فهرست مطالب dariush shahbahrami

When Obama came to power in 2008, Washington has had to reassess its foreign policy. This led to a shift in America's approach to the Middle East. One of the most important goals of changing the Obama-era approach to the Middle East was to change from unilateralism to multilateralism. In this regard, the US approach to the nuclear case, cooperation with the P5 + 1, transatlantic relations, and the adoption of a multilateral diplomatic strategy toward Iran can be seen as effects of Obama's multilateralism strategy. In fact, the main question is: what was the reason for the change in US foreign policy toward the Middle East between 2008 and 2016? In response, it can be said that the vast costs and limited benefits of the past US interventionist policy in the Middle East, shale oil economization in the US and the decline of the strategic importance of the Middle East region and US security concerns elsewhere, including in Southeast Asia, have been the causes of the shift in US strategy toward the Middle East between 2008 and 2016. But the most important signs of Obama's strategy toward Iran are: limitation of deterrence strategy against Iran, reduction in strength of multilateral sanctions and restrictions on controlling and reducing the danger of Iran.

Iran-US relations have undergone many developments during the Islamic Republic of Iran. However, America's central policy has been regime change or metamorphosis in Iran's behavior. The United States has adopted various patterns and behaviors to achieve these macro goals. The main purpose of this study was to examine the patterns of Obama's foreign policy with Iran and its impact on the realization of US national interests. The most important goals of changing the Obama era approach toward Iran include multilateralism toward Iran, efforts to isolate Iran, diplomacy and negotiation with Iran, and ultimately a nuclear agreement. In fact, the Obama administration has transformed America's attitude toward Iran, including abandoning military aggression, creating economic incentives, engaging in direct dialogue with Iran, trying to persuade Iran's public opinion and to serve American national interests in the world, including the Middle East. Naturally, this transformation has served the American national interest in security, politics, and global cooperation, but the interests of governments and extremist groups within the US, the region, and the Zionist regime have been challenged by this Obama-led strategy of dialogue.