Developing a Dynamic Political Strategy for I.R.I’s International Interactions for Economic Development

Document Type : Original Article


1 International Relations, Human Sciences, Tarbiat Modares, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Prof., International Relations, Human Sciences, Tarbiat Modares, Tehran, Iran

3 Professor, Geography and Rural Planning, Human Sciences, Tarbiat Modares, Tehran, Iran

4 Assistant Prof., Department of International Relations, Faculty Human Sciences, University of Tarbiat Modares, Tehran, Iran


Extended Abstract
Throughout its progressive path towards sustainable development and due to the dynamics of the international system, development has experienced several up and downs in different countries, gradually, to reach the era of modern technologies, at the verge of which global economics, politics and communications have been emerged and economic development placed at the focal center of development. The result of series of studies focused on economic development, its methods and theories in different countries led to the strengthening the belief in the increasing role of international interactions for economic development. Eventually, at present, most countries’ vision or policy of economic development is focused on improving the country’s international interactions considering the effects on economic development. Given the role of international interactions in economic development and in view of the 20-year vision of the country, which places the Islamic Republic at the position of regional power of Southwest Asia in 1404, this study intends to present a political strategy to guide the international interactions of the I.R.I in line with economic development.   
   In order to provide the I.R.I with a dynamic political strategy for international interactions in line with economic development as the main question of this study, the research method was based on post-positivism applying comparative as well as survey research approach. An in other words, descriptive-analytical method was used based on a combined (quantitative-qualitative) approach and the theoretical framework is based on dynamic policy making and constructive power. Data was collected through documentary and library studies. Then, based on frequency of indicators, a questionnaire was concluded and distributed among sample society, comprised of economic and political elites and theorists. Accordingly, SPSS means of examinations (regression analysis and path analysis) was applied to examine the collected data (primary and secondary) and the proposed model of political strategy for I.R.I. was presented and approved by the sample society.
 The research findings comprised of two parts: descriptive and statistic findings which are presented as follows:
1. Successful economically-developed countries follow a dynamic political strategy in their international interactions in which they pay attention to economic indicators such as FDI as well as foreign policy indicators such as avoiding international sanctions.
2. As per secondary and primary data, nine main indicators of “economic development”, “effective economic indicators in international interactions”, “international interactions”, “dynamic policy- making”,  “dynamic policy- making in international interactions for economic development”, “constructive regional and international interaction”, “understanding the functioning structure of international economy”, “compliance with international standards”,  “national interests” and their sub-indicators (72) were developed and their authenticity as well as applicability in Iranian society were examined and approved through primary data collected from the sample society.
3. Economic and foreign policy indicators such as export development, transparency, etc., are in weak position in I.R.I.
4. Iran needs a comprehensive and dynamic strategy to operationalize the 1404 vision and to increase in its influence in the regional and international system
Having reviewed the I.R.I. strategies within past decades, it’s been concluded that Iran is favoring potential features of regional power. Also approval of 1404 vision shows that Iranian political leaders and elites are concerned about constructive international and regional interactions and role of such interactions in economic development, however, economic as well as foreign policy indicators has been placed in weak position in I.R.I. which means that 1404 vision is a very broad and general policy. In order to its operationalization, the I.R.I. needs a transparent and dynamic strategy for conducting international interactions. A dynamic political strategy which will improve features of constructive regional power of I.R.I and increase in its influence while mitigating the regional tensions and improving economic interactions in the region and international society.
According to the hypothesis of this study, I.R.I strategy for international interaction should follow a dynamic policy-making strategy based on four main indicators of “constructive regional and international interaction”, “understanding the functioning structure of international economy”, “compliance with international standards”, within “national interests” which will eventually improve the position of economic and foreign policy indicators of I.R.I and lead the I.R.I. to build the features of constructive regional powers.


  1. Albright, M. K. (1999). United States Strategic Plan For International Affairs. Washington.
  2. Ashtariyan, K.(1997). Policy Sciences and Its Achievements for Iran. Law and Political Science, 37 (1063), 159-170.[In Persian]
  3. Barati, R. & Shirkhani M.A. (2013). Pragmatic Foreign Policy and Economic Development (Case Study: China from 1978-2010), Strategic Studies of Public Policy, 4(12), 133-164.[In Persian]
  4. Bayne, N. & Woolcock, S. (2009). The New Economic Diplomacy: Decision-Making and Negotiation in International Economic Relations. Translator: Mohammad Hassan Sheikholeslami, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tehran.[In Persian]
  5. Birkland, T. A. (2015). An Introduction to the Policy Process Theories, Concepts, and Models of Public Policy Making. New York‏: Routledge.
  6. B. Shoraka, H.R., Jafari, A., & Kavianifar, M. (2008). Malaysia’s 2020 Vision, Center for Strategic Research, Tehran.[In Persian]
  7. B. Shoraka, H.R. & Jafari, A. (2009). Saudi Arabia’s 2025 Vision, Center for Strategic Research, Tehran. [In Persian]
  8. Dickson, A. (2008). Development and international relations, translator: Hossein Pourahmadi, Institute for Strategic Studies.[In Persian]
  9. Flemes, D. (2007). Conceptualising Regional Power in International Relations : Lessons from the South African Case Daniel Flemes. In GIGA Research Programme: Power, Violence and Security. Hamburg.
  10. Hallsworth, M., Parker, S., & Rutter, J. (2011). Policy Making in the Real World. In Institute for Government.
  11. Houshisadat, S.M. (2015). Economics and Foreign Policy in the Islamic Republic of Iran; Synergy or Conflict (Emphasizing on Explaining the Position of Foreign Policy in the Commercial and Economic Strategy of the Islamic Republic of Iran), Islamic Parliament Research Center Of I.R.I. Tehran.[In Persian]
  12. Institute for Trade Studies and Research, ministry of Industry, mine and trade. (2004). National Conference of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) (Opportunities and Challenges). Tehran.[In Persian]
  13. Jahangiri, S. & Saei, A. (2018). The role of foreign policy in China's economic development and global emergence, World Politics, 7(3) 25, 183-213, DOI: 10.22124 / wp.2018.3233.[In Persian]
  14. Lake, D. A. (2009). Regional hierarchy: authority and local international order. 35–58.
  15. Malekmohammadi, H.R. (2016). On Laswell's shoulders to the border of borderless in policy, Law and Political Science, 71, 301-309.[In Persian]
  16. Mont, R.J. Almond, G.A., & Paul Jr., (2002). A Theoretical Framework for Comparative Policy Review, translator: Alireza Tayeb, Management and planning studies, Tehran.[In Persian]
  17. Mossalanejad, A. (2016). Internal Cohesion Policy Making in Strategic Area of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Geopolitics Quarterly, 12(4), Summer 2016. 48-72. [In Persian]
  18. Mossalanejad, A. (2017). Economic policymaking on sanctions control throughout the process of nuclear diplomacy, politic Quarterly, 15(47) 3 791-813, DOI: 10.22059/jpq.2017.62865.[In Persian]
  19. Motevaseli, M. (1995). An overview of the perspectives, theories and policies of economic development, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tehran.[In Persian]
  20. Mousavi Shafaie, S.M. (2010). Development-Oriented Approach to Iranian Foreign Policy; Necessities and Challenges, 40(2), 319-338.[In Persian]
  21. Nolte, D. (2007). How to Compare Regional Powers: Analytical Concepts and Research Topics. In GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg.
  22. Nye, B. J. S. (2006). Soft Power, Hard Power and Leadership. Leadership, 1–23.
  23. Pashapoor, Hojatollah. (2018). The Causes of South West Asia Tensions and thePresence of World Powers in the Region; with Emphasis on Geopolitics of Energy. Geopolitics Quarterly, Volume: 13, No 4, Winter 2018.
  24. Pearce, J. (2013). Power and the twenty-first century activist: From the neighbourhood to the square. Development and Change, 44(3), 639–663.
  25. Pedersen, T. (2002). Cooperative hegemony : power , ideas and institutions in regional integration. 677–696.
  26. Ramesh, M., Howlett, H., & Pearl A. (2011). Studying General Policy. Translator: Abbas Monavariyan &  Ebrahim Golshan, Tehran: Administration Management Training Center.[In Persian]
  27. Rezaei, M. (2009). Southwest Asia Region, International Peace Studies Centre (IPSC), Retrieved from 28.03.2018.[In Persian]
  28. Rosenau, J. (2009). Political Science in the Minimized World In Foreign Policy Making in Interdependence of World by James Barber & Michael Smith, translator: Hassan Seifzadeh, Ghoomes, Tehran. 208-222.[In Persian]
  29. Samiee Esfahani, A. & Amirbek, A. (2011). Iran's regional power and external challenges, Politics, 41(4), 97-118.[In Persian]
  30. Schiavon, J. A., & Domínguez, D. (2016). Mexico , Indonesia , South Korea , Turkey , and Australia ( MIKTA ): Middle , Regional , and Constructive Powers Providing Global Governance. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 3(3), 495–504.
  31. Shamiri Shekofti, A. & Shahandeh, B. (2018). Explanation of the Position of Smart Power in China's Foreign Policy, Geopolitics Quarterly, 14 (3), 31-62.[In Persian]
  32. Steel Analytical News. (2018). Complete Economic Recession., 24.03.2019.[In Persian]
  33. Taslimi, M. S. (2011). The Process Analysis of Policy and Decision Making, Samt, Tehran.[In Persian]
  34. Vaezi, M., Jannati, A. & Karbasian, M. (2014). Foreign policy Strategy for development of Iran Economic position in new International Status, Tehran.[In Persian]
  35. Voice of Iran News Agency (cited from (2018)., 20.05.1397.[In Persian]
Volume 16, Issue 58
July 2020
Pages 7-31
  • Receive Date: 06 March 2019
  • Revise Date: 06 September 2019
  • Accept Date: 18 September 2019
  • First Publish Date: 21 June 2020