دانشگاه اصفهان پژوهش های تاریخی 2008-6253 18 3 2026 09 23 Realism and Un-realism in the Iranian Diplomacy during the Qajar Era (The Iranian Delegation's Agency at the Paris Peace Conference, 1919) واقع‌گرایی و ناواقع‌گرایی در عرصۀ دیپلماسی ایرانی عصر قاجار (موردمطالعه: کنشگری هیئت ایرانی در کنفرانس صلح پاریس 1298ش/1337ق) 19 33 30502 10.22108/jhr.2026.148274.2905 FA مهدی اقدسی دانشجوی دکتری گروه آموزشی تاریخ، تاریخ جمهوری ترکیه، دانشگاه استانبول، استانبول، ترکیه رضا بیگدلو گروه پژوهشی اجتماعی، پژوهشکده جغرافیای انتظامی، پژوهشگاه علوم انتظامی و مطالعات اجتماعی، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2026 02 07 Abstract Iranian diplomacy from the rise of the modern era to the present day has been damaged by unrealism and unrealistic thinking due to several factors, including a lack of proper understanding of global politics, the shadow of history, and idealism and ideologicalism. Realism implies proportionality between goals and strategies, resources and capabilities, and acting based on them in foreign diplomacy, whereas unrealism implies the separation and lack of proportionality between goals and strategies in diplomacy. The Paris Peace Conference serves as an example of the confrontation and conflict between realism and unrealism in policymaking and decision-making in Iranian diplomacy. After the First World War, Iran, suffering from numerous defeats, occupations, and economic and social problems, had its eyes set on the postwar world and the emergence of international organizations supporting nations. Therefore, despite not being invited to the conference, the Iranian government formed the Aspirations Committee and sent a delegation to the Paris Peace Conference to turn it into a field of diplomatic activism. Using historical analysis, this article examines how the Iranian delegation's activism at the Peace Conference can be analyzed from the perspective of realism and unrealism and how its achievements can be evaluated from this perspective. The research findings indicate that, contrary to the claims of many researchers, the Iranian delegation's presence at the conference was not without achievements. Attending the conference paved the way for Iran to join the League of Nations, and the country's national sovereignty and independence were recognized by international institutions and countries around the world. However, there was unrealistic optimism regarding the conference and emerging powers, while territorial restitution and border changes stemmed from Iranian idealism. Keywords: Realism, Un-realism, Iranian Diplomacy, Qajar, Paris Peace Conference. Introduction The history of Iranian foreign policy in the modern era has frequently been characterized by tensions between national aspirations and practical capabilities. During the late Qajar period, this tension became particularly visible as Iranian policymakers attempted to respond to growing foreign intervention, economic dependency, political instability, and territorial fragmentation. The conclusion of the First World War appeared to offer new opportunities for weaker states to assert their rights within an evolving international order founded on principles of self-determination, collective security, and international cooperation. The Paris Peace Conference emerged as the central arena in which the future political structure of the postwar world would be determined. Inspired by President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points and encouraged by the collapse of imperial powers such as Russia and the Ottoman Empire, Iranian leaders believed that historical injustices imposed upon their country could be corrected through international diplomacy. Consequently, Iran organized a diplomatic delegation to represent its interests in Paris. This research seeks to analyze the activities of the Iranian delegation through the lens of realism and unrealism. It investigates the extent to which Iranian objectives corresponded with national capabilities and international realities while also assessing the actual achievements and limitations of the delegation's mission. Materials and Methods This study employs a historical-analytical research methodology. Primary and secondary historical sources were examined to reconstruct the political context surrounding Iran's participation in the Paris Peace Conference. The analysis focuses on diplomatic correspondence, memoirs of delegation members, governmental records, conference documents, contemporary newspapers, and scholarly studies concerning Iranian foreign policy. The conceptual framework is based on the distinction between realism and unrealism in diplomatic practice. Realism is defined as the alignment between goals, resources, strategies, and external conditions. Unrealism, by contrast, refers to the pursuit of objectives that are incompatible with available means or with prevailing international realities. Through this framework, the study evaluates both the ambitions and achievements of the Iranian delegation. Research Findings The findings indicate that Iranian diplomacy at the Paris Peace Conference was shaped by several interconnected factors. First, Iranian policymakers displayed an incomplete understanding of the international balance of power. Many believed that the principles of self-determination and international justice would override the strategic interests of major powers. This assumption encouraged ambitious territorial claims that sought the restoration of territories historically associated with Iran. Second, excessive optimism existed regarding emerging international actors. Many Iranian elites viewed the United States as a defender of small nations and expected substantial support from President Wilson. Similarly, some believed that Soviet Russia's anti-imperialist rhetoric would translate into practical assistance for Iranian interests. These expectations ultimately proved unrealistic. Third, Iranian nationalism played a significant role in shaping diplomatic demands. Historical memories of territorial losses to Russia and the Ottoman Empire encouraged proposals for border revisions and territorial restitution. While these claims possessed historical foundations, they lacked practical feasibility within the geopolitical environment of 1919. Fourth, severe domestic weaknesses limited Iran's bargaining power. Political instability, financial insolvency, administrative inefficiency, military weakness, and dependence on foreign assistance significantly constrained the country's diplomatic effectiveness. Nevertheless, the delegation achieved several important successes. It enhanced international awareness of Iran's political status, promoted recognition of Iranian sovereignty, facilitated future membership in the League of Nations, and generated international discussion regarding foreign intervention in Iranian affairs. Discussion of Results and Conclusions The evidence demonstrates that the Iranian delegation's activities reflected a combination of realistic and unrealistic diplomatic approaches. On one hand, demands concerning sovereignty, independence, and international recognition corresponded to legitimate national interests and represented realistic objectives. On the other hand, expectations regarding territorial restoration, reparations, and support from major powers often exceeded what the international environment could accommodate. The delegation's failure to secure participation in formal decision-making processes and its inability to achieve territorial revisions illustrate the limitations of idealistic diplomacy when unsupported by adequate political, military, and economic power. At the same time, the mission's contribution to the international recognition of Iran should not be underestimated. This study, therefore, rejects interpretations that portray the Paris mission solely as a failure. Instead, it argues that the delegation produced meaningful diplomatic outcomes despite its inability to achieve its most ambitious objectives. The Iranian experience in Paris illustrates the enduring importance of balancing national aspirations with realistic assessments of power, capability, and international circumstances. Ultimately, this case highlights a recurring challenge in Iranian foreign policy: the need to reconcile historical memory, nationalist aspirations, and idealistic expectations with the practical constraints imposed by domestic weaknesses and international power politics. The lessons of the Paris Peace Conference remain relevant for understanding the dynamics of Iranian diplomacy in both historical and contemporary contexts. دیپلماسی ایرانی از دوران جدید تا به امروز به‌دلیل عوامل چندی، مانند نداشتن درک درست از سیاست جهانی، سایۀ سنگین تاریخ و البته آرمان‌گرایی و ایدئولوژی‌گرایی دچار آسیب ناواقع‌گرایی و ناواقع‌اندیشی بوده است. واقع‌گرایی در سیاست خارجی، بر ضرورت تناسب میان اهداف و راهبردها، انطباق منابع با توانایی‌ها و کنشگری مبتنی‌بر این مؤلفه‌ها دلالت دارد و در مقابل، ناواقع‌گرایی بر اختلاف و نداشتن تناسب بین اهداف و راهبرد‌ها در دیپلماسی دلالت دارد. کنفرانس صلح پاریس نمونه و مصداقی از تقابل و تعارض بین واقع‌گرایی و آرمان‌گرایی در سیاست‌گذاری و تصمیم‌سازی در عرصۀ دیپلماسی ایرانی بوده است. ایران پس‌از جنگ اول جهانی با انبوهی از شکست‌ها و اشغالگری‌ها و مشکلات متعدد اقتصادی و اجتماعی چشم به دنیای فردای پس‌از جنگ و برآمدن نهادهای بین‌المللی حامی ملت‌ها دوخته بود؛ ازاین‌رو، هیئتی را به کنفرانس صلح پاریس اعزام کرد تا این کنفرانس را به میدان کنشگری دیپلماتیک خود مبدل سازد. این مقاله با روش تحلیل تاریخی برآن است این پرسش را به بوتۀ تحلیل قرار دهد که کنشگری هیئت ایرانی در کنفرانس صلح از دیدگاه واقع‌گرایی و ناواقع‌گرایی چگونه تحلیل می‌شود؟ و دستاوردهای آن را از این چشم‌انداز چگونه می‌توان ارزیابی کرد؟ دستاوردهای پژوهش بیان‌کنندۀ آن است که حضور هیئت ایرانی در کنفرانس برخلاف ادعای بسیاری از پژوهندگان بدون دستاورد نبوده است. حضور در کنفرانس زمینۀ ورود ایران به جامعۀ جهانی را فراهم ساخت. حاکمیت ملی و استقلال کشور را به نهادهای بین‌المللی و کشورهای بزرگ جهان قبولاند. هرچند درزمینۀ امید به کنفرانس و قدرت‌های نوظهور خوش‌بینی غیرواقعی وجود داشته و استرداد سرزمینی و تغییرات مرزی از آرمان‌گرایی ایرانیان منشأ می‌گرفت.

https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_30502_a73bcf97f3b6fc5f25a0147fd5ffa0c4.pdf