In this piece, Nathan González Mendelejis provides an overview of the combative relationship between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. He argues that structural changes in the Middle East are forcing and will continue to force the two nations to improve their relationship. He describes routes that Iran can take to moderate its stance toward the United States and also provides a number of prescriptions for the consideration of US policymakers.
The US-Iran relations are structurally conflictual since the Islamic Revolution in 19791. The animosity is imbedded in the US-hostage crisis, freezing of Iranian assets and differing views on the security architecture of the Middle East. Despite overtures to normalize the bilateral relations from both sides, many issues impede these positive developments. Although there is convergence of interests on many areas, a few events from the past decade like regional peace process, terrorism, and most importantly, Iranian nuclear controversy continue to impact and cast shadows on the bilateral relations. The domestic politics in both countries and the US regional allies, especially, Israel and Saudi Arabia are other major challenges to their unfettered relations. However, lately the geopolitical position of Iran in the changing regional security environment, the phenomenon of ‘Islamic State’ and the agreed framework for a comprehensive nuclear deal raise the likelihood for a detente between Iran and the United States.
“Islam” in particular as well as “the MENA region” more generally continue to be research objects that are often reflected upon in the light of specific grand narratives. “Orientalism”, “Clash of Civilisations”, and the “Arab Spring” are not only indicative of the ambiguous position of “Islam” in varying discourses but also shows its particular relevance within IR due to its meaning in the global realm. Does the requirement to develop an Islamic or Middle Eastern IR theory logically follow? This paper argues that such an endeavour would rather reinforce meta-theoretical narratives and eventually perpetuate Middle Eastern exceptionalism. Instead, this paper seeks to contribute to critical IR theory which accounts for the ‘situatedness’ of meaning that shapes social practices in a particular context. This, however, poses new challenges on the complex issue of in an increasingly globalised world that harbours more and more constitutionalised structures on a global scale, in which the question of legitimacy has to be substantially addressed. Thus, the paper proceeds in three steps: First, it critically assesses predominant IR theories (tacitly) working with normative assumptions, e.g the Westphalian system, and thus producing positivistic scholarship based upon “Western principles”. Second, it will be shown that a turn to reflexive scholarship and interpretive methods in IR not only allow to better assess the diverse practices that are related to “Islam” in different contexts but also constitute the basis to critically approach the question of legitimacy. Third, the discourses during the Syrian uprising will empirically highlight the theoretical claim.
As a Middle Eastern state, Israel did not manage to take an advantage from the huge oil reserves in the Gulf area. In fact, since the birth of Israel, the Arab states have introduced embargo and restrictions on trading with Israel. However, Israel as a developed country is eagerly seeking for reliable and sustainable sources of energy. Furthermore, the Arab springs and the rise of the Islamic governments may lead to more deterioration in the mutual relationships and may abort any effort in reaching settlement. The purpose of this study is to find a solution that would lead to a greater stability in the Middle East in relation to energy disputes. Also, propose solution if taken might settle the political dispute between the Arab and Israelis. This essay will discuss briefly the historical background and the current difficulties that Israel is facing regarding energy. Governmental statements, political events and relevant literature were cited in order to reach a better understanding of this dilemma. The study finds that Israel is in a difficult situation and will have to start negotiations and possibly make concessions in order for the gulf oil flow north to Israel. Similarly with regards to the East Mediterranean reserves, if acted alone, Israel might attract violent response from the other states claiming interests therefore amicable solution is the brighter one.