فصلنامه مطالعات روابط بین الملل
پیاپی 63 (پاییز 1402)

As China seeks to introduce itself as a regional hegemon and a global influential power through the creation of a new economic order and the expansion of the political and security sphere, India seeks to overshadow China's interests and hegemonic behavior by adopting various policies. While the achievements of the Modi government in foreign policy have made India a big and influential power in the region and the international system. Taking these considerations into consideration, the question that arises is, "What policies has India and especially Modi's government put on the foreign policy agenda to counter China's hegemony?" The hypothesis is raised on the basis that India has created challenges and limitations in the political, military, economic and cultural dimensions for the China's hegemony through policies such as non-commitment, action towards the East, first neighborhood and multilateralism in the international system. This study has used a qualitative method based on an exploratory data analysis (EDA) . In the present study, data is qualitative and has been extracted from library and internet sources. Also, Kenneth Waltz's theory of balance of power has been used for the purpose of scientific and theoretical analysis of the research problem.

TheSyrian crisis is one of the most complex international crises in terms of the multiplicity of regional and extra-regional actors and the presence of conflicting interests in it. Russia and the United States are trans-regional players in this crisis who, with conflicting approaches and conflicting interests,seek greater influence in the West Asian region through intervention in the Syrian crisis. In this regard, thetwo countries are seeking to take advantageof this crisis with hard and soft policies and strategies.he conflicting interestsof the two actors have made them try to make the most profit by considering the resources and costs and benefits. In this paper, an attempt will be made to deal with the strategic and intelligent combinationof Russia's soft and hard power against the United States, focusing on the Syrian crisis. The main questionishowRussia asused smart power against American intervention in the Syrian crisis (2011-2023)? In order to examine the issue in the framework of the intelligent power point of view, from Joseph Nye's point of view, the soft power of Russia in the dimensionsofculture,valueandforeignpolicyand thehard powerinthemilitaryand economic dimensions have been discussedThe outcomesof thisresearchshows that in the Syrian field,Russiassoft power has been discussedindimensionsofculture,valueand foreignpolicyand hard powerinthemilitary and economic dimensions.Russia's smart power ha beenusedwithmoreemphasis on soft power to restrain America, and the most important achievement of Russia fromtheuse of smart power, without serious military involvement withAmerica, isto preserve Basharal-Assad'sregime and prevent extensive military action. America against Syriahasbeen taking the initiativeofpeacenegotiations and gaining strategic advantage by signing militaryand conomic contracts

In recent years, a set of internal and external factors have caused the decline of the power of the United States, but the United States has still maintained its superior position in the field of international relations. The purpose of this research is to investigate why and how this issue is. In this research, the four dimensions of power in international relations from the perspective of "Michael Barnett and Raymond Duvall" have been chosen as the theoretical framework. Therefore, this research, following the answer to the main question, "What are the reasons for maintaining the superior position of the United States in the field of international relations despite the weakness and disruption in the power of the United States?", presents the hypothesis that "the position The supremacy of the United States in the international system originates from four dimensions of power, including compulsory power, institutional power, structural power, and productive (or discoursive) power. Although several internal and external factors have weakened the compulsory, institutional and productive powers of the United States, but maintaining the structural power of the United States, which is rooted in the superior-subordinate mental structures of international relations, has led to the superior position of the United States in the field of relations". In relation to how to maintain the superior position of the United States, this sub-hypothesis is presented:

In the legal arrangements after the UN Charter, the United Nations Security Council has been considered as the only legal authority that is allowed to resort to sanctions or coercive measures, despite the fact that the performance of this Council has been political and unfair in many cases, based on the seventh chapter of the Charter, the sanctions imposed by Article 41 aimed of maintaining international peace and security, they are considered collective and coercive in nature and are binding on all member states. The opposite of collective sanctions of the UN is unilateral sanctions by which, one government tries to force another government to change its policies. In response to the main question that what is the legal position and legitimacy of unilateral sanctions of the United States, this article, which was carried out with a descriptive analytical method, takes into account the hypothesis that the unilateral sanctions of the United States violates universal human rights, international humanitarian law, and the principles and objectives stated in the charter, the principle of equality of governments, the principle of non-interference, food security, the right to health and education, the right to development, the right to life and other fundamental human rights of a sanctioned country.

The present study seeks to answer the question from the perspective of Critical Geopolitics how Russia's approaches towards Iran's nuclear dossier can be explained as a permanent member of the Security Council, a signatory of the JCPOA, and of course a mediator. Practical geopolitics, as one of the four research areas of critical geopolitics, will provide an answer to why Russia's foreign policy is pragmatic and "multivector". The findings of the study explain the oscillations of Russia's foreign policy towards Tehran with a focus on multivectorism, opportunism, and pragmatism, and while recognizing geopolitical and economic considerations in the foundations of Russia's foreign policy, it argues that these approaches still have limitations in explaining some aspects of Russia's foreign policy decisions and actions due to their materialistic foundations. In fact, Russia, with the role of a mediator, while trying to keep Iran in its orbit, also takes advantage of the nuclear dossier of Iran in regulating its relations with the West. The method of descriptive-analytical research and the method of data collection is library. In this regard, books, articles, documents, internet resources, and comments of experts and relevant authorities have been used to collect data.

The rise of East Asia in the world as a world power and the substantial development of this region in the 21st century is one of the most important events in the era of globalization. Therefore, East Asia and the movement of this region towards progress and development have received the attention of the nations in the world, and it has attracted a large amount of international interactions in the global arena. Meanwhile, Iran as a developing country, emphasizing its geopolitical and geo-economical position seeking to exploit the capabilities of East Asia, has made the move towards development and progress as a priority for its major foreign policy goals. This article, by adopting a descriptive-analytical method, aims at explaining the international capacities of East Asia and emphasizing the importance of the status of this region in the current international system by asking: East Asia's opportunities and threats to advance Iran's foreign policy in this region? will investigate this issue. Studies have shown that the geopolitical position of Iran in the field of fossil fuels and international corridors, together with the increasing need of the countries of the East Asian region to provide energy as a driving engine for the growth and development, have created many opportunities for Iran's foreign policy in East Asia. But at the same time, Iran is facing obstacles at three domestic, regional and international levels to pursue its foreign policy in East Asia.

Eurasia includes the two continents of Europe&Asia.After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it seems that the current world order, which was previously unilaterally determined by the United States for years, has faced serious challenges with the rise of China.America has always been a powerful geopolitical actor in the region, which has been able to shape its relations with its partners considering its national interests.The policy of the Donald Trump administration towards Eurasia has been accompanied by an approach based on pure pragmatism.The interests of the US government in this region mainly include the problem of fighting terrorism, strengthening regional security and regional integration, energy and economicaspects,as well as the alternating restraint of two influential players inEurasia,China&Russia.In addition,the results of the research show that Trump failed to advance American policies in Eurasia because he could not find a strong arm for the United States.The reason for this failure can also be seen from the relative independence of Eurasian countries from world powers and from the other hand the geographical distance between America&Eurasia, because although Eurasian countries have maintained their independence from America and China, they paid more attention to China and Trump Giving them to America was not very successful.

After World War II, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States of America has always claimed supremacy in the international system and has explained its foreign policies based on the national security strategy in every presidential term. On the other hand, the Islamic Republic of Iran, as a regional superpower, has been able to create a new form of regional order with its material and spiritual influence in West Asian countries. The conflict between the interests of the United States and Iran raises the question that the national security strategies of the United States of America during the years 2001-2021 have become in practice what strategies have they turned into in relation to Iran? In response to the proposed hypothesis, "The United States of America, by adopting its aggressive national security strategies towards Iran, is seeking to limit Iran's interests in the international system so that it can increase its interests and finally become the supreme hegemon in The international system should be transformed." After examining the sources of the first category indicators (economic and security strategies) with the method of integrated content analysis (quantitative and qualitative), the results showed: America initially follows the policy of changing Iran's behavior and containment, and then the policy of engagement and pressure And finally, it turned into containment and behavior change, and in order to implement these strategies during this period, it has imposed more and more diverse sanctions against Iran every year