Description
Role Theory, one of the several theories applied in Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA), has recently come back on the trend. Originally used in sociology, it shares many of its assumptions with Constructivism in International Relations (IR). Their basic assumption is that identity is constructed by the people, and it is not a reality which exists independently from the society, and therefore needs interpretation by the researcher.
Horizontal and Vertical Domestic Role Contestation is one of the dominant approaches to Role Theory. It provides helpful insights to the study of foreign policy. However, like other approaches to FPA, it assumes that there is one dominant Role Conception for a country at a specific period, and tries to explain all policy outcomes based on that, or a competing one which replaces it. This leads to confusing arguments by assigning contradictory policies to one Conception.
Gaskarth’s ‘Role Theory and British Foreign Policy’ is an attempt to address this confusion by providing a set of Role Orientations, Conceptions, and Performances which are applicable to British FPA. Although it is a very promising start, and I apply its proposed structure as the foundation for my theory building, it still leads to contradictory assignments between Role Performances and Role Orientations.
Through carrying out Quantitative Content Analysis on a comprehensive case study on ‘British Foreign Policy to Iran’s Nuclear Programme (2002 – 2022), and by collecting 186 debates on Iran in British Houses of Parliament in that period, I aim to propose a model explaining ‘Identity Reconstruction in British Foreign and Security Policy’, which rests on a new interpretation of ‘alter’ (explaining Role Orientations), ‘ego’ (explaining Role Conceptions), and advocated policies by the British political elites (explaining Role Performances). The diversity of actors involved in the JCPOA helps to see how the British interpret each country’s role.
