How Identity Affects Iran-European Union Relations (2003-2020)

Document Type : Original Article from Result of Thesis

Authors

1 PhD Student of International Relations, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Professor of Department of International Relations, Faculty of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SIR)

3 Head of Department of Poltical Science of Gilan University

4 Assistant Prof. at Department of Political Science and International Relations, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

After the Iranian Islamic Revolution, the Islamic Revolution Discourse and the resulting system transformed the Iranian domestic and foreign policies under the influence of cultural and normative elements, values, and identity. Based on an Islamic-revolutionary identity, the Islamic Revolution Discourse opposes the West-oriented discourse of Liberalism-Secularism. The West and European powers have always had eyes on Iran because of its geo-strategic and geo-political position. The Iran-European Union (EU) relations have gone through ups and downs because of their differing identities and outlooks on issues; identity gaps and contradictions have damaged the relations and posed a number of threats to the bilateral ties. In different periods, the Islamic Revolution Discourse has made the Iran-EU relations to diverge. This study intends to answer the question that how identity has affected the Iran-EU ties. The results showed that the ideology of the Islamic Revolution Discourse, which is based on religious values and the Islamic Civilization revival, is at odds with EU’s Liberalistic-Secularistic identity breeding different attitudes toward issues such as human rights, terrorism, etc. Therefore, this study sought to analyze the identity of Iran and EU within the framework of Laclau and Mouffe’s Theory of Discourse and Hegemony using discourse analysis research method.

Highlights

Introduction

Despite their long history, the relations of Iran with European countries have witnessed ups and downs in the past four decades. The 1978-1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran reintroduced Islam into the personal and social lives of Muslims, dazzling the world with different labels such as Islam Restoration/Resurrection, Islam Revival, and Political Islam. The political relations between Iran and the European Union (EU) stem from their differing identities in regard to their foreign policies. Declining the Western stance toward Islam, Iran dissociated with the US and showed a gradual, cautious inclination toward Europe even though it had already adopted the ‘Neither East nor West, policy. As a result, Iran, like European countries, has been inclined to peaceful, friendly relations. On one hand, Iran wishes to use the EU’s power in the international arena to its advantage, attract EU investors, avail itself of the EU’s state-of-the-art technologies, and use the EU’s political and economic power to stand against the US. EU, on the other hand, has tried to deepen its political relations with Tehran/Iran in order to expand economic and energy relations in the Middle East, invest in Iran, broaden its influence in the Middle East, help to establish peace in this region using the Islamic Republic of Iran’s (IRI) political sway, counter terrorism, prevent the development of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), establish a multilateral order system in the Middle East and the world, and make a strong international presence alongside the US. Changing the ruling ideology in Iran and the EU’s foreign policy based on the Maastricht Treaty and the resulting discursive identity contradictions set the Islamic Revolutionary Identity against the Liberal-Secular Identity, opening up regional and superregional/global gaps between Iran and EU. These contradictions caused disagreements in relation to Iran Nuclear Deal, human rights, terrorism issues, sanctions against IRI, etc. Consequently, the Iran-EU relations failed to develop and bear fruit. In other words, the Iran-EU relations have been mostly strained. 

 

Research Method

this study sought to analyze the identity of Iran and EU within the framework of Laclau and Mouffe’s Theory of Discourse and Hegemony using discourse analysis research method.

 

 

Findings

In the post-Iranian Revolution era, the spiritualistic approach of IRI transformed political, social, economic, and cultural spheres. Spiritual constructs and intersubjectivity bolstered the Iranian identity whose main component is a different approach to the relations with the West according to the Revolution’s values and ideals. Major changes in the political identity of Iran after the Islamic Revolution and concentration on the Islamic Ideology against the Western Liberal-Secular Ideology have created substantial identity and conceptual gaps/cleavages between Iran and EU, setting their identity and ideology foundations against each other.

 

 

A close examination of Iran’s and EU’s strategy and foreign policies in the recent forty years reveals that their ties cannot be explained within the two paradigms of neo-realism and discourse analysis. Islamic Revolution’s identity includes struggle for independence, Islamic identity supremacy over one’s fate, and elimination of the influence of foreign powers. The Islamic Revolution Discourse has impacted the Western states in foreign relations. Therefore, identity elements are among the determining factors in establishing relations and ties between Iran and EU in the post-Revolution era. The Islamic Revolution Discourse has been established on the basis of the ‘Neither East nor West’ policy through the revival of political Islam and consideration of Islamic and religious values, standards, and models, which are different from those of the Wester Liberal ideology. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the end of bipolarism, EU continued its relations with Iran in a new format and, at the same time, adjusted to the new state of affairs in the international arena. A systematic consideration of the Iran-EU relations in different periods displays the effects of structure on the international environment and ideological issues. Threat and benefit constitute the two main feature of the international politics, and lay the foundations for organized cooperative acts among the actors of international politics. In addition to identity elements, external factors such as the US policies in relation to the Iran-EU relations also deserve notice in this process. In these ties, the benefits of EU have always been secured through the adoption of the US strategy, which, in different periods, severed the bilateral relations and posed challenges to human rights, terrorism issues, the nuclear deal, etc. causing the Iran-EU relations to diverge (from the outset of the Revolutions).

 

Results

Considering the above remarks, this paper used desk and online research methods to provide an answer to the following question within the framework of Laclau and Moufe’s Theory of Discourse and Hegemony: How has identity affected the Iran-EU relations? The novel contribution this paper makes is based on the fact that in the Iran-EU relations model, the effects of the US strategy on these ties merit special notice. Therefore, using a combination of the structuralism model based on Waltz’ structural realism (neo-realism) and the post-structuralism model based on Laclau and Mouffe’s Theory, it is possible to gain a clear picture of the EU’s foreign policy toward Iran.  The results (from hypothesis testing) showed that the change in Iran’s policy after the Revolution crated a negative mindset inside Europeans against Iran. EU sees the ruling ideology of the Iranian policymakers a threat to its Liberal-Secular ideology and social security. The ruling mindset in EU toward Iran has been negative and unfavorably affected their bilateral relations. Disagreements in the relations between these two actors, especially in regard to factors such as identity gaps/cleavages and the Utilitarianism approach of Europe toward the US, have posed challenges to Iran-EU ties. An analysis of the Iran-EU relations can shed light on the reasons why foreign powers intervene and sow seeds of mistrust.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Abbasi, M. (2013). The Impact of Terrorism on the Confrontation between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Iran after September 11. Rahbord Journal. 69. 41-63. (In Persian)
  2. Aghaei, D. (2006). Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran during the Eight-Year War (Looking at the Position of European Society in This Policy). Politics Journal. 73. 1-34. (In Persian)
  3. Ahmadi Lefouraki, B. (2015). European Book12: For European Parties and Currents. Tehran: Abrar Moaser, First Edition. (In Persian)
  4. Barzegar, K. (2020). U.S. and European Strategic Objectives on Iran. Foreign Policy Journal. 1(34). 37-55. (In Persian)
  5. Dehshiri, M. (2011). Conceptual and Theoretical Reflection of the Islamic Revolution of Iran in International Relations. Tehran: Mehraeen. Firs Edition. (In Persian)
  6. Dehshiri, M. Ghasemi, R. (2016). The rise of the far-right and its impact on the future of Muslims in Europe. Tehran: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs Publication. First Edition. (In Persian)
  7. Ebrahimifar, T. (2008). The New Security Order in the Persian Gulf after the Military Occupation of Iraq. Political Science Research Journal. 10. 7-36. (In Persian)
  8. Esposito, J. (2016). Political Islam, Beyond the New Threat (1) and (2). Translated by Mehdi Hojjat, Tehran: Andisheh Publications. (In Persian)
  9. Faraji Rad, A. Ghasemi, N. (2012). New Geopolitics of Europe and its Impact on Foreign Relations of the Islamic Republic of Iran (Emphasis on post-Cold War era and the formation of the European Union). Geography of The Land Journal. 9(35).19-32. (In Persian)
  10. Fredman, S. (2001). Discrimination and Human Rights. London: Oxford University Press.
  11. Haji Mina, R. (2018). Analysis in the Conflicting European-American Discourse on the JCPOA. International Relations Research Journal. 27. 215-244. (In Persian)
  12. Jürgensen, M. Phillips, L. (2010). Theory and Methodology in Discourse Analysis. Translated by Hadi Jalili, Tehran: Ney Publications. Seventh Edition.
  13. Khalozadeh, S. (2012). Obstacles and Challenges facing the Relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the European Union. World Politics. 1 (28). 187-212. (In Persian)
  14. Laclau, E. (2000). Identity and Hegemony: The Role of Universality in the Constitution of Political Logics. Advances in Applied Sociology. 5(12), 44-89.
  15. Laclau, E. (1990). New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. London: Verso.
  16. Laclau, E. Muffe, Ch. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. Scientific Research. An Academic Publisher. London: Verso.
  17. Masoud, A. Zakerian, M. (2020). Representation of The Continuation of Iran's Strategic Culture in the Construction and Foundation of Regional Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. International Studies Journal (ISJ). 66(2). 97-114. (In Persian)
  18. Moghadami, M. (2011). Lakla and Moff's Discourse Analysis Theory and Its Critique. Journal of Social Cultural Knowledge. 6. 124-91. (In Persian)
  19. Motaghi, E. (2013). Evolution of Power Balance Approach in Regional Order: Identityism against Structuralism. Journal of Strategy. 67(22). 165-192. (In Persian)
  20. Mousali, A. (2003). Images of Island in The Western world and Language of West in the Islamic World. Riyadh: ARAB-PR.
  21. Mousavi, S. Esmaeili, A. (2012). Globalization and Countries of the Islamic World: The Contexts of Convergences and Divergences. Journal of Political Studies of the Islamic World. 2(1). 73-92. (In Persian)
  22. Naghibzadeh, A. (2014). Analyzing the Roots of Islamophobia in Europe. Basirat. July 2. At: https://basirat.ir/fa/news/267689/. (In Persian)
  23. Naghibzadeh, A. (2014). Political Development. Tehran: Qhomes. First Edition. (In Persian)
  24. Paltridge, B. (2012). Discourse Analysis. Londen: Bloomsbury Discourse. Second Edition.
  25. Pourhashemi, (2001). Reproducing the new European identity. Hawzah Notices, At: https://www.hawzah.net/fa/Magazine/View/3814/3855/23539 (In Persian)
  26. Poynting, S., Mason, V. (2007). The Resistible Rise of Islamophobia. Journal of Sociology. 43(1).
  27. Qaimpanah, S. (2018). The Study of EU-Islamic Republic of Iran Relations in post-2018. Political Science Journal. 97. 203-204. (In Persian)
  28. Rahbarghazi, M. (2018). Favorable model of Iran-Europe relations. Islamtimes. December 12. At: https://www.islamtimes.org/fa/article/766244/ (In Persian)
  29. Ramzanipoor, H. (2016). Islamic human rights and its differences with Western Human Rights. Iribnews. August 4. At: https://www.iribnews.ir/fa/news/1239920 (In Persian)
  30. Sajjadpour, K. Ejtehadi, S. (2010). Western Security Attitude and Post-Cold War International Threats: A Case Study of Iran's Nuclear Program. Political Knowledge. 1(6). 25-95. (In Persian)
  31. Soltani, A. (2004). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Methodology. Political Science Journal. 28. 153-180. (In Persian)
  32. Tajik, M. (2009). The Role and Position of Islamic Revolution Discourse in International Politics. Journal of Islamic Revolution Approach. 8. 61-86. (In Persian)
  33. Tajik, M. (2009). Theoretical Foundations of Lyotard's Pluralism Democracy. Politics Journal. 49. 25-45. (In Persian)
  34. Taremi, K. Moradi, I. (2014). A Study of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Foreign Policy with the European Union in the Last Three Decades. International Relations Studies Journal. 28(7), 133-166. (In Persian)
  35. Zakerian, M. (2000). Evaluation of Khatami Foreign Policy. Vol. II. Tehran: Hamshahri. First Edition.
  36. Zakerian, M. (2018). Islamic Teaching and Human Rights, International Studies Journal (ISJ). 2(15). 1-20. (In Persian)

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics