The relationship between ideology and political practice, with Iran as the case study

本研究将以伊朗为个案，探讨意识形态与政治实践之间的关系。更具体地说，它将评估伊朗在2005-2015年间中东政治和武装冲突方面的国际政策，包括伊拉克、叙利亚和黎巴嫩。它将调查伊朗在这一时期的政策和行动是对主流国际意识形态的挑战，还是仅仅是一种地缘战略策略。我的目标是强调意识形态层面的相关性，特别是与伊朗在中东冲突问题上的外交政策的相关性，包括伊朗与其支持的运动之间的高度意识形态亲和力。选择何种方法来确定是否可以仅从利益角度最有效地解释伊朗的政策，或者意识形态因素是否发挥了作用，对这项研究至关重要。两种不同的理论模式最初似乎适合于这项任务：一种属于现实主义或新现实主义学派，另一种结合了英国学派的历史方法，建构主义侧重于意识形态。为了评估意识形态的亲和力，第一步将是追踪21世纪伊朗官方政治意识形态的轮廓。为此，既可以使用官方文件，也可以使用知识分子的原始材料，也可以使用二手资料。最具挑战性的任务是审查伊朗支持或反对的那些政治运动的意识形态路线。由于这里审议的时期是最近的(2005-2015年)，因此不乏可用的主要资料来源，以及关于这些运动的目标和政策的第一手资料。关于历史和经验材料的范围，我将重点讨论伊朗对伊拉克、叙利亚、黎巴嫩，可能还有阿富汗的政治冲突的影响。这一选择取决于地理上的接近，因此具有战略重要性，以及这些特殊冲突的高度国际性。

This research will examine the relationship between ideology and political practice, with Iran as the case study. More specifically, it will assess Iran's international policy on political and armed conflicts in the Middle East 2005-2015, covering Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. It will investigate whether Iran's policies and actions in this period have been a challenge to the prevailing international ideology, or simply a geostrategic manoeuvre. I will aim to highlight the relevance of an ideological dimension, in particular to Iran's foreign policy on Middle Eastern conflicts, and which includes a high ideological affinity between Iran and the movements it supported.The choice of approaches for establishing whether Iran's policy can be explained most effectively in terms of interests alone , or whether ideological considerations played a role , is crucial for this research. Two different theoretical models initially appear suitable for the task: one belonging to the realist or neorealist school, with the second combining the English school's historical approach, and the constructivist focus on ideology. In order to assess ideological affinity, the first step will be to trace the contours of Iran's official political ideology in the 21st century. For this, both official documents and intellectuals' original material can be used, as well as secondary sources. The most challenging task is to examine the ideological line of those political movements Iran either supported or opposed. Since the period considered here is recent (2005-2015), there is no lack of primary sources available, along with first-hand accounts of the aims and policies of those movements. Concerning the range of historical and empirical material, I would focus on Iran's impact on the political conflicts in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and possibly Afghanistan. This choice is dictated by geographical proximity, and thus strategic importance, as well as by the highly international dimension of these particular conflicts.