This thesis is an analysis of the motivations behind U.S. efforts to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapons program. It argues that U.S. actions must be viewed within a larger context; specifically it must be viewed from the perspective of the overall interests of the U.S. in the Middle East. These interests include ensuring access to Middle Eastern oil, protecting the state of Israel and eliminating security threats, to the U.S. and its allies, especially from terrorist organizations. The thesis examines U.S.-Iran’s relationship over the nuclear issues a historical context, beginning with Eisenhower Administration. It is guided by the insights derived from the realist paradigm in International Relations theory which stresses national interest, defined in terms of power as the major determinant in state behaviour. The study shows that the U.S. was quite supportive of Iran developing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes only when relations between the two states were cordial. However, since the Islamic Revolution of the late 1970s, the relationship has been marked by hostility on both sides, and importantly, by American attempts to contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions, particularly its goal of developing a nuclear weapons program, and the latter’s efforts to circumvent these. An Iran in possession of nuclear weapons is seen as a dangerous threat to Middle Eastern stability and, of course, to U.S. interests in the region.

No description available.

Iran's foreign policy is consistent and is fundamentally realist with a revolutionist vision while the means are rationalist is the central argument of this dissertation. I make use of the English Schools three traditions of realism, rationalism and revolutionism in analyzing the speeches of Iranian statesmen to identify the ways in which the dynamics of the three traditions have evolved since 1997 and what it means for interpreting the developments of Iran's foreign policy ventures. I utilize both quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis in examining the speeches of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, the presidents since 1997. The quantitative method employs a customized software generating figures that represent the recurrence of realist, rationalist and revolutionist terminologies in all the documents downloaded from the official websites of the Iranian statesmen as well as the United Nations and select news agencies and affiliates. The quantitative phase of the analysis, meanwhile, carefully examined selected statements of the supreme leader and the presidents uncovering the foreign policy argumentations and justifications, which were studied alongside foreign policy actions and classified under the three traditions. The findings suggest that Iran's foreign policy is the same as in the other states of international society – it is consistent and dynamic. It is simultaneously realist, rationalist and revolutionist with each tradition serving a specific purpose, which cannot be disentangled from the other two.