چکیده:
This paper suggests how, over time, a state like Iran could deliberately develop a number of different reputations in connection with international law and international relations. The theoretical and empirical findings confirm the hypothesis that states with a weak reputation in both international law and international relations should probably put more emphasis on reputation building for ‘resolve’ rather than for ‘compliance’ if intended to get the results in the short term. Using reputation as a causal variable to explain Iran’s status in the international arena, one could find out that reputational sanctions imposed on Iran, is actually due to its reputation for resolve and toughness in international relations. The paper not only justifies why states, as rational actors, change their dispositional behavior in security area but also provides an empirical study into the analysis of the interdisciplinary function of reputations in this area.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Reputation and Iranian Nuclear Program: 1997-2013 Hadi Dadmehr Abstract This paper suggests how, over time, a state like Iran could deliberately develop a number of different reputations in connection with international law and international relations.
Based on the resolutions adopted by the Board of Governors and the UNSC, and considering the regular reports made by the IAEA Director General to both organizations, it seems that they are seriously concerned about the implementation of the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its relevant safeguards agreement in Iran.
Why did the IAEA remain suspicious of Iran’s nuclear activity and continued passing several more resolutions against it, even though Iran decided to cooperate beyond its obligations under the NPT to the extent that it signed and implemented the Additional Protocol and Modified Code 3.
This paper argues that Iran’s behavior during Ahmadinejad could be possibly best understood as a new struggle by Iran to invest more on its reputation for resolve rather than compliance.
In this regard, the rational choice will suggest that where a state does reflect on the necessity of complying with valid global law norms, it will conclude in most cases that its medium- to long-term interests are enhanced by a reputation of being an actor in good standing in the international community and a reliable partner for international cooperation (Huth 1997: 74).
But, while Iran’s nuclear program is being regarded as a symbol of national pride by the government and public opinion, it carries a considerable value regarding reputation for resolve; the policy of sanctions and pressure seems to yield no support for such a humiliating digression among the Iranian political parties.