The relationship between public opinion and foreign policy has given rise to a significant theoretical literature in the sociology of international relations. The main question is what the position of public opinion was in Iran’s foreign policy during the Pahlavi period, and how it reacted to the separation of Bahrain. It is an essential assumption that Bahrain’s position in the separation was reactive and limited due to the conditions of the international system, the regional order, and the country’s ruling political structure. The theoretical position of public opinion in non-democratic regimes is analyzed by examining the content of speeches, documents, and memoirs of official representatives to measure public opinion. The findings reveal that the position of public opinion is reflected in the protest of a small number of parliamentarians, some statements by national parties, and the significant role of Mohammad Reza Shah in this separation, albeit with concern for the judgment of Iranian society tomorrow.
Introduction
In Iran has been highly sensitive about territorial integrity and foreign policy has always been involved with public opinion on issues of territorial integrity. The same trend has made the Iranian people sensitive to foreign relations and has caused historical distrust of the people and the authorities. Many changes in Iran’s configuration in the nineteenth century led to much attention to territorial integrity in the constitutional constitution and the Islamic Republic.
However, people are still protesting against the violation and of Iran’s rights and the performance of the rulers in the separation of the Bahraini Islands and partition of the Caspian sea- one of the most controversial issues in the field of foreign policy and the territorial integrity of Iran was Bahrains’ Issue. The main question of this article is how public opinion reacted to the decisions of the country’s territorial integrity regarding the separation of Bahrain theorize implies that the role of public opinion on the issue of Bahrain’s separation was in the shah’s time, because of international and regional conditions and the political structure of the country prevailed with little reflection with the protest of the member of (Representatives Parliament) and the fear of the authorities in the future of Iranian society.
Theoretical Framework
In the light of new transformations and transitions asks whether public opinion affects foreign policy and when does public opinion affect foreign policy seeking to explain the mediating variables at the different level such as importance of foreign policy, internal structures and coalition stages and elites coordinates between public opinion and foreign policy. The multiplicity of reading and discourse pluralism about the link between public opinion and foreign policy shows that the impact of public opinion on foreign policy based on topics territorial integrity is the most important issue for public opinion. the territorial integrity seeks to maintain the unity and integrity of countries which is justified in terms of geographical stability considerations and this is the geographical stability that gives public opinion freedom in governments to determine their political situation and pursue their social and cultural, economic development, in the authoritarian regimes of some third world public opinion as a tool in the hands of governments. In this type of political systems the rulers because of new technology of notification have kept the community unaware and indifferent and in which they created a political and indifferent and in which they created a political and compatible kind of government to institution alize information. Therefore the impact of public opinion on foreign policy issues depends on the type of political regims.
Among the theories the various theory of political accountability analyzes the relationship between public opinion and foreign policy policymakers more accurately, so that policy makers’ behavior against public opinion demands indifferent governments, so that politicians are always from public opinion. They do not comply and decide on political and environmental conditions. This theory claims that the impact of public opinion on foreign policy varies from one case to another and from the president to another depending on the circumstances the presidents can follow or ignore public opinion. The presidents seem to feel more pressure and reaction to public opinion but if public opinion is not focused on it or even worse political accountability is reduced.
Methodology
This article examines its claim by documenting the press of political parties’ statements the role of political groups, the role of formal and informal institutional etc, as the tools of extraction public opinion the aim is to determine why the role of public opinion in the foreign policy of the second Pahlavi and how to disregard it and the consequences of this disregard for the authorities will be clarified so that this issue is not repeated for Iran’s territorial integrity, over all this article can be based on a research model.
 Results & Discussion
This article examines public opinion’s stance by examining the statements of the parties, the political speech of the representatives parliament including the Shah and the Iranian court and ambassadors in London and the London ambassadors in Tehran and the press not in the years 1968 until 1971 and the positions of personal and groups of public opinion. Some political parties and organizations explicitly or secretly declared their opposition to the Shah’s regime’s acceptance of the separation of Bahrain of course parties such as the Iran Novin party, people’s party and Mellion party and that were in favor of the government in the parliament, they voted for, but parties such as the Mellat Iran party, Jebhe Meli Iran (united national front) and the Pan Iranian Parliamentary Group criticized by the government is suing declarations with the separation of Bahrain.
On the part of the left and the religious parties because of their illegality and the Shah’s dominance of documentary affairs there was no reaction, although at the time of the nationalization of the oil industry and the adoption of the nationalization of the oil by both Iranian parliaments in March 1951, Iran’s claim of Bahrain’s rule by left and religious parties was revived. In Iran at this point because of the regime’s dominance over the media, public opinion in the press is very weak. The Bahraini issue had a reflection on the support of the regime and controlled public opinion. There are reports of SAVAK’S order to write notes and conduct interviews that Bahrain is not important to Iran. The Shah calls on the press including the Ettelaat Newspaper and the Kayhan newspaper and Ayandegan newspaper to emphasis by publishing articles and notes trying to neglect Bahrain’s annexation to Iran, arguing that oil and Bahrain’s pearls are completing and capturing except for the cost of hostility to the neighbors of Iran. The structure of foreign policy in Iran during the Pahlavi era was not institutionalized so public opinion in Iran’s foreign policy was not only formed but the politicians were trying to form it in their desired direction. Foreign policy decision making was made by the Shah himself and Iranian foreign policy agencies were merely a commission of the Shah’s policies. He only founded the dignity of foreign policy decision making as only a matter of self and did not even give the foreign minister and experts and scholars of the international arena a decisive role in important decisions. Therefore despite the constitutional law constitution emphasis on the parliamentary system and the emphasis on the public opinion on important issues this was more formal. However the Shah was never comfortable with the Iranian people and he afraid from Iranian people judgment in the future. The minister of royal court of Shah Asadollah Alam in his first volume of memorandums book always talk about the Shah’s grip on Bahrain in loneliness of them. The royal court which was important organization in foreign policy at Pahlavi era also afraid from public opinion and their judgment in Iran’s future. Among the army which was  an important organization in Pahlavi regime’s structure.
There were also patriotic officers who were not afraid to defend their homeland, but the SAVAK domination and the Shah’s strong supervision made them not to take effective action although the Shah was obliged to respond to naval officers.
 Conclusions & Suggestions
The point of departure of this article were the question of the role of public opinion in the separation of Bahrain research literature on why Bahrain’s Separation has been discussed but did not examine the position of public opinion and how it is acted. This article examines public opinion theories and the index of public opinion institutions such as parties, groups and associations, personalities and … and official institutions such as the Shah and royal court and the government assembly, foreign ministry and the army and … and their reaction to public opinion. They tried to public opinion from a sociological perspective and its impact on Iranian foreign relations answer from the documents and memories in the light of theories presented we concluded that because the structure of the Pahlavi regime was undemocratic it was in the light of the role of the Shah and the court and more in wishing the government to be role playing in the Persian Gulf and collaborating with the international system and disregard for public opinion settle, Although this never abandoned the fear of judging the Shah and other officials. It seems that lack of public opinion on this issue and the lack of attention of the intellectuals and in particular the scholars on the separation of Bahrain reduced the regime’s political accountability suggestion for this article is to emphasize to public opinion as a important arms of foreign policy at remarkable foreign policy file’s as a territorial integrity. If Mohammad Reza Shah valued public opinion, he could make a better decision on Bahrain. This was subject to the freedom of the press, parties, groups and elections to appoint representative parliament to comment on Bahrain’s separation for assign members of parliament for assessment was at separation of Bahrain’s case.
.