نشریه تحقیقات سیاسی و بین المللی
پیاپی 12 (پاییز 1391)

The relations of Britain and European Union have always been one of the important and controversial issues in domestic political scene of Britain for the past fifty years due to negative attitude of Britain towards European integration and unity. The question which the present article wants to examine is how this skeptical and stressful attitude of Britain towards European unity has shaped and what circumstances have helped shaping this outlook? The present article wants by making use of “perceptual-cognitive theory” of Lakoff and Johnson and metaphoric documentation analysis method of Millikan and also by examining the language used in speeches, statement of politicians and foreign ministers of Britain in relation to European integration, extract and analyze metaphors, signs, premise, symbols and systems indicating this discourse and explain the possibility of this attitude in foreign policy, the process of shaping British and European identity and also the common custom of this country towards European policy and the dynamic of such interpretation.

After the Second World War and formulation of the United Nations’ Charter, the main founding principle of international security for the post war period was laid and that was prohibition of the use of force in international relations. The founder of the United Nations’ Charter taking into consideration the experience of the League of Nations in which the governments within certain conditions had the right to resort to force, this time strictly prohibited the use of force in international relations and considered it illegal and illegitimate. Nevertheless, for this rigid and inflexible rule there were two exceptions viz collective security derived from chapter seven of the United Nations Charter and referring to right of self-defense or legitimate defense based on Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Except these two exceptions any resort to force in international relations was prohibited and considered illegal. In question of the criteria of implementing collective security there was not serious debate. But after 11 September events the question of preemptive legitimate defense was brought about from theoretical Pandora box of American leaders and on that basis the United States strategy of countering terrorism formed. On the basis of this concept which had its origin in customary international law; despite of the clear emphasis which the United Nations Charter put on occurrence of military aggression for referring to the principle of legitimate defense, stated that there was no need for military aggression and mere existence of direct and immediate threat which have the sign of imminent aggression from enemy, allows the governments to attack the threating center and eliminate the source of threat. The present article wants to examine whether such a preemptive strategy of the United States is having legal legitimacy based on the United Nations’ Charter or it is an action to justify and legitimize the application of force in international relations? Therefore, the articles by looking into different legal and political aspect of this rule, examines the legitimacy or lack of legitimacy of the United States measures.

The present article wants to understand the impact of geopolitical features of Azerbaijan Republic on bilateral relations of Islamic Republic of Iran and Azerbaijan Republic. Azerbaijan Republic is located in a region which due to its geographical features and neighboring Iran has always attracted the attention of world powers. Therefore, the geopolitical study of this country can help decision makers of Iran on political, economic, cultural and military matters and it is also useful in preventing possible future confrontations between the two. For this reason the study answers this question as to what is the impact of geopolitical features of Azerbaijan Republic on relations with Iran. The article makes use of content analysis methodology to have a deeper understanding of features and roots of the problems, challenges, opportunities and threats. Finally the article while explaining the impact of geopolitical factors of Azerbaijan Republic on increasing or decreasing the level of relations between the two countries analyzes the above issue and presents suggestion in this regard.

From the beginning of 21st century the geo-economic approach is used as a new approach for analysis of strategic and international problems and competition of big powers in strategic regions. This approach is formed from the combination of three elements, namely geography, power and economy and it examines the relations of geography, power and economy and the interaction of these three elements in acquisition of power. In this period the powerful countries instead of paying attention to mere geopolitics mainly turned to geo-economics and try to have a politico-economic look instead of politico-military look to sensitive regions of the world. In present century energy particularly oil and gas as the spirit of geo-economics plays important role in the process of development, determining security and creating regional and international tensions. One of the strategic and geo-economic regions which will be the scene of disputes and geo-energy competition in twenty first century is Persian Gulf. Persian Gulf from the viewpoint of geopolitical and geostrategic theories is an important international region and this region from the viewpoint of new theories (geo-economic, geostrategic and geo-energy) is one of the sensitive and effective region in international and regional equations.

The international relations theories give different viewpoints about the reason and the quality of adherence or non-adherence of international and domestic actors to rules of international system. These theories are divided into two categories on the basis of the logic of affecting the behavior conforming to the rules. In spite of the normative viewpoints of English school and theories based on legitimacy of rules, constructivism as one of the current dynamic approaches in international relations has played an important role in explaining the concept of adherence. The common point in constructivist’s viewpoints regarding the question of adherence is the concept of socialization and internalizing norms and rules but they present different mechanism about adherence, mechanism like acculturation or normative coercion and convincing.

The study and measurement of the presence and effectiveness of the United States and Russia in Caucasus region shows the important new development which is taking place in the region. It seems that the United States is having a grand plan to bring change in technology and economic structure of the countries of Caucasus region. Its aim is substituting free market model economy and capitalism with centrally planned and state economies. In this way facilitate the necessary ground for expansion of its influence and also controlling the political structure of the newly independent republics. It also aims at containing regions and forces that challenge the United States. On the other hand Russia which considers itself the Godfather of this strategic region calls this region “the near abroad” and is determined to contain the United States expansion of influence in the region. In the present article by a descriptive analytical method, an attempt is made to raise this question whether a new cold war has started in the Caucasus region after the end of cold war? The underlying hypothesis that the paper examines, is that, with the presence of the United States in Caucasus region, a new cold war has started. On the whole it seems that by increasing the economic, political and strategic and military attractions of the region the possibility of conflict also increases considerably.

The unexpected developments in the Middle East which occurred in 2011 have attracted the attention of many experts. The long standing dictatorships of the region were caught in the domino of crisis. Some faced regime change; others faced widespread unrest or civil war. These developments took place at a time that few years ago during George Bush junior presidency in the United States of America, a plan was introduced with the name of “the Greater Middle East” which envisaged mechanism for political changes in the region. On the basis of this plan the inefficient governments of the Middle East which generally have undemocratic political system and are deeply affected by corruption and mismanagement at all levels will eventually create dangerous crises for the region. In fact the chaotic situation of some of the countries of the Middle East region not only lead to widespread migration of people to Western countries but in the long run result into growth and formation extremist anti-West groups. Therefore, it is better that democratic model of government substitute the existing form of government and the Western countries should reconsider their support for the dictators of the region. The present article by a descriptive-analytical method wants to study the United States foreign policy vis-à-vis the Middle East and North Africa developments particularly Egypt (as an important actor of the region) within the framework of the greater Middle East plan. The underlying hypothesis is that the United States policy in connection with Egypt conforms to broad framework of the Greater Middle East plan, although the Egypt’s later developments after the fall of Mubarak which led to coming to power of Muslim Brotherhood was contrary to the United States’ objectives.