نشریه پژوهشهای سیاسی جهان اسلام
سال سوم شماره 1 (پیاپی 6، بهار 1392)

Imam Khomeini’s foreign policy discourse, in spite of having confident strategic and diplomatic basics, is ideological. The Islamic revolution organizes the focus of his discourse. The Islamic revolution founder`s foreign policy discourse is based on a strong ridging between the self and the other. In this other-making logic, the international system is divided into two domains: the suppressor and the suppressed. This paper, regarding the leadership discourse of Ayatollah Khamenei, is to show that this discourse is the logical outcome of Imam’s discourse in an evolutionary environment. The special internal, regional and international conditions and the characteristics of Ayatollah Khamenei have moved him towards forming a more pragmatic reading in the framework of interactionism discourse against the dominating system. The discourse is the extract of Iran’s foreign policy that articulates the three notions of revolutionary Islam, social security and national interests besides each other in different proportions. In this logic, the two blocks of the dominator and the dominated are placed against each other and the identity-other, difference logicequivalence chain make the international system meaningful. This article, after schematizing the interactionism discourse against the dominating system, makes the basics of the world division and its divergences and convergences prominent by surveying the two concepts of identity and the other and the chain of equivalence and the difference logic.

As God-given asset, dignity is devoted to human being only and none of other terrestrial creatures are so characterized. Based on Holy Quran, human dignity is divided into two kinds the quality of our interpretation of which is the base for our other behaviors, decision making and programs in treatment with Humans and consequently civilians in Islamic society. Possessing an interpretive outlook and hermeneutics method to human dignity oriented verses, authors ultimately conclude that dignity is an inalienable human right that stems from God-given reason and soul in the human being body. Of course, human beings are free to neglect this essential advantage. The approach provides some sociopolitical-related constraints to both civilians and political system.

The term minority is legally refers to those human groups which usually are marginalized legally, politically, culturally and economically. Nowadays, regarding the international importance of minorities, this is a global issue and a problem for many of the states. Iran is of different religious, ethnic and linguistic minorities. These minorities looked for their legal, political, social and cultural receivables. This survey is going to show that religious minorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran have attained most of the equal rights with Muslim Iranians via the constitution and the verdicts of jurists, during the last three decades, although, considering some legal restrictions and different views, it is a long way to the substantiation of equal rights with Muslims. During the recent period, this issue is emphasized and taken into consideration by legal institutions and related organizations and the minorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran have an optimum position regarding their legal rights compared to the many of the other countries.

With the beginning of the 33-day war against Lebanon, global and regional actors adopted different orientations and stances towards it according to their interests. The efforts of western governments and the U.S. as the super powers of the world, in support of Isreal and against Hizbullah, are obvious manifestations of the issues of this war. The present paper is aimed at explaining and analyzing the stances and policies of the U.S. government and western governments based on Rosenau foreign policy theory. The main question is “how was the foreign policy and stances of the western governments and the U.S. in the 33-day war of the Lebanon?” In the present paper, the different aspects of these stances are studied through documentary method. The results show that the interests of these countries are very overlapping and they are trying to undermine the Resistance Front and to prevent the deployment of Iran`s geopolitical sphere. Therefore, European and the United States governments strengthen, equip and support the Zionist regime thoroughly. United States managed the war politically and European governments went along with the U.S. according to their interests and goals.

Great Middle East Project were proposed on September 12, 2002 for the first time the apparent purpose of this project that faced with opposition and doubts was to help the countries of the Middle East, especially the Arabic countries in the region, in the area of economic, political and social reforms. The term “Islamic Middle East” was first proposed after the Zionist army defeat in the 33-day war in Lebanon in 2006 by Hizbullah and over the “New Middle East” project of the US Foreign Minister. The questions that this survey is going to answer and examine are “whether Middle East Muslim world project, proposed against the “great Middle East Project” of the US, could be executed, and what challenges this project face? It seems that, after regional evolutions, the role and place of Islamic thought in the regional solidarity has been of great importance and this will highlight the role of Iran.

The recent upheavals in the Middle East, especially the Syrian crisis, have created new equations in the region. It seems that this crisis will ultimately affect the strategic axis of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah in the region. The present paper is mainly aimed at answering these key questions: 1) How will the current upheavals in Syria affect the triple axis and also Iran’s national security? 2) What is Iran’s security strategy on the upheaval and how can it be explained? The hypotheses that the present paper addresses are as follows: 1) The interface ring of the strategic triple ring (Syria) will be lost and as a result, the security factor of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the region will be reduced if Asad fails and opponents win the power. Moreover, Iran’s security strategy on this crisis is vigorous support of the Syrian regime that can be explained in the framework of regional balance of threat against the United States and Israel.