فصلنامه مطالعات روابط بین الملل
پیاپی 31 (پاییز 1394)

International Relations (IR) obtained a rigid image of security institutions in the Cold War era. This image, of course, stemmed from the security and ideological equations in the divided world between two main blocks so-called the West and the East. Shifting from the rationalist perspective to the Reflectivity one, IR theorization after the Cold War developed the study of the security institutions. In the context of the Post-cold War era, one can consider the security institutions from the Rationalist/ reflectivity perspectives based on a theoretical synthesis including Neoliberal Institutionalism, Defensive Realism, English School, Constructivism and Copenhagen School. In this article, authors attempt to apply the five concepts of interests, threat perceptions, society, identity and urgency from the aforementioned theories respectively on the amount of explication entity of security institutions after the Cold War.

The global economy in the paradigm shift from the parameters is dominated by the west towards the multipolar is emerging economic powers in the different continents which the Brix Group is a symbol of this approach. In fact, the most important concern to the south and of the main dilemmas in international relations in the last half century, when non Western countries also with understanding the complexity of these relations is doubly; in this regard. It seems to Iran in order to use its own resources and capabilities to the new definition of their relations on the basis of value - criteria ideological confrontation with the West and to provide their national interests, communication and interaction with an institution like Brics. This paper in its official is benefiting from the analytical few resources, while the definition of the nature of the goals and challenges facing Brics and the impact on the role of transnational group in the international system and how they interact with each other and other nations.

International Relations (IR) obtained a rigid image of security institutions in the Cold War era. This image, of course, stemmed from the security and ideological equations in the divided world between two main blocks so-called the West and the East. Shifting from the rationalist perspective to the Reflectivity one, IR theorization after the Cold War developed the study of the security institutions. In the context of the Post-cold War era, one can consider the security institutions from the Rationalist/ reflectivity perspectives based on a theoretical synthesis including Neoliberal Institutionalism, Defensive Realism, English School, Constructivism and Copenhagen School. In this article, authors attempt to apply the five concepts of interests, threat perceptions, society, identity and urgency from the aforementioned theories respectively on the amount of explication entity of security institutions after the Cold War.

Current study is aimed at evaluating the cooperation of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) with Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and its influence on security of Islamic Republic of Iran in a descriptive method. The results of study show that close cooperation of Southern Persian Gulf Countries with NATO has negative impacts on security of Islamic Republic of Iran and so limits the interests of Iran in the region. In current situations the operations of NATO in the region are challenging to national interests of Iran, and the attitude of Iran toward NATO as an organization under the direct influence of the United States, is a completely controversial one. Military presence of all high-ranking NATO members in Persian Gulf and Oman Sea and existence of their different defense treaties with Iran’s southern neighbor countries and independent common-wealth ones in North of Iran, especially with Azerbaijan, are examples of the military presence of NATO and its high-ranking members in borders of Iran. This can be considered as a threat against security of Islamic Republic of Iran. Financial and army supports of the U.S and its allies for Iraq during imposed war, supports of most of high-ranking members of NATO on Iran oppositions, their supports for territorial claims of Arab Countries on Persian Gulf Islands, unprecedented selling of modern weapons and army facilities to GCC member-states, their overuses of the human rights subject against Iran as a political means, their accusations based on Iran’s achievement to mass destruction weapons or Iran’s supports for terrorist attacks, are among negative elements of NATO attitude toward Iran. Presence in defense and security treaties of the region is among the most critical strategies of Islamic Republic of Iran to overcome new threats and to defuse enemies’ plots on ignoring Iran in regional relations.

From the preliminary of creating the Zionist regime, the approach of foreign policy and security of Israel, based on factious religious teachings, strategy of extend pending territories and building town, obtain to strategic depth, dominance on challenges and internal splits and in extreme gain to ideal of the greater Israel in order to realization the promises of the old testament. New, after passage the sixty years from the creating this regime and passage the several wars and 33day war between Hizbullah and Israeli army- also knowledge toward internal splits and challenges and the will of public opinion on creation and secure the safety, Israel decided to change its foreign policy and security to obtain the permanent security. This vicissitude is inclusive the decision of this regime for withdrawal from the occupied territories, redefinition of borders and rectification of regional strategies instead of occupied and mastery. It is evident that this vicissitude will have affects and consequences on area of regional and Iran.

The long and complex negotiations between Iran and P5+1 on the nuclear conflict in the past twelve years, finally led to a comprehensive nuclear agreement between Iran and permanent members of the UN Security Council. This agreement not only recognizes the right of have and use of peaceful nuclear energy for Iran but also contains a joint program for removing the international sanctions against Iran. Regardless of consequences and primary estimates of nuclear agreement and It costs and benefits for Iran, the impact of diplomacy and foreign policy method that the eleventh administration has taken on this matter is one of the components that must be regarded. Accordingly, the main question in which this article has written on is: If achieving a common point to Resolution the nuclear dossier after twelve years conflict between Iran and international actors, in time of ruling moderation discourse on Iran's foreign policy is a Sign for significant change in nuclear diplomacy or is only the Continuation of past approaches in new conditions? This article through a casual-analytical study of diplomatic procedures in two periods; reformation (1997-2005) and moderation (2013-2015) seeks to proof this assumption that regarding to political and diplomatic procedures resulted in Vienna Agreement, it seems that eleventh administration's diplomacy is merely is a disport from the past offensive approach in foreign policy (2005-2013) and return to détente and trust building toward west, which had been applied in the early years of third millennium. The eleventh administration's foreign policy operation (in the case of nuclear deal) is based on trust building, détente and managed interaction with west in order to eliminating the distrust and pessimism about Iran's peaceful nuclear program; the same policy, that in the first round of negotiations was applied. Of course the tactics and mechanism of this kind of diplomacy are novel and original. So, considering the Coordinates of nuclear diplomacy leading to "Barjam" (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) it seems that this progress is the synthesis of continuation or change in Iranian diplomacy during recent years.