The Islamic Republic of Iran - Assignment Example

Insert The country that has been chosen as having principles that that are opposed to liberalism is The Islamic Republic of Iran, commonly known as Iran [or Persia]. As the second-largest country in the Middle East, Iran is surrounded to the east by Armenia, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Russia, the Persian Gulf and the Coast of Oman on the south and Iraq in the west. The government is a unitary presidential system with Hassan Rouhani serving as head of the executive. At the façade, Iran appears to have the vestiges of a liberal democracy, yet a closer look at Iran’s affairs shows otherwise.

On the contrary, a close scrutiny reveals Iran as a theocracy and a dictatorship. As an Islamic theocracy, Iran is governed under its 1979 Constitution which is Islamo-centric and enshrines a place for the supreme leader who serves as the head of state and is appointed for posterity by an Islamic religious body known as the Assembly of Experts. The supreme leader presides over the judiciary and the military and also appoints members of the Expediency Discernment Council and the Guardian Council.

Recommendations On How Liberal Democracies Should Approach International Relations With This Ideological Rival The first option, [using a military threat or action] is advantageous because it may bring about instant results. Nevertheless, it is likely to heighten anti-Americanism and elicit international backlash. The second option [the use of military force] may also herald instant results but this will go against the US’ resolve to inject mutual respect in its international relations and diplomacy (Tarock, 150).

The third option, the use of economic pressure [sanctions, embargoes and boycotts] may pose a setback to the US since Russia will easily attempt to seal in the gap left by the US, with an attempt to supplant the US in Middle East affairs and politics. The fourth option [arming an internal opposition] is advantageous in that the US will be fighting a proxy war and will therefore sustain less collateral damage. However, it is unsuitable because it will embolden dictatorial tendencies, at the hands of a regime that will use the accusation that the US does not respect Iran’s sovereignty as boogeyman.

The sixth and final option [taking the ignorance path] has no advantage at all since it assumes a danger that is brewing: assuming a problem only causes the problem to fester. As a superpower, the United States cannot ignore the problem and threat in Iran (Tarock, 162). Recommendations The best way for liberal democracies such as the United States and Britain is by taking the route provided in the fifth option. In this light, liberal democracies can engage with a country opposed to liberalism such as Iran is by engaging and compromising.

It should be accepted that liberalism will not be entrenched in Islam overnight and therefore, there should be a positive engagement with the Iranian government or group and by exploiting economic, political and socio-cultural avenues to bring about socio-economic change. The fact that the US has been able to use the UN and the Breton Woods institutions [World Bank and International Monetary Funds] attest to engage governments and groups to their advantage. The vilification of the US by Arab countries which have accused the US of interfering with Islamic countries Works Cited Tarock, Adam.

“US-Iran Relations: Heading for Confrontation?” Third World Quarterly, 17.1 (2006): 149 – 167. Print