نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دکتری علوم سیاسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران.
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
Problem Statement
The national interest is one of the most widely used yet conceptually ambiguous concepts in political science and international relations, particularly in foreign policy. The multiplicity of meanings attributed to it has led some scholars to argue that the concept lacks a clearly identifiable referent. A similar ambiguity exists in contemporary Iran, where some political and intellectual elites maintain that the national interest has yet to be clearly defined.
Yet the Iranian debate differs from the broader literature in an important respect. Since the Islamic Revolution, some Iranian scholars have emphasized the government’s transnational responsibilities at the expense of its national ones. Nationalism, the absolute export of the revolution, and the Umm al-Qura doctrine represent three positions that have emerged from this debate. Thus, whereas debates elsewhere have largely been substantive debates over the nature and meaning of the national interest, in Iran they have at times become existential: the question concerns not only what the national interest is, but whether it exists at all.
This dual problem complicates the evaluation of governmental and civic actions, since no generally accepted criterion exists for determining whether such actions serve the national interest. This is particularly significant given Clinton’s characterization of the national interest as a common language of society. Developing a theory of the national interest in Iran that can provide such a criterion requires first identifying the conceptual range and patterns of reasoning through which the national interest has been constructed in the scholarly literature.
Literature Review
Islamic values and ideals have been important elements shaping the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran (Sariolghalam, 2000; Tajik, 2004; Ebrahimi, 1388; Azghandi, 2010; Gahramanpour, 1394). This has generated an extensive body of scholarship centered on the relationship between the national interest and Islamic interests, with debates over the nature of the national interest largely framed within this broader controversy. Much of this literature is normative, advocating the primacy of either the national interest or Islamic interests, or seeking to reconcile the two. At a first level, the literature can thus be divided into three broad positions: proponents of the national interest (e.g. Seifzadeh, 2001; Bashiriyeh, 2001; Moqtader, 2000); proponents of Islamic interests (e.g. Larijani, 1990; Mahmoudikia, 2023; Shojaei, 2013); and those seeking to reconcile or integrate the two (e.g. Ekhtiari Amiri et al., 2025).
Even studies that review or classify these debates have rarely moved beyond this established conceptual framework. For example, Ghobadi (1384) classifies the positions of proponents and opponents of the national interest while ultimately favoring an integrative approach that gives priority to the national interest. Ranjbar (in Kiani, 1386) goes somewhat further by examining the underlying bases of disagreement, distinguishing between religious and ideological foundations among those who prioritize Islamic interests. Yet such efforts largely remain concerned with classifying and evaluating existing positions rather than reconstructing the deeper relationships among the concepts, themes, and patterns of reasoning underlying the debate. The gap in the literature, therefore, is not simply the absence of another classification of existing positions, but the lack of a coherent account of the conceptual and argumentative spectrum of this body of scholarship.
Objective
Given the conceptual ambiguity and existential crisis of the literature on the national interest in Iran, it is necessary to begin by clarifying the scope and boundaries of this field of inquiry. More specifically, a conceptual map of the literature is needed to identify the range of concepts within which scholars have framed their discussions.
Methods
Methodologically, the research employs a scoping review because its objective is not to evaluate empirical evidence but to comprehensively map the conceptual landscape of an evolving body of scholarship. Following the methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, Persian scientific articles addressing national interest were systematically identified, screened, and selected according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selected studies were subsequently analyzed through thematic analysis in order to identify recurring concepts, interpretive patterns, and relationships among themes. In this study, thematic analysis functions not merely as a coding technique but as a method of conceptual reconstruction, through which individual themes are reorganized into higher-order analytical categories capable of revealing the implicit conceptual structure of the literature.
Findings
The findings demonstrate that the extensive yet fragmented literature on national interest in Iran can be systematically reconstructed around three conceptual domains: preconditions, objectives, and instruments.
The first domain concerns the preconditions of national interest, particularly democracy and globalization. Divergent understandings of these conditions shape different conceptions of how national interests are defined and pursued and underlie many theoretical disagreements in the Iranian literature.
The second domain concerns the objectives of national interest. The literature divides between approaches that prioritize the security, welfare, development, and prosperity of the Iranian nation-state and those that assign greater priority to the interests of the Islamic Ummah, Islamic civilization, and transnational religious responsibilities. This divergence reflects competing conceptions of political community and the purpose of political action and constitutes a distinctive feature of the Iranian literature.
The third domain concerns the instruments for pursuing national interest. Two main debates emerge: whether ideology should determine foreign-policy priorities or function as an instrument subordinate to national interest, and whether national interests are best pursued through negotiation, engagement, and accommodation or through resistance, confrontation, and deterrence. These positions reflect contrasting assumptions about international politics, power, and the relationship between idealism and pragmatism.
Conclusion
Building upon these findings, the study argues that the diverse and often disconnected debates within the Iranian literature can be reorganized into two broader paradigms. The first paradigm emphasizes high politics, ideological commitments, revolutionary ideals, and civilizational objectives, whereas the second prioritizes low politics, state-centered pragmatism, socioeconomic development, public welfare, and effective governance. From a broader philosophical perspective, these competing paradigms may also be interpreted as alternative conceptions of politics and anti-politics, insofar as they are grounded in fundamentally different assumptions concerning political community, sovereignty, legitimacy, collective identity, and the purpose of political action.
The study concludes that both the conceptual ambiguity and the ontological contestation surrounding national interest in Iran originate from deeper philosophical disagreements regarding the nature of politics, the relationship between religion and the state, the definition of political community, and the hierarchy of moral obligations. Consequently, theorizing national interest in the Iranian context requires more than conceptual clarification or definitional refinement; it necessitates sustained engagement with political philosophy and the philosophical foundations of the social sciences. The principal contribution of this study lies in the development of a three-dimensional conceptual framework consisting of the preconditions, objectives, and instruments of national interest, through which the Persian-language literature is systematically reconstructed. By establishing a bridge between scoping review and conceptual theory building, the proposed framework provides a foundation for cumulative knowledge production, theoretical development, and future comparative research on national interest in both Iranian and broader international contexts.
کلیدواژهها English
