 |
| Iranian President Hassan Rouhani (left) and former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (right). |
Module 2 readings (and PTJ's "soliloquy") focus on the issues of interests versus ideas. Do states act with interests in mind or ideas? As usual, when I read and listen to almost any topic in international studies, I think of Iran (my most-favorite area of interest and favorite state/culture to learn about).
Two Iranian leaders came to mind when thinking about acting on interests and ideas; one leader represents acting for the interests or Iran and the other represents acting on the ideas --or beliefs-- of Iran.
The first leader is current Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. To me he represents an Iran that acts on the interests of Iran. He has helped to usher in a diplomatic thaw between the United States and Iran and, as of this past week, and Iran free of crippling international sanctions that had been placed on it as a result of their secretive nuclear enrichment program. These actions, it seems, have been taken out of the interests of the Islamic State of Iran.
The other leader that comes to mind is Rouhani's predecessor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad, one could argue, took actions to protect the ideas of Iran, rather than the interests of Iran. Under the U.N. Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that Iran is party to, Iran has a right to peaceful uses of nuclear technology. Under Ahmadinejad presidency, Iran took steps to enrich uranium for what they claimed to be peaceful purposes. Ahmadinejad was acting on the ideas or Iran to do so. Building underground enrichment facilities is a slippery slope toward sanctions, but Ahmadinejad believed that Iran --a sovereign state party to the NPT-- had the right to do so.
This leads me to my last thought for this post, and draws from PTJ's Module 2 lecture. How do we know what what the true interests are of any state? And how do we really know what a state's ideas or beliefs are? I would argue (as would Dr. Jackson, I assume) that Iran's ideas as a whole could be pretty accurately summarized. We could study their history, culture, political actions, etc. and come up with a good idea of what their beliefs are. But what are their true interests? Might Iran have entered into the latest nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) for some other reason that is also in their interests? Maybe it serves to promote their ideas, also. Might it serve the ideas of Iran to be regarded once again as a major player in the international community while questions simultaneously arise regarding Saudi Arabia's place in the international community. (Another here) While abandoning hopes of obtaining a nuclear arsenal might be a blow to the ideas of Iran, becoming the moderate voice of Islam and and the center of power in the Middle East would, undoubtedly, promote the ideas --and ultimately the interests-- of Iran.
-SC
Brilliant post! I absolutely loved the Iran leaders examples you gave. I agree that Rouhani is more of a "interest" guy while his predecessor Ahmadinejad gravitated towards "ideas". As a result of Ahmadinejad's focus, Iran suffered through tough international sanctions. Rouhani is much more of a diplomatic and strategic leader with the state's interest in mind.
ReplyDeleteThanks IRscholar! Another interesting point worth considering is that both Ahmadinejad and Rouhani "take orders" from the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. I would argue that the Supreme Leader acts to promote both Persian interests and ideas.
DeleteAs Dr. Jackson mentioned in his lecture, truly knowing the interests and ideas of an individual is much more difficult than understanding the interests and ideas of a state. Since Iran is a state that is largely under the direction of one person, this greatly complicates diplomacy with Iran. Do you think that Khamenei acts mostly to promote the interests of Iran, or the ideas of Iran?
Good question and observation! I think Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is and has been more of an advocate of ideology for the longest time. You see that clearly as leaders such as Ahmadinejad and his predecessors promoted much of ideology while compromising state interests. Clearly, the Ayatollah supported this approach until recent years where his perception changed somewhat given the reality of facing tough economic sanctions that have virtually crippled Iran and the lives of many. Rouhani is smart as he is realist enough to diplomatically remove most sanctions to buy time for Iran without giving in on ideology.
DeleteExactly, IRscholar! Iran has a unique situation in that the Ayatollah seems to be more committed to Persian/Shi'a ideas while the popularly-elected Iranian President makes decisions with state interests in mind. Perhaps this is a reason why Iran has defied the norm and is the only theocracy (other than the Vatican) to exist today.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete