 |
| Volume XIV, Summer 2007, Number 2 |
| |
ABSTRACT
The New Aggressiveness in Iran’s Foreign Policy
|
| |
| Mark Gasiorowski |
| |
Dr. Gasiorowski is a professor of political science and director of the International Studies Program at Louisiana State University.
Iran’s foreign policy has displayed a new aggressiveness in recent years, causing great concern in Washington and European capitals and among many of Iran’s neighbors. The biggest concern has focused on Iran’s nuclear program, which is widely believed to be aimed at producing nuclear weapons. Iran’s actions in Iraq also have produced growing concern, not only for the United States and Britain, who accuse Iran of supporting attacks against their armed forces, but also for Saudi Arabia and other nearby countries, who fear Shia dominance and deeper sectarian violence in Iraq. Together with Iran’s longstanding support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and radical Palestinian factions, these actions have led many to believe that Iran is seeking regional hegemony.
Concern about Iran’s newly aggressive foreign policy has sharply increased regional tensions. U.S. officials have implicitly threatened to use force to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, and in late 2006 and early 2007 they arrested several Iranian officials in Iraq and moved a second aircraft-carrier battle group into the Persian Gulf. Israel also has threatened to attack Iran. Officials in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries have warned of an emerging “Shia crescent” stretching from Iran through Iraq into Lebanon and have issued veiled threats that they might support Sunnis against Shia in Iraq if Iran does not back down. Some observers have speculated about the possibility of an alliance between moderate Arab states and Israel, Turkey and the United States against Iran. Indeed, many now believe that a military confrontation between the United States and Iran is likely, perhaps even inevitable.
This paper evaluates the new aggressiveness in Iran’s foreign policy, examining how extensive it has been and why it has occurred. It concludes with a discussion of the possible consequences of this new aggressiveness and appropriate U.S. responses. |
| |
|
