Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/dsp010v838382d
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorChyba, Christopher
dc.contributor.authorToivanen, Henrietta
dc.contributor.otherPublic and International Affairs Department
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-06T20:23:39Z-
dc.date.created2023-01-01
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.urihttp://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/dsp010v838382d-
dc.description.abstractThe negotiations towards the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the landmark nuclear agreement signed in July 2015 between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the P5+1 (the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Russia, China, and Germany), can be examined as a case of coercive diplomacy. More specifically, it is a case of coercive counterproliferation, whereby a coalition of international partners attempted to convince Iran to restrain its nuclear program by means of positive and negative inducements. This dissertation studies these efforts of coercion from the perspective of the target state, inquiring why and how the specific contours of Iran’s internal political topography influenced its responses during the more than decade of efforts that culminated in the JCPOA in 2015. Using Robert Putnam’s two-level games as a theoretical framework, the research traces the Iranian domestic political discourse to show how factional divisions, institutional power, and collective narratives contributed to how international coercive and persuasive efforts reverberated in the Iranian domestic political landscape. These intervening variables mediated whether a domestic consensus came together or whether the political landscape was further polarized, with these outcomes shaping Iran’s negotiation positions in different ways. The research shows how the nuclear dispute reflected and fueled deeper debates in Iran about its role in the international system and the region, its fluctuating state of isolation after the revolution and the vacillating desire to change this situation, and the conundrum between modernity and conservatism that continues to divide political forces in Tehran. The dissertation illuminates how significant barriers to resolving the nuclear dispute were overcome as a result of the interplay of external pressures and internal changes in the Iranian political landscape, but also sheds light on how the international coercive campaign often backfired at the domestic level in Iran. The findings provide insights for international policymakers when designing future engagement policies and broader strategies vis-à-vis Iran, not only related to Iran’s nuclear program, but also other efforts in multilateral and regional diplomacy involving the country.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPrinceton, NJ : Princeton University
dc.subjectCoercive diplomacy
dc.subjectIran
dc.subjectSanctions
dc.subjectTwo-level games
dc.subject.classificationPublic policy
dc.subject.classificationInternational relations
dc.subject.classificationPolitical science
dc.titleTaking Perspective on Tehran: The Domestic Reverberations of Coercive Diplomacy Against Iran
dc.typeAcademic dissertations (Ph.D.)
pu.embargo.lift2025-06-14-
pu.embargo.terms2025-06-14
pu.date.classyear2023
pu.departmentPublic and International Affairs
Appears in Collections:Public and International Affairs

Files in This Item:
This content is embargoed until 2025-06-14. For questions about theses and dissertations, please contact the Mudd Manuscript Library. For questions about research datasets, as well as other inquiries, please contact the DataSpace curators.


Items in Dataspace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.