Journal of Politics and Law; Vol. 9, No. 9; 2016 ISSN 1913-9047 E-ISSN 1913-9055 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education 77 Iran's Political Stance toward Yemen's Ansar Allah Movement: A Constructivist-Based Study Keyhan Barzegar 1 & Seyyed Morteza Kazemi Dinan 1 1 Department of Political Science and International Relations, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran Correspondence: Keyhan Barzegar, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: kbarzegar@hotmail.com Received: July 13, 2016 Accepted: August 4, 2016 Online Published: October 30, 2016 doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n9p77 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v9n9p77 Abstract In recent years, the role of non-state political groups, particularly in the Middle East has become more prominent. Islamic Republic of Iran has to have a policy toward such groups. One of these groups is Yemen's Ansar Allah who, after the outbreak of protests in the country since 2011, has had a high and effective role in the political arena of Yemen. In this study, based on Constructivist theory of international relations, we attempted to answer this fundamental question that “what is the strategy of Islamic Republic of Iran toward Yemen's Ansar Allah?” Islamic Republic of Iran with regard to the definition of their identity and perceptions of the structure of the international system and the behavior of important regional and international actors as well as their opinions about Ansar Allah Movement as a Shiite, popular, anti-Israel, anti-American, and anti- Saudi group aligned with the values and principles of Islamic Republic System, has taken a supportive stance. Iran's support for Yemen's Ansar Allah is political, diplomatic, media and if possible, material supports (e.g. sending foods and medicine). Keywords: Ansar Allah movement, Houthis, Yemen, Islamic Republic of Iran, strategy, constructivism 1. Introduction New in international relations, we are seeing an increase in the relative position of non-state political actors in international relations. These actors in recent years, have had undeniable and prominent roles and impacts. Therefore, we can not identify and assess the foreign policy of a country only based on state-centric foreign relations. In the Middle East, according to political developments in Arabic countries from 2010 to the present, political, non-state and Islamist actors (such as Ansar Allah in Yemen, Al-Wefaq in Bahrain and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt) have contributed effectively in the political arena of their countries as well at the regional level, such that in some areas they have changed the head of state (e.g. in Yemen) or have had an impact on the relations between two or several Middle Eastern countries (Iran-Saudi Arabia, Egypt-Saudi Arabia, Iran-Bahrain, Iran-Yemen, Iran-Turkey, etc.). With regard to this case, it is clear that one of important issues in study of a country's foreign policy is the type of approach to the non-state political players; an approach that should be taken very professional and realistic. The important point to policy makers is that on the world stage you can not reach the realization of national goals and strategies with slogans and show. Foreign policy must be managed based on current realities. In this regard, Iran as one of the most important and powerful players in the Middle East, to realize their aims, should has a policy based on precise and rational calculations connected with the other actors in the region including actors such as Yemen's Ansar Allah. In this paper we aim to study this policy and strategy of Iran toward this group based on theory of constructivism. 1.1 Theory of Constructivism Constructivism is an international relations theory that believes that states exist within a world of our own making, and that they are social rather than material. It “emphasizes the social construction of world affairs as opposed to the claim of (neo)realists that international politics is shaped by the rational-choice behaviour/decisions of egoist actors who pursue their interests by making utilitarian calculations to maximize their benefits and minimize their losses, hence the materiality of international structures” (Behravesh, 2011).