Iran: The Balance Diplomacy

What make a country to be a dangerous state are the events that are generated within the country. Sometimes these events are related to government decisions and sometimes the behavior of people or a part of them. Dictatorship which may be adopted as a decision made by the state and terrorism as a method which may be adopted by a part of a country, prepares the tools for the country to be hazardous in the international arena.
So what makes Iran to be considered as a threat in the international arena, and particularly in the Middle East, does not have an external factor, but whatever it is, is related to the decisions that are made in Iran. Therefore what distinguishes Iran from other countries that have a similar situation, such as North Korea and Cuba, is that in Iran various political groups have a political life including temperance-oriented groups who seek harmony with the international order; Iranian current government is an example aroused from these kinds of groups.
Thus it can be argued that the international community will witness a safe Iran as long such a state is located in the country. Therefore it is expedient that the international community adopt the balance diplomacy in order to prolong the life of this policy in Iran, so that this emerging political ideology in Iran, which is already deployed, will be stabilized and continued.
It seems that the balance diplomacy could be a good alternative to the change diplomacy. Change diplomacy is applied about countries like Venezuela and Syria, but in the case of Iran, it is convenient to use a balance diplomacy which aims at maintaining the current status, because achieving the ideal situation in Iran needs to create new political rivalries within the country; a competition that its outcome is not clear. On the other hand, Hassan Rohani’s government has attempted to avoid any competition and dealing with any Iranian extremist groups who have much power. This means that there is no required competitive condition in which there are winners and losers.
Also, in response to a group of politicians who advocate the idea of imposing political isolation to Iran, it must be said that firstly, the philosophy of imposing political isolation is to eliminate the negative effects of the international order which is generated as the result of a destructive government in the international arena; whereas by the direct and immediate support of China and Russia from governments such as Iran, North Korea and Syria, they have made the goal which this political process was following, to be ineffective and invalid. Secondly, imposing the political isolation to a country cannot suppress the desire for the survival of that government, thus, as it had happened earlier, such governments that often suffer from undemocratic political structure, guarantee their survival by giving many political and economic privileges that support their survival. For example, North Korea has to provide political and economic concessions to ensure their survival and this leads to the strength of Chinese and Russian governments and are the strength of both Moscow and Beijing is in favor of Washington's interests?!