The Verbal Strategy of the United States in the Process of Securing Iran's Nuclear Program (2001-2021)

Foreign policy choices usually range from historical to routine decisions. Political elites may decide to start conflicts, form alliances, reach agreements, make peace with each other, establish diplomatic relations, adopt certain views on nuclear nonproliferation, or enforce sanctions against other players. This study aims to analyze the motivations behind the efforts of the United States in the verbal aspect to prevent the development of Iran's nuclear program. To this end, it tries to answer the following main question: How has the United States' verbal strategy for securitization of Iran's nuclear program evolved and why is this approach so aggressive? The research hypothesis, which is examined using the descriptive-analytical method and the doctrines of security studies in the Copenhagen School, is based on the proposition that the United States' verbal strategy has maintained its aggressive nature via exaggerating the concern that one of the aspects of Iran's access to nuclear weapons is achieving regional hegemony, with the aim of providing the US with access to the resources of the Middle East. The results of this study indicate that the leaders of the White House are trying to ensure that the US gains access to the Middle East's oil, protects Israel and annihilates security threats.