Analyse the contemporary political behaviour of Iran. To what extent can its behaviours be explained by a rational actor model?

Authors Avatar by darcierae (student)

Analyse the contemporary political behaviour of Iran. To what extent can its behaviours be explained by a rational actor model?  (Allison & Halperin, 1972) To what extent does one need to mine more deeply to understand their action? Ensure you answer the question using the appropriate IR literature, to include respective IR theories and levels of analysis.

To determine whether or not a state can be recognised as a ‘rational actor’ depends on how that state makes choices.  When considering if a states’ behaviour is consistent with rational actor theory, it is important to recognize what it means for a government or state to act rationally. It does not necessarily suggest that other governments see the world the way we do, or make the decisions we would make.  Principally, as Allison and Halperin outline, there are certain characteristics that determine whether or not a state is rational; that decisions are arrived at ‘through a process of logical reasoning and thought; that the decisions made are the best ones given the options available, and that the costs and benefits of each alternative are considered.’ As Slanchev claims rationality doesn’t carry any connotations “of normative behaviour. That is, behaving rationally does not necessarily mean that one behaves morally or ethically.” This being said, though theoretically Iran can be seen in some lights as being a rational actor, there are also other ways to view its international actions and choices.

Most discussion of whether the Iranian regime is a rational actor focus on the question of how the regime make its choices. Despite the view that much of the regimes rhetoric is ‘unhinged and illogical’, it cannot be denied that Iran is calculating in its decisionmaking. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear program maintains that: "Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs." However, this raises a subsequent critical question: what does the Iranian regime see as costly, and what does it see as beneficial? This leads to another criterion for rationality: to make the best decision given the choices available. However as Slantchev mentions, rationality cannot be determined by moral or ethical values. This demonstrates that two rational actors, faced with the same circumstances and factual information but holding different values, philosophies or interests, will reach vastly different conclusions about what decision to make. As a subsequence, to understand if Iran can be identified as rational actor, it is vital to assess how the regime perceives its interests. All indications are that the regime values its own survival above all. This fuels the drive to develop or obtain a nuclear weapon, which it may see as a guarantee against external foes. This can be seen in Iran’s recent expansion in its controversial uranium enrichment drive, and in its ‘failure to respond to allegations of research relevant to developing nuclear arms’ The insistence to form a strong defence and an atomic weapon can be seen as rational in this sense as it is an example of Iran recognising the danger it faces and acting in the most beneficial way. However as Rasmussen claims ‘Ideology and Pragmatism are thus not absolute qualities’; and despite Iran’s rationality on some fronts,  individual influence and ideology still play a large part in their foreign policy decisions.

Join now!

There are a number of factors in Iran’s foreign policy which cause ambiguity as to whether it can be defined as a rational actor.  As Isaak notes, realist IR theory such as RAM ‘neglect or ignore the individual or humanistic aspect’ of international relations.  There must also be consideration that the regime often lacks complete information or anything close to it. This is where the assumption that Iran acts rationally may not show the full extent of Iranian decision making. Despite being the executive decision maker in all Iranian policy since his accession to the role of Supreme Leader in 1989, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay