Policy success or policy failure? Narrative analysis of the Islamic parliament of Iran’s debates on the FATF recommendations bill

Abstract

ABSTRACT The problem of becoming a member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has been an ongoing issue in the Iranian policymaking environment since 2009. One significant aspect of this issue is the FATF-related success or failure narratives from the perspective of policymaking. The current study uses the narrative method to analyse the stories defending and refuting the FATF Recommendations Bill in the Islamic Parliament of Iran (IPI). Two major competing narratives have been presented in the IPI by the two main Iranian political factions: the Principlists and the Reformists. The Principlists see the passage of the Bill as a failure, whereas the Reformists consider it to be a policy success. To gain a better position, both narratives have employed specific settings, characterisation, and emplotment. The findings demonstrate that the ‘failure narrative’ constructed by the Principlists is dominant as it has a better setting and characterisation than the ‘success narrative’ advocated by the Reformists. Although the ‘success narrative’ frames a better emplotment structure compared to the ‘failure narrative’, the ‘failure narrative’ is more forethoughtful and prudent as it uses conditional propositions in its emplotment, paving the way for the approval of the Bill in the future based on revolutionary rationality or expediency.