منبع تحقیق درمورد the، of، and، security

دانلود پایان نامه ارشد

arrangement in the region encompassing the eight coastal states anchored in a joint security solution against the U.S. policies. They believe such an assumption if enacted, could be the most desirable and ideal model for the regional states, especially Iran. However, in the existing regional and international circumstances, the chance for such a convergence is slim (Saeed Taeb & Khalili, 2008).
b) Second Strategic Scenario Assumption: The security structures of the Persian Gulf coastal states devised by the U.S. They believe this scenario dates back to a 1970s strategy and follows the Nixon doctrine which is based on the policy of “balance of power” and reducing U.S. military presence in the region. Such a plan could in the short-run hoard the region from the present crisis; help the US have a face-saving retreat from Iraq; and limit U.S. presence to fewer bases but they believe even such a plan has its own challenges (Saeed Taeb & Khalili, 2008).
c) Third Strategic Scenario Assumption: Forming a “security partnership arrangement” on the basis of traditional values and practices that is compatible with the people’s norms and governments across the Persian Gulf waterway, and independent of the strategic U.S. policies. If regional states reach that extent of intellectual maturity, they could constructively interact in economic cooperation and through confidence building measures, and the region could move toward convergence and establishment of a joint security system in order to reduce the existing tensions and make optimum use of the Western intellectual/technological potentials. Taeb and Khalili (2008) believe that such a scenario is the wisest strategy in the present circumstances simply because a joint security solution also has a steady tendency toward regional order and security plus fulfillment of security in different spheres and angles as its ultimate goal (Saeed Taeb & Khalili, 2008).
Marcy Agmon (1993) in a report “Post cold war U.S security strategies for the Persian Gulf” presents four representative security alternatives for the Persian Gulf: 1) Saudi defense independence; 2) U.S-Saudi security condominium; 3) all Arab defense of the Persian Gulf; 4) U.S as disengaged balancer but none of these four security alternatives invite the participation in a security pact of all members of the Persian Gulf region including Iran and Iraq but it has been asserted that the exclusion of specific regional states from Persian Gulf security arrangements would polarize the region, exacerbate tensions, and make resolution of existing disputes more difficult.
2.5 Iran’s Persian Gulf policy
Iran, with a population of over 70 million is among the largest countries in the Middle East. It possesses vast lands and extended sea borders in the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea region. Iran produces 4.2 million barrels of oil per day. It’s proven oil reserves stand at around 132.5 billion barrels (over 11percent of the world’s reserves). In addition, the country has around 27.50 billion cubic meters of natural gas [15.3percent of the world’s proven natural gas reserves] (Lotfian, 2007-08). Estimates indicate that the total volume of the world’s exploitable crude oil is about 1200.7 billion barrels. However, Iran has 138.22 billion barrels of hydrocarbon fossils that or 11.4 percent of the world’s reserves and with a production of 4.343 million barrels per day, Iran shares 5.1percent of global crude output (Simbar & Ghorbani, 2011, pp. 95-96).
Focusing on Iran’s ambitions toward the Persian Gulf shows that lack of security is a main motivation of Iran to persuade a new security system for the Persian Gulf. Iran has a deep concern about national security within a regional and international context. Security concerns of Iran include American troops near east and west borders (Iraq and Afghanistan), neighbors that are allies of America such as Turkey and Azerbaijan, nuclear neighbors that are also allies of America (India and Pakistan), Israel as an enemy that is also nuclear and problems with Arab neighbors (borders-Shi’ism). Political prestige is also another motivation for Iran to persuade a new security system for the Persian Gulf. Iran has been a great power for a long time and now it wants to reacquire its historical position. (Bahjat, 2006)
Historical and religious heritage and prestige of Iranians in the Middle East has been another motivation for Iranians to move toward a stable security system to strengthen them and protect their allies in the Middle East. Most of the Iranians are Shi’a that is the opposite of sunny in Islam. Iranians are proud of their religious heritage and they want to protect their religious identity also they want to protect Shi’a groups in other Arab countries like Hezbollah in Lebanon and Jeysholmahdi in Iraq (Brennan, 2008).
Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran has shaped her foreign policy in answer to direct threats to her security, sovereignty and internal integrity, which had been related to the ideological structure of Iran. After 9/11, the USA entered Afghanistan and Iraq and complicated the Iranian position even more. Longstanding American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan created many threats to Iran but at the same time it gave new opportunities for increasing Iran’s influence in the region and its international position. Without Iran’s will, there probably would not be any peace in those states. On the other hand, radicalized policies of the Islamic regime may result in international isolation or even in open conflict with the United States (Bojarczyk, 2008).
In an informal announcement of Iran’s decision to ensure a successful regional security system for the Persian Gulf, Saideh Lotfian (2007) believes Iran, Iraq and Yemen must be part of any security arrangement in the Persian Gulf (Lotfian, 2007-08). She believes the main pillar of Iranian policy on the Persian Gulf is based, on the regional states’ responsibility for ensuring security of this region without outside help. One barrier in the way of improving the security environment of the region is the current tension between Iran and the United States. This has also overshadowed Iran’s ties with other regional states. In sum, Iranians think of an effective regional security pact to minimize extra-regional influence of foreign countries. The strategy of the Iranian government vis-à-vis the security of this important region is based on the expansion of regional cooperation and intra-regional security-building. In this regard, there has been a remarkable growth in political exchanges and interaction at high levels between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other Persian Gulf states (Simbar & Ghorbani, 2011).
Joseph Marie and Shahdad Naghshpour (2011) at their book “Revolutionary Iran and the United States”, explain the US and Iran’s objectives toward each other. In this regard, one of main objectives of the American is deter Iran to control the Persian Gulf region: “the united states seek several objections: 1) regime change in Iran, yet short of regime change at least containment of an expansionist Iran; 2) reduce the ability of Iran to control the Persian Gulf region though military, economic and political means; and 3) reduce the ability of Iran to support terrorist organizations and organizations that are hostile to American allies”. Also in view of Naghshpour and Marie the mail goal of Iranian is limitation of the influence of the US in the Persian Gulf region: “Iran seeks: 1) to limit America influence in the region; 2) spread the Ideas of the Islamic revolution to neighboring nations, particularly nations with large Shia communities; 3) confront the US in the Persian Gulf and internationally though low level military actions and diplomatic means; 4) engage the grater Islamic world in dialogue detrimental to US interest; and 5) create bilateral economic, diplomatic and military ties with states hostile to US e.g. Venezuela and china” (St Marie & Naghshpour, 2011).
Marie and Naghshpour (2011) concluded that the conflict between Iran and US had been in motion for almost three decades and this conflict can be directly tied to domestic policies in each nation. They summarized for both Iran and US, the conflict is costly in economic terms but it can also be used politically to gain votes. They believed from the perspectives of political elites in each county this is a rational strategy and both have used the conflict for their political advantage. Indeed politicians like to have an enemy that allows them to rally voters because it is an advantageous. In sum, according to Naghshpour and Marie the real or unreal conflicts will continue between two countries and especially as they mentioned the Persian Gulf is the common point in security policies of both countries.
2.6 Conclusion
According on the literature review in this chapter the main criticism on western scholars is that their thinking about security of the Persian Gulf is according to the US and its western’s allies interests and the realities of the region has been not considered in their studies on the Persian Gulf region. As it was reviewed current studies have focused on the U.S. as the balancer of power in the Persian Gulf region that will led to penetration of US in the region, because inherent nature of balance of power policy is penetration of big powers to regions to maintain their interest and influence. So the gap between current studies by scholars and the studies that refer to today’s realities of the region that lurched from crisis to crisis is the significant reason for doing this research. Furthermore; the theory that is justified for this study can offer practical ideas on improving or replacing the current security arrangements to prepare peace and security with independence for all states of the region.
CHAPTER 3
THE EVOLUTION OF THE U.S. POLICIES TOWARDS IRAN IN THE PERSIAN GULF REGION (1979

پایان نامه
Previous Entries منبع تحقیق درمورد the، of، and، a Next Entries منبع تحقیق درمورد the، of، and، a