in the Arab world has exasperated this political-cultural gap. At the same time, some conservatives Arab regimes regard Iran as an unreliable neighbor and some of them even consider the Iranian Shia state as their own enemy. (11) Therefore, such structural and cultural gaps hold back any closeness between the two sides and restrain any concentration on regionalism in the conduct of Iran's foreign policy. Undoubtedly such pessimism towards regionalism in Iran's foreign policy, in terms of the existing social, political and historical differences between the two sides is to some extent convincing and relies on a plausible logic. However, what is important and noteworthy is that the persistence of this trend will ensure the passivity of Iran's foreign policy and lead to missed opportunities in which Iran could otherwise have deployed its numerous sources of power to strengthen its national interests at the regional and international levels in the longer term.

Constants of Regionalism in Iran's Foreign Policy

After the September 11th, especially following the 2003 Iraq crisis, Iran’s regional role markedly increased. This situation has laid the ground for Iran to expand its relations with friendly political factions and states in the region. It has also provided a good opportunity to solve Iran’s strategic discrepancies with the United States. The boost in Iran’s regional role is not merely based on the traditional geopolitical components which consider Iran the center of various geographical subsystems in the greater Middle East such as Central Asia and the Caucasus, Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Persian Gulf, Iraq and Arab Middle East, and mostly takes a cultural-historical as well as a developmental-economic approach regarding the necessity of attention to regionalism in Iran's foreign policy. Rather it puts emphasis on new components that impact Iran’s foreign policy, based on a security-political and strategic approach which highlights the Al-Qaeda terrorism and the threats resulting from the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear terrorism, in the region. (12)

        Combining three sets of approaches i.e., cultural-historical, developmental- geopolitical, and security-political, and implementing them in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in order to increase Iran's regional role will lend more support to the necessity of focusing on regionalism in Iran’s foreign policy. Three factors are significant in strengthening a regionalist approach in Iran's foreign policy.

● A powerful nation-state

Iran enjoys a powerful nation-state which gives it special standing in the region. Iran claims a great share in the civilization of Middle East, connecting Middle Eastern culture to the rest of the world. Iran’s background historical and cultural presence in the region is formidable. Unity of the nation, ambition and firm determination for development and progress are major characteristics of the Iranian state. For this reason, Iran has been able to remain independent throughout its history. At the same time, Iran has maintained its historical, cultural and political ties to the regional nations and states to the extent that most regional nations including Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, and Iraq respect Iran as a great political-cultural force. Even nations such as Turkey and Russia, who were rivals of Iran through historical times, have always respected Iran for these features.

      No other country in the region, except Turkey and Russia, has such features. For instance, Iran’s two eastern neighbors, i.e., Afghanistan and Pakistan, lack such features and do not enjoy Iran’s regional status. While the nation is historically powerful in Afghanistan, the state is weak in this country. As a result, Afghanistan is still afflicted with elongated civil wars. In contrast, there is a powerful state in Pakistan, yet the nation is rather weak in this southeastern neighbor. During the past few years, Iraq has experienced some developments that have undermined the cohesiveness of its nation and the power of its state. The legitimacy of regimes in the Arab states of the Persian Gulf is also seriously diluted. In fact, the concept of the nation in these states is still experiencing the primary stages of its origins.  In this respect, Iran is an exception since it simultaneously enjoys a powerful nation and state capable of establishing stability in the country and influencing the regional politics. Through concentration on regionalism in foreign policy, such elements can contribute to interactions, alliances and coalitions between Iran and other regional nations and states.

● Geopolitical Identity

Iran simultaneously connects with the major geopolitical identity and regional subsystems in the greater Middle East. In other words, the geopolitical, political and security, as well as historical and cultural features of Iran are such that it can be considered as part of various identity and political subsystems. Iran is a connecting point between Central Asia and the Caucasus, which also links South Asia to the Persian Gulf and the Arab world. Each of these subsystems faces Iran’s foreign policy with a different set of political and security themes. As a link between South and East Asia, Iran's role is closely related to “security,” “energy,” and “development” themes. From historical and cultural standpoints, Iran is part of the “Greater Aryana” which also encompasses other countries across the north-south divide, a large family of 1.25 billion people, from Tajikistan and Tibet to the Maldives, along with an east-west divide, from Myanmar to Iran (from Arakan to Khorasan) in which Iran remains pivotal for a great part of that cultural identity. Through Pakistan, India and China, Iran is related to energy security in East Asia, while through Afghanistan it is related to security matters specific to this subsystem. The same is true about Iran’s geopolitical identity in relation to Central Asia, the Caucasus, Turkey, the Persian Gulf, Iraq, and the rest of the Arab world which affords Iran special importance in strengthening the concept of regionalism in its foreign policy strategy. Therefore, Iran potentially acts as a major crossroads in the vast geographical expanse of the Middle East.

       The orientation of a country's geopolitical identity is among the significant issues in the conduct of Middle Eastern countries' foreign policies. During past decades, various governments in the region have taken advantage of their geopolitical identity in order to preserve their power–base and legitimacy among their nations and the relations with great powers. For instance, Pakistan has always been faced with challenges in defining its geopolitical identity. While Pakistani people, elites, and intellectuals tend to adopt a developmental approach in order to link their country’s identity with the South Asian cultural-political identity, energy security, and economic development, its ruling elites and governments have endeavored to link their country with the identity of the Middle East region and the Islamic world focusing on political-security and ideological matters. (13)

       There are various reasons for such a state of affairs. Chief among them is the Pakistan’s growing importance for the United States which is itself related to different issues such as the war against Al Qaeda terrorism, prevention of the growth of Islamic extremism, and security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. During past decades, different Pakistani governments have been able to acquire billions of dollars of aid from the United States. These financial resources have mainly been spent on protecting Pakistani governments rather than contributing to economic development in the country. (14) The challenge of geopolitical identity is a common issue for other regional countries, including Afghanistan, Turkey, Iraq, as well as Central Asian and Caucasian countries. 

      Yet the nature of Iran's geopolitical identity is modestly different. Because the region is part of Iran's civilization sphere and the country has considerable historical, cultural, and political influence in the region. Therefore, it is easier to get linked to each of the region's subsystems in specific political-security and cultural conditions. Some Iranian scholars tend to except that Iran should shift from look to the neighboring west (the Arab Middle East) and look to the East (to Indian Subcontinent and Central Asia) in order to remove bottlenecks of  Iran's foreign policy. Iran has been faced with such challenges after regional developments following the outcomes of the September 11th attacks to the United States and consequently the occupation of Iraq in 2003. Advocates of such a perspective argue that this Look to the East approach can enhance Iran’s regional and global status. (15)

      From the author's view, creating a balance between all these subsystems and playing a linkage role to connect these regions can be a best approach in the conduct of Iran's regional policy. Through adopting developmental and economic integration approaches and expanding cultural-historical relations with its neighbors in the east, Iran can link itself to the identity, security, and developmental themes in South Asia, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and the Caucasus. At the same time, Iran should link itself to political-security issues in the Arab Middle East (Iraq and the Persian Gulf) which are significantly important for the international community and especially the United States. From this perspective, one can argue that concentration on regionalism in Iran's foreign policy can enhance the country's regional and global status.

● Shia ideology

This factor has continuously influenced Iran’s foreign policy in the course of its contemporary history. Some analysts maintain that even the Shah's regime, in spite of not assigning a clear-cut role for ideology in the promotion of its foreign policy, used this factor in order to increase Iran’s role and political influence in the region. (16) However, after the 2003 Iraq crisis and the strong presence of the Shiite element in the power structure of the Middle East, the use of this component has been taken more seriously in Iran's foreign policy and regional strategy. Subsequently, Iran’s role in political and security issues of Iraq, Lebanon and the whole Middle East region has increased.

Within the framework of regionalism, the Shiite factor, in addition to its ideological aspect, can draw upon in order to increase Iran’s regional role and national power. In other words, the use of this component should not be limited to achieve merely short-term aims during particular times of insecurity; rather it should be used as a factor to strengthen Iran’s relations with other nations and states, and even in hypothetical resolution of Iran’s political-security issues with the United States.

       For instance, strengthening the role of the Shia factor in the regulation of Iran’s foreign policy in Iraq has played a great role in countering the immediate security threats posed by the United States during 2003-2005. (17) Meanwhile, strengthening the Shia element in the power structure of Iraq can not only turn Iraq into a friendly state, heading off the conventional military threat,  but will also play an important role in strengthening Iran’s role in its attempts to redefine political-security arrangements in the Persian Gulf. Therefore, strengthening this component can strengthen Iran’s regional and international role, providing a powerful logic for greater concentration on regionalism in Iran's foreign policy.

Bolstering Regionalism in Iran's Foreign Policy

The nature of the international system is such that the more the role and influence of states increases, the more interaction and cooperation and the need to form alliances and concentrate on regionalism become inevitable. For instance, the expansion of the U.S. presence in various regions of the world was due to the increased interests of America at the global level World War II subsequently the needs to understand other nations and form alliances with states in various parts of the world. Following the failure of George W. Bush’s strategy for creating a unipolar world under the leadership of America, President Barak Obama defined a new strategy for the U.S. in 2009 emphasizing on collaboration and alliance with friendly and rival states in order to solve regional and global issues. In other words, the new American strategy has concentrated on a kind of regionalism.

      Likewise, a focus on regionalism in Turkey’s foreign policy is another vivid example. This strategy is one of the most important measures that Turkey has adopted in order to create a kind of balance in its relations with major powers such as the United States and the European Union. The Turks are taking advantage of the potentials of their country’s geopolitical identity in order to play a more active role in the region and throughout the world.  The incumbent ruling “Justice and Development Party” in Turkey have conditioned their country’s strategic objectives, including accession to the European Union, to the enhancement of the “Look to the East” strategy and focusing on the oriental-Islamic of the Turkish identity and geopolitical characteristic in dealing with the West and especially the United States. In this respect, Turkey has expanded its relations with Iran, Russia, and Arab states and emphasizing the Turkish mediatory role in solving the regional crises in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine. (18) Some Turkish analysts are even talking about the enhancement of Turkey's soft power in the Middle East and the fact that Turkish increased regional role is somehow related to the enhancement of regionalism in Turkish foreign policy. (19)

      Due to its unique geopolitical position, as well as the nature of the political-security issues it faces such as the nuclear issue and crises in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran is directly linked to global and international security issues. The expansion of Iran's regional role, political-security, and economic interests at the regional and global levels is somehow related to the states' need to increase its interaction and understanding with different regions of the world especially the Middle East. In this regard, the scale and significance of Iran’s increased political-security and economic role so far as they are compatible with Iran's national and security interests is in favor of Iran. The logic of international relations in the contemporary world requires an aspiring country like Iran move towards interaction, making coalition, and unity. It is impossible to achieve such objectives without pursuing an active foreign policy. Since Iran's foreign policy issues are somehow linked to global politics, Tehran can resort to regionalism in order to achieve its developmental objectives on the one hand and tackle its national security threats on the other.

      Another important point in Iran's foreign policy strategy is the concept of creating “balance” between “regionalism” and “globalism” (closeness with the West). Iran has constantly faced a dilemma over adopting each of these options in its foreign policy. Bolstering regionalism in its traditional form, especially after the Islamic Revolution’s inception, has meant increased relations with regional countries, especially the Muslim and Arab worlds. Some other Iranian perspectives, consider the expansion of relations with the East, especially with South Asia, Central Asia and the Caucasus as well as China and Russia and other parts of Asia as parts of Iran’s regionalist policy. The government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad even looks upon Iran's active role in Latin America as a kind of regionalism, which ought to be factored into the formulation of Iran's foreign policy. In contrast to regionalism, the Iran's foreign policy also attends to globalization, and regards relations with the West as a requirement of a pragmatic foreign policy. (20) From this perspective, the West, especially the United States, is the main producer of wealth, technology and science in the world and Iran on its way to becoming a regional power, must interact with the United States of it is going to play its part in important political and security roles in the region and the world.  To go on with its development drive Iran should also take advantage of Western capital and technology.

          A combination of two approaches, however, will better serve Iran’s national interests. In reality, Iran’s international significance is closely related to its regional political-security clout. Although Iran was also important before the September 11th events, its significance has greatly increased following 9/11 and especially in post-invasion Iraq. Fighting Al-Qaeda terrorists and preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, as well as the resolution of regional crises in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Palestine are major goals of international security. (21) Iran has a vital role in settling all the abovementioned issues. Iran’s increased role in the Middle East region, combined with its nuclear program and Tehran’s decision to keep its “independent nuclear fuel cycle” are factors which have provided a position of "political strategic parity" and paved the ways for possible strategic negotiations between Iran and the United States.  

       An Iranian perspective, which can be called “traditional regionalism,” maintains that Iran’s excessive involvement in Middle East issues, especially the issues relating to the Arab world such as Palestine and Lebanon, are costly and create tension between the strategic priorities governing Iran's foreign policy, and moreover damage the relations between Tehran and the main Arab world actors like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. It will also jeopardize Iran's relations with the concerned foreign powers. Therefore, focusing on regionalism should not be overemphasized in Iran's foreign policy strategy. These viewpoints focus on strengthening a “developmental” approach to foreign policy with emphasis on Iran’s sensitive geopolitical situation, which may entail many opportunities and challenges for the national interests of the Iranian nation. As such, Iran should maintain an active presence in its immediate security environment at the level of its neighboring countries.

In contrast, there is the concept of “new regionalism”, focusing on a political and security approach which maintains that Iran should not only be concerned about the security issues in its immediate neighborhood e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf, but should also have an active role in other parts of the Middle East like Lebanon and Palestine and use its clout there to repel security threats posed by the United States and Israel, thereby protecting its strategic interests in the region and in relation to the great powers. In other words, it should create a balance between economic development on the one hand, and security and national interests on the other. 

      Focusing on regionalism in Iran’s foreign policy should be based on creating a balance between traditional and new forms of regionalism. Iran, as an emerging regional and potential world power, like India and Turkey, needs an active foreign policy based on a coalition with friendly states and nations in various parts of the world, especially in the Middle East. At the same time, a rising regional power requires to develop its economy and focus on integrative approaches with the region and world's economy. Therefore, an active foreign policy is marked by the simultaneous adoption of security-political and economic-developmental approaches toward surrounding regions. Within the neighborhood, undoubtedly, the Persian Gulf region is of the highest importance to Iran's security and national interests. This region is Iran’s main connecting route to high seas, is critical to the export of Iran's gas and oil and import of necessary commodities. Given the nature of its sensitivity to political-security issues such as the growing extremism and international energy security in the region, the Persian Gulf must be the center point of the pursuit of regionalism in Iran's foreign policy. The Persian Gulf is simultaneously the entry point to South and East Asia, and the Arab Middle East. It is also the focal point of Iran's relations with great powers, especially the United States.

Conclusion

       This article studied the conceptual-historical and theoretical aspects of regionalism in the conduct of Iran's foreign policy. It also examined different critical views regarding any concentration on regionalism in Iran's foreign policy. Critics mostly argue that Iran's power and political structure is rather different from its neighbors. They believe that there are cultural, social, religious differences, as well as diverse systems of governance in Iran and other regional states. Meanwhile, Iran and regional states have different perceptions towards the sources of security threats at the national and regional levels. They are also at odds over the scale of their relations with major powers, especially the United States, and the scale of their presence in the region. From this perspective, the divergent views between Iran and regional states, especially the Arab world, during recent decades have prevented any enhancement of regionalism in Iran's foreign policy and due to these structural differences, Iran's foreign policy will face serious obstacles in concentrating on regionalism in the conduct of its foreign policy in the future.

      The logic of these arguments is acceptable. Yet, one should bear in mind that over-emphasis on such a perspective can undermine Iran's regional and global role and status. Following the September 11th attacks and the United States invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Middle East has experienced a political-security transformation in which each major regional actor endeavor to enhance its own political-security and economic roles. In this context, Iran has also emerged as a newly regional power and actor. While Iran's issues such as its unique geopolitics in affecting the regional crises in the post-9/11 Middle East, as well as its nuclear program as a global matter, have boosted Iran’s importance at the regional and international levels, they have presented new threats such as the existence of foreign troops across Iran's national boundaries.

     Taking advantage of the new opportunities and tackling the new threats require a concentration on regionalism in Iran's foreign policy. In this regard, adopting an active foreign policy is vital for expanding Iran’s economic, cultural and political-security interests in order to materialize the national objectives envisaged by the “20-Year Perspective Plan”. A focus on regionalism should equally include developmental and political-security approaches. As the contemporary history shows, emerging powers have inevitably given priority to regionalism, as well as making coalitions and alliances in the conduct of their foreign policy. Owing to its sources of power such as a powerful nation-state, a unique geopolitical situation, and a dynamic Shia ideology, Iran can play a distinctive role in the regional politics. Iran’s strategic value is due to its connection with some Middle Eastern issues that are directly related to international politics and security. Concentration on regionalism in Iran's foreign policy favors Iran’s security and national interests in the long-term.

Kayhan Barzegar is a Faculty Member and Chair of the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Science and Research Campus of the Islamic Azad University.

Discourse: An Iranian Quarterly, Vol. 9, Nos. 3-4, Fall 2010-Winter 2011

Notes:

R. K. Ramezani, "Ideology and Pragmatism in Iran's Foreign Policy," The Middle East Journal, Vol. 58, No. 4, Fall 2004, p. 550.

Changiz Pahlavan, "In the Search for New Regional Structures,” Goftegou Journal, March 1994, p. 29 & p. 32.

Graham Fuller, The Center of the Universe: The Geopolitics of Iran, Oxford: Westview Press, 1991, p. 50 & p. 62.

Kayhan Barzegar, "Twelve Years after the Disintegration of the Soviet Union," Discourse: An Iranian Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 1, Summer 2003.

Kayhan Barzegar, “Roles at Odds: Understanding the Roots of Iran-US Conflicts after the 9/11 attacks,” Rahbord Quarterly (in Persian), No. 39, Spring 2006.

Mahmoud Sariolghalam, Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran: Theoretical Review and Paradigm of Alliance, Tehran: Center for Strategic Research, 2000, p. 56.

Hooman Peimani, Iran and the United States: The Rise of West Asian Grouping, Westport, CT: Praeger Publications, 1999.

Sariolghalam, op. cit., p. 156.

Ibid., p. 33.

 Mahmoud Sariolghalam, Iran and Globalization, Tehran: Center for Strategic Studies, 2005.

 Ahmad Naghibzadeh, "Reflection of Iran's Foreign Policy Shortcomings during Khatami's Presidency," Discourse: An Iranian Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 3, Winter 2002, pp. 85-100.

 Kayhan Barzegar, “Iran, the Middle East and International Security,” Foreign Policy Journal, No. 3. Vol. 22, Autumn 2008, pp. 654-655.

 Husain Haqqani, "The Role of Islam in Pakistan's Future," The Washington Quartely, Vol. 28, No. 1, Winter 2004, p. 88 & pp. 91-92.

 Ibid., pp. 93-94.

 Saeed Taeb, “The Necessity of Change in Geographical Concentration of Iran's Foreign Policy,” in: Articles of the First Conference of Regional Studies, Tehran University, 2009.

 Graham E. Fuller & Rend Rahim Francke, The Arab Shi'a: The Forgotten Muslims, Trans. Khadije Tabrizi, Tehran-Qom: Shia Association Publications, 2005, pp. 171-172.

 Kayhan Barzegar, "Iran's Foreign Policy in Post-Invasion Iraq," Middle East Policy, Vol. Xv, No. H, Winter 2008.

 Owen Matthenws and Christopher Dicky, "Triumph of the Turks," Newsweek, 7 December 2009.

 Bulent Aras, "Turkey's Soft Power," available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk, 14 April 2009.

 Manouchehr Mottaki, "Iran's Foreign Policy under President Ahmadinejad, Discourse: An Iranian Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 2, Winter 2009, pp. 7-8.

 Kayhan Barzegar, “Iran, the Middle East and International Security,” Foreign Policy Journal, No. 3. Vol. 22, Autumn 2008, p. 456.