Understanding the Iran Deal from a Realist Perspective in International Relations

The recent historic deal between the United States and Iran regarding Iran's nuclear program can be understood through the lens of Realism in International Relations (IR). From this perspective, the deal can be examined as a pragmatic negotiation, reflecting the enduring nature of state rivalry and the pursuit of national interests without the assumption of trust or friendship between adversaries.

Realism: A Cynical but Practical Viewpoint

Seen through the realist paradigm, Iran and the United States will more likely find themselves in conflict rather than in a perpetual state of peace. Realism posits that states act in their own self-interest, driven by power and security concerns, and that no deep-seated friendship will emerge between rival states. Thus, the idea that the US and Iran can form a lasting peace is seen as na?ve and unrealistic. This worldview suggests that any diplomatic efforts, such as the nuclear deal, are motivated by the need for short-term stability and security, rather than by an optimistic vision of shared prosperity.

The Lack of Trust and Reciprocal Friendship

Despite the recent deal, the underlying tensions between the US and Iran persist. Almost everyone in the US decision-making circle understands this truth, which has shaped their policy moves. The US has no intention of considering peace with Iran a plausible outcome. One key reason for this is the significant loss of credibility and public support experienced after the 2003 Iraq War. A full-scale military occupation of Iran, while theoretically possible, could be counter-productive and risky. Instead, the US seems to aim for a managed conflict to prevent direct engagement that could escalate into a costly and extended war.

The Perception of Iran: A Complex Reality

Donald Trump's characterization of diplomats as "babies" and "naive" when it comes to dealing with Iran reflects a broader perception within the US political sphere. From a realist perspective, Iran is viewed as an intrinsic threat due to its regional influence and alliances. Key allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel are deeply concerned about Iran's role. For example, Iran's support for Hezbollah and the potential of fomenting unrest among the Shia population in Saudi Arabia, which includes many key oil-producing regions, poses a significant concern. This fear translates into a cautious approach to any negotiations or agreements, as any over extension could be seen as reward for a state that is seen as a long-term threat.

The Strategic Benefits of the Iran Deal for the US

Despite the negative outlook, the US has strategic reasons to support the Iran deal. Historically, the US has shown a consistent effort to control and limit the expansion of nuclear capabilities among other countries. By integrating Iran into the global system, the US hopes to mitigate potential threats that could arise from a disorderly transition of power or regional instability. Additionally, Iran's influence in countries like Afghanistan and Syria offers the potential for more direct or indirect involvement in regional affairs. This could help the US indirectly influence events without direct military intervention.

Challenges and Counterarguments

While there are strategic benefits, the realist perspective also acknowledges the potential drawbacks. The decades-long alliance between the US and its Middle Eastern allies, particularly Saudi Arabia and Israel, means that any perceived concessions to Iran could be viewed as undermining these relationships. These actors hold significant sway in shaping US foreign policy in the region, and any move that appears to favor Iran could be seen as detrimental to broader US strategic interests.

In conclusion, the Iran deal, seen through the realist lens, is a complex and pragmatic agreement rooted in the inherent distrust and rivalry between states. While it offers potential benefits, such as stability and strategic influence, it also comes with risks and challenges that must be carefully managed.

Keywords: realism, Iran deal, US foreign policy