Prisonniers des rôles : une analyse constructiviste de la permanence de la rivalité entre les États-Unis et l’Iran
Keywords:
Rivalité irano-américaine ; Constructivisme social ; Analyse de discours ; Sécurisation ; Identité étatique., U.S.–Iran rivalry; Social constructivism; Discourse analysis; Securitization; State identityAbstract
Les approches rationalistes dominantes appréhendent la rivalité entre les États-Unis et l’Iran à travers le prisme des dilemmes de sécurité nucléaire, des intérêts pétroliers et de l’hégémonie régionale. Ils peinent à expliquer pourquoi cette dyade demeure prisonnière d’une posture de quasi-guerre depuis plus de quarante-cinq ans, en dépit de la fluctuation des incitations matérielles. En mobilisant le cadre du constructivisme social, cet article propose de réinterpréter la conflictualité irano-américaine non comme un état de fait immuable, mais comme un processus continu de co-constitution identitaire et de socialisation de la menace. S'appuyant sur les apports conceptuels d'Alexander Wendt et de Ted Hopf, l'article utilise une analyse qualitative et conceptuelle des discours institutionnels clés pour mettre au jour les mécanismes sémiotiques de cette rivalité. L’analyse textuelle montre que : (1) les labels « Grand Satan » et l’«Axe du Mal » fonctionnent comme des structures narratives constitutives qui figent les rôles ; (2) les séquences de sécurisation post-1979, 2002, 2018 et 2024 agissent comme des filtres cognitifs récurrents qui bloquent les ouvertures diplomatiques ; (3) les facteurs matériels, tels que les sanctions économiques ou le développement nucléaire, n’acquièrent leur charge stratégique qu’à l’intérieur de ces grilles de lecture. L'article met ainsi en lumière la valeur heuristique des approches idéationnelles pour saisir la résilience des conflits prolongés dans les relations internationales contemporaines.
Abstract
Prisoners of Roles: A Constructivist Analysis of the Persistence of the US-Iran Rivalry
Dominant rationalist paradigms conceptualize the US-Iran rivalry primarily through the prism of nuclear security dilemmas, hydrocarbon interests, and regional hegemony. Consequently, they fail to account for why this dyad remains entrenched in a state of quasi-war spanning over forty-five years, despite fluctuating material incentives. Deploying the framework of social constructivism, this article reinterprets Iranian-American conflictuality not as an immutable systemic given, but as a continuous process of identity co-constitution and threat socialization. Drawing upon the conceptual insights of Alexander Wendt and Ted Hopf, it employs a qualitative and conceptual analysis of key institutional discourses to uncover the semiotic mechanisms underpinning this rivalry. The textual analysis demonstrates that: (1) the discursive labels "Great Satan" and "Axis of Evil" function as constitutive narrative structures that reify adversarial roles; (2) the critical securitization sequences of post-1979, 2002, 2018, and 2024 operate as recurrent cognitive filters that systematically foreclose diplomatic openings; and (3) material variables, such as economic sanctions or nuclear development, derive their strategic salience exclusively within these deeply embedded interpretative grids. Ultimately, this article underscores the heuristic value of ideational approaches in elucidating the resilience of protracted conflicts in contemporary international relations.
Downloads
References
Adler, E. (1997). Seizing middle ground: Constructivism in world politics. European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319–363.
Al Jazeera Centre for Studies. (2026). The contradictions of US political rhetoric in the 2026 Iran war: Secularism and sacred narratives. Al Jazeera Network. aljazeera.net
Araghchi, A., & Trump, D. (2026). The discourse of dominance and resistance: A critical discourse analysis of the 2026 United States vs. Iran conflict. ResearchGate Academic Repository. researchgate.net
Azizi, H. (2025). Iran's "Look to the East" policy: Ideological alignments and material constraints. Middle East Policy, 32(1), 45–62.
Balzacq, T. (Éd.). (2011). Securitization theory: How security problems emerge and dissolve. Routledge.
Bennett, A. (2024). New developments in case study methods for institutional economics. Dans Handbook of New Institutional Economics (pp. 415–432). Springer.
Britannica Editors. (2026). 2026 Iran war: Causes, escalation, and regional ceasefire dynamics. Encyclopedia Britannica. britannica.com
Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Campbell, D. (1992). Writing security: United States foreign policy and the politics of identity. University of Minnesota Press.
Chubin, S. (2024). The ideological lock: Why Washington and Tehran cannot escape the cycle of hostility. International Security, 48(3), 112–148.
Clingendael Institute. (2026). War, political psychology and the future of US-Iran relations. Clingendael Report Series. clingendael.org
Congressional Research Service [CRS]. (2026). U.S. conflict with Iran: Legislative oversight and military deployments (Report No. R48887). Congress.gov. congress.gov
Crist, D. (2012). The Twilight War: The Secret History of America's Thirty-Year Conflict with Iran. Penguin Press. (Ouvrage de référence pour la citation présente dans votre texte original). [1]
Dunne, C. W. (2025). The permanence of sanctions: How the US Congress institutionalized the economic siege of Iran. Journal of Palestine Studies, 54(2), 78–95.
European Centre for Populism Studies [ECPS]. (2026). The ongoing war between Iran, the US, and Israel: A brief analytical assessment. ECPS Insights. populismstudies.org
Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 133–168. researchgate.net
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman. doi.org
Fathollah-Nejad, A. (2024). Iran in an emerging multipolar world: The strategic implications of China-Iran comprehensive partnership. Routledge.
Fitzpatrick, M. (2021). The death of the JCPOA and the transition to maximal pressure. Survival, 63(1), 57–74.
George, A. L., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. MIT Press. mit.edu
Geranmayeh, E. (2025). The collapse of the JCPOA and the rise of the resistance narrative. European Council on Foreign Relations [ECFR]. ecfr.eu
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.
Hopf, T. (2002). Social theory of international politics: Identities and foreign policy. Cornell University Press.
Juneau, T. (2024). Iran's strategic depth in 2024: Proxies, asymmetric warfare, and discourse. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 47(5), 412–435. doi.org
Katzenstein, P. J. (Éd.). (1996). The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics. Columbia University Press.
Keohane, R. O. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton University Press.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (2e éd.). Verso.
Limbert, J. W. (2009). Negotiating with Iran: Wrestling the ghosts of history. United States Institute of Peace Press.
Mahoney, J. (2012). The logic of process tracing tests in the social sciences. Sociological Methods & Research, 41(4), 570–597. doi.org
Maloney, S. (2020). The Iranian Counter-Offensive: Sectarianism and Regional Proxy Warfare. Brookings Institution Press. (Pour la partie sur l'imbrication des conflits régionaux).
Maloney, S. (2025). The structural gridlock: Washington, Tehran, and the path to perpetual confrontation. Brookings Institution Press. brookings.edu
Manara Center. (2026). Beyond deterrence: Can economic reconstruction rebuild U.S.–Iran relations? Manara Magazine, 74, 12–21. manaramagazine.org
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. W. W. Norton & Company.
Milani, M. (2024). The Friday prayers in Tehran as a barometer of Iranian strategic thinking. Iranian Studies, 57(2), 201–224.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2e éd.). Sage Publications.
Mitzen, J. (2006). Ontological security in world politics: State identity and the security dilemma. European Journal of International Relations, 12(3), 341–370.
Nabers, D. (2015). A discursive theory of international relations. Palgrave Macmillan.
Nephew, R. (2017). The Art of Sanctions: A View from the Field. Columbia University Press. (Pour la complexité de l'architecture des sanctions américaines).
Onuf, N. G. (2025). World of our making: Rules and rule in social theory and international relations (Éd. révisée). Routledge.
Parsi, T. (2007). Treacherous alliance: The secret dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States. Yale University Press.
Parsi, T. (2025). Institutional constraints and the failure of post-2024 US-Iran diplomacy. World Policy Journal, 42(1), 34–49. doi.org
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.
Ramazani, R. K. (2024). The linguistic construction of the enemy: Forty-five years of US-Iran rhetoric. University of Virginia Press.
Ruggie, J. G. (1998). Constructing the world polity: Essays on international relations. Routledge.
Steele, B. J. (2008). Ontological security in international relations: Self-identity and the IR state. Routledge.
Takeyh, R. (2025). The Supreme National Security Council and the militarization of Iranian foreign policy. Survival, 67(3), 89–104. doi.org
Thies, C. G. (2013). Role theory and foreign policy analysis in international relations. Routledge.
Valizada, K. (2026). Iran–United States relations: Historical dynamics, strategic rivalry, and prospects for diplomacy. AGHEL: Journal of Geopolitical and Strategic Studies, 5(2), 89–114. egarp.lt
Valizada, K. (2026). The structural persistence of the Iran-United States gridlock: A multi-paradigmatic assessment. SSRN Electronic Journal. ssrn.com
Van Evera, S. (1997). Guide to methods for students of political science. Cornell University Press. cornell.edu
Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and desecuritization. Dans R. D. Lipschutz (Éd.), On security (pp. 46–86). Columbia University Press.
Walker, S. G. (Éd.). (1987). Role theory and foreign policy analysis. Duke University Press.
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. McGraw-Hill.
Weldes, J. (1999). Constructing national interests: The United States and the Cuban missile crisis. University of Minnesota Press.
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.
Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge University Press.
Zehfuss, M. (2002). Constructivism in international relations: The politics of reality. Cambridge University Press.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2026 Parcours et Initiatives : Revue interdisciplinaire du Graben (PIRIG)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
