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, Ali Khamenei has not travelled outside Iran on a political basis since his appointment. As a subsequence, he is ‘likely insulated by his aides from bad news or criticism, and depends on an increasingly narrow and homogenous power base which may not expose him to alternative opinions.’ As a result, his form of leadership and decision making cannot be defined as epitomising a Rational actor, as one is unlikely to make a rational decision based on exploration of all alternatives decision if ill-informed or unaware of all the options.
There are indeed examples that suggest rational cost-benefit decisionmaking by the Iranian regime, including the one cited in the 2007 NIE -- the regime's apparent decision to suspend its nuclear "weaponization" research in 2003 following the U.S. invasion of Iraq. However, other Iranian actions seem unrestricted from cost-benefit considerations. Constructivist theorists have a wholly different view on Iranian decision making. This view maintains that Rationalist theories simply recognize the Islamic Republic of Iran as an interest based, objective oriented actor that only pursues material and selfish interest. ‘From the rationalist viewpoint, the foreign policy of states considered as the result of cost-benefit and means-ends analysis aims at maximizing security and power in international relations, whereas it is not possible to explain the Islamic Republic of Iran's foreign policy just based on cost-benefit analysis and materialistic objectives.’ Iran is not looking to implementing its interests in terms of low-cost options and instruments. Rationalist theory provides the supposition that due to the fact actors are power –seeking, security-seeking , or influence seeking actors, they self-regarding actors as opposed to functionalist actors who aim to ‘maximize or guarantee their situations in International Relations’. As Kenneth Waltz –a leading neorealist scholar-argues, in an anarchical world, self-help is the principle of action in world politics and most obvious and effective way to ensure national security. From the rationalist perspective "the reason for states to have selfish identities and interests is a structural requirement and they are imposed on states by the structure, and thus exogenous to state interaction." From this perspective, in the global anarchic system, states exhibit similar behaviour because anarchy imposes on actors particular rules, which drive them to behave alike. The foreign policy of states is ‘subordinated to change in [the] international distribution of power. Hence, they ignore the effect of domestic variables in determining states' foreign policy priorities.’ As a consequence, when looking at Iran’s foreign policy one cannot dismiss that Iran’s ideological interest has outweighed the impact of national interest. This is where the Rational Actor Theory cannot provide a totally comprehensive explanation of Iranian political behaviour. To understand such behaviour, a constructivist level of analysis would be arguably more effective. This is such, as the foreign policy of Iran has been contingent since its Islamic Revolution. As a consequence Iran’s Islamic superiority aims shape foreign policy decisions: ‘To grasp Iran’s ambitions and foreign policy, one must first understand the Islamic Republic’s religious ideology. The Iranian regime believes that the right religion for humanity is Islam, and the right sect of Islam is Shi’ism. An Iranian’s religious and national duty is to restore Shi’ism to its rightful position of leadership.’
This shows that Iran's foreign policy has been more consistent with ideological interest than national ones. Ideological policy has imposed too many costs on the country's national interests and increased its regional and international challenges to be deemed as a rational course of decision making. Hence, to understand Iranian foreign behaviour, one should try to understand the ideological and normative characteristics of the country’s foreign policy.
As the world’s second largest exporter of oil, and having undoubtedly the largest population and population density in the geographical Middle East, Iran simply cannot be overlooked. ‘Iran's geopolitical position at the crossroads of the Middle East, the Gulf Region, the Caucasus and Central Asia has ensured the country’s status as a key actor historically as well as in modern times, and both regionally and internationally.’ For the same reasons, Iran is deeply dependent on its foreign relations. Rationality is, as a consequence, implemented to maintain relations in some situations. Conversely to what extent one can conclude that Iran is indeed a rational actor is clouded by lack of knowledge and poor understanding in the international sphere of how the regime regards its interests; what it perceives as costly and beneficial, what information is available to its leader, and therefore what it would consider the best decision in a given circumstance. One of the main indistinct aspects of the regime, and one which also to an extent defines how rational the state is as an actor is how much the regime bases policy on ideology. Though this is a debate scholars hotly quarrel over, it is important to understand ultimately how Iran sees her interests. And of course, even otherwise rational actors are prone to the occasional, and sometimes very consequential, irrational decision. Moreover, in an authoritarian state with an aging and increasingly isolated leader, this risk of irrationality and erratic decisions increases considerably.
Bibliography
Fredrik Dahl Iran has expanded sensitive nuclear work: U.N. agency: - Accessed 27/2/2012
Graham T. Allison and Morton H. Halperin Bureaucratic Politics: A Paradigm and Some Policy Implications World Politics , Vol. 24, Supplement: Theory and Policy in International Relations (Spring, 1972), pp. 40-79
Slantchev, Branislav L. Introduction to International Relations Lecture 3: The Rational Actor Model (April 2005)
I - www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf - United States - Accessed 29/2/2012
Robert A. Isaak The Individual in International Politics: Solving the Level-of-Analysis Problem Polity , Vol. 7, No. 2 (Winter, 1974), pp. 264-276
Madhi, M N PhD A Holistic Constructivist approach to Iran’s Foreign Policy International Journal of Business and Social Science Vol. 2 No. 4; March 2011
Snidal, Duncan, Reus-Smit Christian; The Oxford Handbook of International Relations Joel Quirk Historical Methods : Rational Action, Materialism and Functionalism: Print publication date: 2008 Oxford University Press 2009 ch13 p 223
Snidal Duncan, Reus-Smit, Christian; The Oxford Handbook of international Relations Ian Hurd Constructivism and State-Centrism Print Publication Date 2008 Oxford University Press 2009 ch.17 p307
Rahjee, B Deciphering Iran: The Political Evolution of the Islamic Republic and Foreign Policy After September 11 Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 24:1 (2004)
Katrine Barnekow RasmussenThe Foreign Policy of Iran : Ideology and pragmatism in the Islamic Republic Katrine (2009)
Ideology and Pragmatism in Iran's Foreign Policy
R. K. Ramazani Middle East Journal , Vol. 58, No. 4 (Autumn, 2004), pp. 549-559
Media Dossier Sources
Iran has expanded sensitive nuclear work: U.N. agency – Freidrik Dahl
UN nuclear inspectors declare Iran mission a disappointment:
International Atomic Energy Agency team blocked by authorities in Tehran from visiting suspect site Julian Borger, diplomatic editor, The Guardian –
Iran’s nuclear goals are ideological
Editorial: Talk tough, but talk with Iran
Iran working on an advanced nuclear warhead Iran nuclear report: IAEA claims Tehran working on advanced warhead
Graham T. Allison and Morton H. Halperin Bureaucratic Politics: A Paradigm and Some Policy ImplicationsWorld Politics , Vol. 24, Supplement: Theory and Policy in International Relations (Spring, 1972), pp. 40-79
Slantchev, Branislav L. Introduction to International Relations Lecture 3: The Rational Actor Model (April 2005)
Katrine Barnekow RasmussenThe Foreign Policy of Iran : Ideology and pragmatism in the Islamic Republic Katrine (2009)
I - www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf - United States
Fredrik Dahl Iran has expanded sensitive nuclear work: U.N. agency: - Accessed 27/2/2012
Robert A. Isaak The Individual in International Politics: Solving the Level-of-Analysis Problem Polity , Vol. 7, No. 2 (Winter, 1974), pp. 264-276
Singh, M Is Iran Rational?
Madhi, M N PhD A Holistic Constructivist approach to Iran’s Foreign Policy International Journal of Business and Social Science Vol. 2 No. 4; March 2011 p279
Madhi, M N PhD A Holistic Constructivist approach to Iran’s Foreign Policy International Journal of Business and Social Science Vol. 2 No. 4; March 2011 p280
Kenneth N. Waltz, "The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory," Journal of Interdisciplinary History18, .no. 4 (spring, 1988): 624.
Rahjee, B Deciphering Iran: The Political Evolution of the Islamic Republic and Foreign Policy After September 11 Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 24:1 (2004)
Katrine Barnekow RasmussenThe Foreign Policy of Iran : Ideology and pragmatism in the Islamic Republic Katrine (2009)