The Dynamics of Normative and Security Discourses in EU-Iran Relations (1992-2018)

In international relations and political science, Iran and the European Union have always received considerable attention as two important international actors with very long-standing relations. This article considers Europe's normative power and its importance for Iran, as well as the effects of this normative approach, as theorized by Jan Manners, on Tehran. This article aims to answer the following key question: Why did the European Union adopt a normative approach toward Iran between 1992 and 2018? To answer this question, the present study hypothesizes that the European Union has always been known as a normative power. As such, European normative thinking has shaped its relations with Iran since 1992, when the European Union was formed. As a result of the creation of new international problems such as terrorism, migration crisis, and economic crisis, this trend has gradually shifted to a security mode after 2008 to 2018 and Trump's withdrawal from the JCPOA.This issue has been investigated using constructivism as a theoretical framework.

Introduction

The relationship between Iran and the European Union (EU) has always been important in international relations. It has been more substantial since the 1990s, influenced by several factors, including international norms, human rights concerns, security concerns, and Iran’s nuclear program. As a normative power in the international sphere, the EU tends to promote European values such as human rights, democracy, the rule of law, and individual freedoms through its foreign policy. The EU has consistently paid close attention to Iran as it is a major player in the West Asian region with abundant energy resources. This article examines the EU’s discursive shifts regarding Iran, transitioning from the normative to security approach, and analyzes the factors affecting this transition between 1992 and 2018.
2.Theoretical Framework
In this study, Iran-EU relations are analyzed using constructivist theory. As a non- this theory posits that international behavior is shaped largely by norms, identities, and intersubjective structures. According to this theory, international interests and interactions are directly defined by the state’s identity and internal norms. This study draws on this framework to examine the EU as a normative power and Iran as a state with its own political and cultural identity.

Methodology

This article uses qualitative analysis based on reliable data to analyze issues. Data were collected from reliable sources such as statements, resolutions, official reports from the EU, scientific articles, and specialized books relevant to Iran-EU relations. Historical and content analyses were employed to examine the shifts in EU discourses and determine the reasons for these changes. A comparative study of the EU’s behavior during different periods was conducted to examine the factors affecting the transition from normative to security discourse.

Results & Discussion

The results of this study show that Iran-EU relations have been influenced by changes in the EU’s normative and security priorities over four main periods. In the first period, the EU’s approach was based on normative values such as human rights and democracy. However, as Iran’s nuclear issues and new security threats became apparent, this approach gradually shifted to security-oriented policies. Although there have been efforts to return to an atmosphere of engagement and dialogue, security and political issues have remained the main obstacles. Domestic and international priorities have influenced Iran-EU relations in each period, and the link between norms and security has played a key role in defining these interactions.
A: The Critical Dialogue (1992-1997): The EU built on critical dialogue to persuade Iran to respect human rights and democratic values, focusing on normative power during this period. Following the Edinburgh Conference in 1992, these dialogues were conducted on human rights, Middle East peace, and terrorism prevention. The EU considered Iran an important energy source and a source of regional stability. Following events such as the fatwa on the assassination of Salman Rushdie and the Mykonos incident, relations became strained, and sustainable progress was hindered.
B: The Comprehensive Dialogue (1997-2000): Iran-EU relations entered a more positive phase since the reform government headed by Seyyed Mohammad Khatami took power and promoted slogans such as dialogue between civilizations and de-escalation. As a result of this shift in approach, the EU attempted to establish broader economic, political, and cultural ties with Iran. Iran became a significant trading partner of Europe during this period. The atmosphere of the discussions became more constructive and positive, even though human rights issues were still raised.
C: The Escalating Tensions and Securitization of Relations (2002-2013): The disclosure of Iran’s nuclear program in 2002 and concerns about the possibility of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons changed the discourse of the EU. After the disclosure of Iran’s nuclear program in 2002, the EU gradually began to focus on security issues rather than normative issues. Even though nuclear negotiations between Iran and the EU began, they failed to conclude due to a deep conflict and a lack of mutual transparency. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s stance towards the West resulted in strained relations between the two parties. In addition to supporting UN sanctions, the EU imposed independent sanctions against Iran.
D: The JCPOA and Shifting Approaches (2013-2018): When Hassan Rouhani’s government gained power in 2015 and emphasized constructive engagement with the world, a new round of nuclear negotiations began, ultimately leading to the JCPOA agreement. This agreement reduced some of the EU’s security concerns and paved the way for improved political and economic relations. This process was interrupted, however, by the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 and the return of sanctions. Despite its efforts to preserve the JCPOA, the EU could not maintain its independence from the United States, and security concerns once again adversely affected relations.

Conclusions & Suggestions

Various factors, such as international developments, domestic priorities, and the changing policies of both parties, have influenced the relations between Iran and the EU between 1992 and 2018. As a normative power, the EU attempted to transfer its norms to Iran through dialogue and interaction in the 1990s. Since the early 2000s, the perception of security threats from Iran’s nuclear program, terrorism, and migration crises has increased, gradually giving way to a security-oriented discourse. This change in discourse reflects the influence of the EU’s foreign policy on the international environment and the prioritization of security interests over international norms. The constructivist theory outlines this process well, showing how norms, identities, and mental structures influence international behavior. This article comprehensively analyzed Iran-EU relations, helping policymakers and political scientists better understand these complex relations and the impact of normative and security factors.