The role of the military in foreign policy governance has long been a subject of significant scholarly attention, as it profoundly influences a country’s international interactions and domestic political dynamics. This paper aims to analyze and compare the impact of military actors on foreign policy governance in two distinct systems: Iran and the United States. Employing a comparative methodology, the study explores structural, historical, and political dimensions that shape the involvement of military institutions in shaping foreign policy decisions. While Iran’s foreign policy governance often reflects the influence of ideological and revolutionary frameworks combined with military presence, the United States demonstrates a more institutionalized civil-military balance, though military influence remains pronounced in strategic policymaking.

The findings reveal both similarities and fundamental differences in the extent and nature of military intervention in foreign policy in the two countries. Iran’s military role is deeply embedded within the framework of its revolutionary goals and regional security concerns, whereas the United States leverages its military primarily for maintaining global dominance and strategic alliances. This research highlights the implications of such military involvement, including its impact on governance efficacy, international perception, and regional security. The study concludes with recommendations aimed at enhancing civil-military balance in foreign policy governance, particularly within contexts similar to Iran.