Abstract:
This thesis employs Securitization Theory to examine the origins of current US foreign
policy towards Iran. It shows how the rational actor model in international relations
theory fails to explain the foreign policy behavior of the US towards Iran because of the
history of US Orientalist discourse vis-à-vis Iran and the influence of the Israeli lobby in
Washington. It argues that Orientalist trends found in US political and international
relations discourse towards Iran provide the rationale for the securitizing actions of the
US government in dealing with Iranian nuclear weapons. The thesis examines the
contents of US presidential addresses, Congressional hearings, the stipulations contained
within the most recent sanctions on Iran, transcripts of US Central Intelligence Agency
reports and advisory speeches, interactions between Israel and AIPAC and the US
administration and the use of loaded Orientalist and securitizing terms – such as
“threat,” “evil,” “containment,” and “existential threat to Israel,” to test the hypothesis
that US foreign policy discourse creates and responds to false threats in the Middle East
due to Israeli influence and the perpetuation of neo-Orientalist views of the Middle East.
Finally, it examines how partisanship and presidential administrations influence US
foreign policy by parsing out the major changes in discourse from the Bush to the
Obama terms.
