Understanding Rational Choice Theory President Obama Approving Sanctions Against Iran

Rational Choice Theory -- Obama's Sanctions on Iran

The Rational Choice Made by a U.S. President

The recent action by U.S. President Barack Obama to place additional sanctions on the country of Iran represents one more step in the West's attempt to stymie Iran's apparent drive to build a nuclear bomb. It has been known for some time that Iran had nuclear reactors for generating electricity, and from the production of electricity through nuclear fission, materials for a bomb can be gleaned. But the key issue to Western governments (Europe, the U.S., Canada and other Western nations) is to try and block Iran's policy by cutting off the number of countries that Iran can sell crude oil to. Specifically, Obama targeted "financial institutions doing business with Iran's central bank, a key conduit for the country's oil sales," according to The Wall Street Journal (Hodge, et al., 2012)

. In making the move Obama is hoping that Iran, the world's number three exporter of crude oil will be hurt enough financially to back off from its nuclear program. Obama also believes there is a "sufficient supply of petroleum" in the world market so the cut-off of Iranian crude oil won't cause worldwide shortages.

Rational Choice Theory -- Instrumental Rationality

Looking at President Obama's strategy through the lens of the Rational Choice Theory (RCT), although Obama is the "single unified actor," his actions were authorized by the U.S. Congress many months ago and he only now has come to the conclusion that it is time to clamp down on Iran. Max Weber points out that using the instrumental rationality aspect of RCT, a social action takes into account "the behavior of others and is thereby oriented in its course" (RCT, 2005)

. Obama's decision represents the "calculability, intellectualization, and impersonal logic of goal-directed action" that Max Weber was alluding to. Clearly Obama as the actor in this drama sees the potential benefits of pressuring Iran as more viable than the "costs" that may be incurred (a shortage of oil and resulting higher gasoline prices at the pump, which the public will blame Obama for in an election year).

What assumptions can be made about Obama's decision? For one, Obama knows that Israel is considering attacking Iran's nuclear facilities, and if Israel wishes to start a war in the Middle East, there is nothing the U.S. can do to stop Israel. But a war between Israel and Iran would be a major distraction for the West, and as John Scott points out, human behavior "is not free but determined" -- and it is shaped by the "rewards and punishments that are encountered."

In this case, Obama assumes that by getting tough on Iran -- punishing their economy -- there will be rewards for the West, for the U.S. And Israel, America's ally in the Middle East. "Each participant's behavior rewards or punishes the other," Scott writes (12), and Obama's use of his authority is designed to punish and then receive a reward.