Trump and the Iran Deal as Viewed from the Constructivist Perspective
The Constructivist school of International Relations provides observers with an interesting explanation for why Trump pulled out of the Iran deal and allows one to better understand the weaponized soft power messages that he’s trying to propagate around the world by doing so.
Constructivism is perhaps the most controversial of the three main theories of International Relations because it’s inherently subjective and deals with images, perceptions, and symbolism, all of which are constantly changing, but it’s nevertheless surprisingly effective in analyzing the foreign policy of President Trump, especially in regards to his decision to pull out of the nuclear deal with Iran. Just like the eternal question about the “chicken and the egg”, it’s impossible to know which came first, and whether Trump first believed the following narratives that guide his behavior or if he also had a hand in crafting them himself, given that he’s a master at perception management and has unparalleled global influence over prevailing narratives.
It should therefore be assumed that he simultaneously believes the same narratives that he himself contributes to and shapes into more lethal information weapons, and that he’s doing so irrespective of objective reality in order to create his own version of events that he expects the rest of the world to believe. There are veritable geopolitical reasons that are driving his behavior, such as his desire to weaken Iran at the behest of his country’s powerfully influential “Israeli” allies and consequently make it easier for them to “manage” the Mideast through their infamous Yinon Plan of dividing and ruling the region, but the focus of this concise analysis is the informational component of this asymmetrical offensive against Iran.
From the Constructivist standpoint, here are the perceptions that simultaneously influence Trump’s behavior and are also the same messages that he’s working so hard to propagate around the world:
The Iran Deal Was Against American Geopolitical Interests And Negotiated By His Corrupt Predecessor
Trump blames the Obama Administration for “selling out” American geopolitical interests by being “soft” on Iran in order to selfishly clinch a legacy-defining agreement.
Iran Used Some Of The Released Funds To Aid Its Regional Allies
The President believes that his predecessor knew that the money he was releasing to Iran would be used to fund governments (Damascus) and groups (Hezbollah, Houthis) opposed to American interests.
The Money That Iran Was Given Should Have Been Reinvested By The Government Into Its People
Trump doesn’t sincerely care about the welfare of Iran’s citizens but wants to provoke domestic unrest by framing Tehran’s post-deal support of its allies as being at the expense of its own citizens’ interests.
Iran Cheated The Entire Time And Lied To The World
Even though no incontrovertible evidence has yet to be procured in proving this bold assertion, Trump wants the world to believe that Iran lied to them and was secretly reneging on the deal this entire time.
The World Must Unite Against Iran To “Teach It A Lesson”
All of the abovementioned narratives contribute to the conclusion that Trump wants the world to unite against Iran in order to “teach it a lesson” through the reimposition of a much harsher sanctions regime.
Regime Change Is The Only “Acceptable” Outcome
Trump and his new neoconservative allies (Bolton and Pompeo) haven’t made it a secret that they believe that the only “acceptable” outcome to “secure” the region is to carry out regime change in Iran.