The United States considers Iran a rebellious country that seeks to influence the currents and policies of the region. The currents in which Iran’s influence to a large extent can affect the interests of the United States in the Middle East. The United States fears that after its withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq Iran would expand its sphere of influence into Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Lebanon and Palestine. Therefore, for a long time, the United States considered the balance of power as the most important solution for controlling Iran. Thus, the Pahlavi regime saw Iraq during Saddam Hussein as the most important obstacle to Iran, and on the other hand, by creating two pillars of Iran as a country providing the security for the region and Saudi Arabia as the region’s economic power, it created a kind of balance. Even during the war, by adopting a policy of bilateral control of Iran and Iraq the United States sought to prolong the war so that both sides would be weakened because any powerful actor who would win the war could pose a threat to American interests in the future. The common view in the United States and the Arab world is to maintain a balance of power in the Middle East, which can be the greatest guarantee of stability in the Persian Gulf region. From this perspective, the traditional balance of power between Iran and Iraq provides security for Arab countries, guaranteeing the interests of foreign actors, especially the United States. Thus, with the weakening of Saddam, the United States sought to create another kind of balance of power to limit Iran, thereby securing the region. Therefore, the United States sought to play a balancing role as a foreign actor so that if Iran signs the nuclear accord, it can still play a strong role in the Middle East and ultimately implement the policy of regional deterrence.
Regional Deterrence
Although the doctrine of nuclear deterrence was introduced during the Cold War, it may be used in any other situation where nuclear weapons exist. In fact, with the outbreak of the first nuclear bomb by the United States in 1944, the international system entered a new phase, and the traditional concept of balance changed into nuclear deterrence. Deterrence is a special type of social or political relationship in which one party tries to influence another’s behaviour. Deterrence is an attempt made by country A to prevent country B from doing something that A does not favour or to threaten B of facing unacceptable damages.
The United States is trying to isolate Iran and put pressure on it to stop its nuclear activities, with the view that if Iran is equipped with nuclear technology, it will become the most powerful member of the Middle East security complex. In addition, the United States has directly increased its forces in the Middle East assuming that Iran will produce nuclear weapons. That is why it continues a direct presence in the region so that to pursue deterrence in the event of a possible threat. The United States has increased its military bases in Iran’s neighbouring countries, from Afghanistan and Iraq to Bahrain, and also it has increased its long-range American missiles in Turkey. The creation of regional deterrence by the United States under the pretext of confronting Iran’s nuclear threat is largely rooted in the United States’ fear of the exporting of the Islamic Revolution to other members of the Middle East security complex, a phenomenon that the United States has always grappled with and has reached its peak with the new wave of Islamic awakening in the region.
Preventing the Exporting of Islamic Revolution of Iran
The Islamic Republic of Iran is the only government in the Middle East that has chosen Shi’ah Islam as its official religion. After the Islamic Revolution of Iran, many Sunni countries in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia, began their hostile activities against the Islamic Republic of Iran. In this regard, one can refer to the training Wahhabi and Taliban forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan which aimed at weakening the Shi’ah government in the region. Fear of exporting the Islamic Revolution of Iran made the Middle Eastern countries, which were the most important American allies in the region, openly oppose Iran. To that end, they sought the help of the United States to increase their pressures on Iran. With the formation of allied groups of the Islamic Republic of Iran, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, this mindset that such opposition to the United States may be formed in the region led the United States and Arab countries to show objections and label these groups as terrorist groups. In addition, due to the fear of the spread of Shi’ah thought in the region and given that Iran had a Shi’ah government one may claim that Iran, by supporting the Shiites of Iraq and Lebanon, seeks to increase its influence in these countries and then pose a serious threat to Sunni governments in an attempt to create a Shi’ah crescent in the region. From the American point of view, the Islamic Republic of Iran has created forces in Iraq, such as the one in Lebanon called Hezbollah, and is trying to strengthen these forces to expand the idea of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and act as a strong lever in this country. That is why the United States has expressed grave concern over Iran’s presence in Iraq, and even cited Iran’s influence after the United States withdrawal as one of the reasons for its efforts to maintain a military presence in Iraq.
In such an environment, focusing on Iran’s nuclear program and securitizing it by the United States and the West are of importance. The United States not only sees Iran’s nuclear project as a threat to the Middle East security complex but also considers it as a threat to territorial security and Israel, its regional ally. In addition, the Americans claim that even Iran’s peaceful nuclear program would create two other major problems. Iran’s success in reaching an agreement regarding its nuclear program, especially through legal means, poses the greatest threat to the United States through the nuclear domino; since an opponent of the United States has been able to achieve some sort of regional hegemony. This will lead to the expansion of the nuclear program in Turkey, the Gulf states, Syria and Egypt. Another noteworthy point is that the allies of the United States will conclude that anti-American countries will eventually achieve nuclear power by pursuing a policy of strategic self-reliance and that the United States is preventing them from achieving nuclear technology.
Preventing the exporting of the Islamic Revolution is one of the goals of the United States which is pursued in line with the United States’ attempts to securitize Iran’s nuclear activities and prevent it from becoming stronger in the region. However, the primary concern and objective of the United States are changing the system of governance in the Islamic Republic. Because the deep-seated disagreements between Iran and the United States show that if Iran abandons its nuclear activities, the United States will continue to pursue a new policy and use a new excuse to change the system of authority in Iran due to substantial differences of the two countries’ systems of governance.
Changing the System of Governance
The policy of changing the system of governance in Iran is one of the most important policies that the American presidents have pursued. This policy was strengthened when George W. Bush came to power, to the extent that an annual budget from the American government was allocated for this issue. There were many options for changing the political system in Iran, from military strikes to supporting the internal movements and foreign opposition groups. For Washington changing the system of governance in Iran is the best option for changing Iran’s policies toward the United States; either through military means or by inciting Iran’s internal unrest. However, the experience of Iraq and Afghanistan would make these options seem pretty difficult. This is because the internal legitimacy of the Islamic Republic is greater than the two countries and it has more military power and political stability than Afghanistan and Iraq. However, Bush’s speeches about choosing the option of carrying out military strikes probably are referred to carrying out airstrikes and something like engaging in preemptive war.
According to many Western theorists, if the Iranian nuclear issue is resolved, there is still a possibility that Iran-United States relations will remain hostile. Changing the system of governance in Iran is a serious concern for the United States government, and the governments in power have been working to make this possible.
In general, the American goal of securitizing and intensifying pressure on Iran is the potential threat that the Islamic Republic of Iran poses to the expansion of the American dominance in today’s chaotic world and the absolute authority of the United States in the next century. Analysts say that Iran’s acquisition of nuclear technology could jeopardize American national interests in four areas; hence, the United States is concerned about these four areas.
1) The Territorial Security of the United States: Today, the American national security strategy is based on the belief that regional and domestic wars will not endanger American territory. If the conflicting interests of Iran and the United States are considered within the framework of threats that threaten each other’s territories, deterrence alone may be sufficient. But American officials claim that Iran wants to take advantage of the political value of acquiring nuclear technology to gain privileges in other areas and that Iran’s perception of itself as a natural leader in the Persian Gulf, a cultural hegemony in the Middle East and a challenge to the United States’ presence in the region, are indicating that Iran wants to use its influence and nuclear power to achieve goals beyond defending its territory.
2) The Function of Conventional American Forces: The United States has one of the largest conventional combat forces and the most sophisticated equipment and methods of training in the world. From the American point of view, a nuclear Iran can deter the United States. In that case, Iran’s threat to the United States could be of two kinds: it could increase the political cost of using force for the United States and also it may slow down the United States’ response to nuclear strikes. Iran’s success in reaching a nuclear agreement will increase the operational vulnerability of the United States’ allies in the Persian Gulf who want to host American forces and bases.
3) Efficiency of the Regimes which Prevent the Spread of Nuclear Weapons: The United States claims that Iran’s acquisition of nuclear technology raises serious questions about the effectiveness of the current regimes in the nuclear field and poses many difficulties in preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
4) Influencing the Coalition Building: According to some analysts, a nuclear Iran could revive the issue of deterrence for a third party because members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, like European members of NATO, do not have many affiliations with the United States. After all, the difference in capabilities and power of the United States and its friends in the Persian Gulf makes it difficult to divide the works. The United States is far from the region, so it will have a heavier and more difficult task.
Arab countries in the Persian Gulf do not favour a situation in which the American presence in the region will be increased thereby causing more casualties and spreading anti-American and anti-government sentiment in the region. All of this makes it more difficult for the United States to form a coalition and reach a consensus in times of crisis. Accordingly, and given the above-mentioned points, the American policy of changing the system of governance is a policy that this country has pursued but has so far failed to achieve it.
Archive of The Enemies of the Islamic Revolution
leave your comments