امریکا

This article examines the US's devolution strategy in the face of China's growing power and Japan's key role in this regard. Japan's security concerns regarding China's intentions, especially in the field of territorial disputes, have made this country play a more security role and cooperate more closely with the United States. In recent years, the distribution of power in the Pacific has experienced significant changes that have forced the United States to reconsider its policies. Considering the security threats from China, the US and Japan have strengthened their military and security cooperation to maintain the balance of power in the region. This article examines the question of how Japan has played a role in the US offshore balance strategy and how to form a coalition to contain China. The findings of the article have shown that due to the increase of unilateral costs in neutralizing China, the United States, relying on the strategy of Buck pass in economic and military dimensions through bilateral or multilateral agreements, economic and military-security alliances with Japan, has been trying to create a collective balance in order to restrain China. These collaborations include updating mutual defense guidelines and developing joint military capabilities. This article explains the position of Japan in the offshore balancing strategy of the United States of America to contain China with a descriptive-analytical method and based on library sources.

 Sanctions have been used as a foreign policy tool since ancient Greece. Over time, various countries have employed them to exert pressure. The United States is among the most frequent users of sanctions in its foreign policy, with Iran being one of its primary targets. Iran–U.S. relations became strained after the 1979 Revolution, ultimately leading Washington to sever diplomatic ties with Tehran. Since then, successive U.S. administrations have imposed severe sanctions on Iran. One of the most intense sanction periods occurred during the Trump administration, encompassing financial, banking, insurance, transportation, shipping, and other sectors under what was termed the Maximum Pressure Campaign. This raises a crucial question: What effects have U.S. sanctions had on social and political capital in Iran? The present study argues that sanctions contribute to the decline of social and political capital in the countries they target.

Research on the impact of sanctions on Iranian society faces two major shortcomings. First, there is a lack of studies specifically addressing U.S. sanctions imposed during Donald Trump’s presidency. Second, most existing research focuses primarily on the economic consequences of sanctions—particularly their effects on domestic and foreign trade—while giving less attention to their political and social ramifications.  To address this gap, the present study aimed to examine how U.S. sanctions during the Trump administration influenced social and political values in Iran, particularly in relation to political development and social capital.

This research employed a case study approach to conduct an in-depth examination of sanctions and their effects across economic, political, and social dimensions. The objective was to achieve a comprehensive and multidimensional understanding of the issue. The selection of indicators was based on face validity (logical validity), assessed by experts and specialists in political science. According to their judgment, the chosen indicators effectively measure the concepts under study within the frameworks of social and political capital. Moreover, the collected data was analyzed within a designed conceptual framework using descriptive–analytical methods.

An analysis of the effects of sanctions on Iran revealed that their impact extends beyond the economic sphere, influencing social values and social capital as well. This finding is significant because sanctioning entities often claim that sanctions are intended to pressure governments rather than affect the lives of ordinary citizens. However, in reality, the general population bears the brunt of these measures, experiencing greater hardship than politicians and government officials. Moreover, applying pressure on citizens does not necessarily lead officials to retreat from their political decisions. The effects of sanctions on the Iranian economy can be evaluated using several key indicators, including economic growth, economic stability, foreign investment, the Gini coefficient, and poverty. Among these, economic growth is a particularly important measure when assessing the effects of sanctions on the economy. Before the imposition of sanctions, Iran’s economic growth showed positive figures. However, after the sanctions were implemented, the figures indicated negative economic growth. Another crucial factor is economic stability, including price stability in the country. Statistics indicate that before the imposition of sanctions, Iran’s highest recorded inflation rate was around 9.98%. However, following the sanctions, prices have continuously risen, leading to a persistent increase in inflation. Furthermore, studies reveal that the onset of sanctions triggered economic instability, characterized by rising inflation and surging exchange rates. This instability became a major concern for investors in Iran, making them hesitant to invest their capital in the country. Additionally, many existing investors began planning for capital flight. Regarding the poverty index, surveys by the Statistical Center of Iran indicate that income and wealth inequality increased by 4.9% following the imposition of sanctions. Beyond the economy, sanctions also impact on political values. This section evaluated indicators such as political participation, social protests, and order and law compliance as measures of political capital. Regarding political participation, after the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA and the imposition of sanctions, Iranian society faced significant fluctuations and economic hardships.  In the short term, economic concerns became a primary focus for the public, reducing the importance of political engagement. Therefore, political participation declined, with Iranian society showing less willingness to engage in political activities—an effect that was evident in the low turnout for the 2021 presidential election. Regarding the second indicator (i.e., social protests), evidence suggests that street protests and unrest intensified during periods of heightened sanctions. The scope of these protests has expanded in terms of duration, number of participants, number of cities involved, and their financial and human consequences. Moreover, in terms of order and law compliance, incidents of theft, street violence, and both labor and political protests increased during the sanctions period. In indicators of social capital, such as crime and felony rates, theft, divorce rates, migration, suicide, and voluntary social participation—including charitable organizations, NGOs, and cultural or artistic programs—significant differences were observed between the periods before and after the sanctions.

Contrary to the prevailing view among proponents of sanctions—who argue that sanctions can promote political liberalization and facilitate the transition to democracy by exerting pressure on leaders—sanctions actually weaken both the material and non-material (social and political) capital of society. This marginalizes democracy, weakens the public sphere, and strengthens authoritarian processes aimed at securing basic livelihoods. If this situation persists and economic problems in Iran continue to expand, it could darken the future of political and social values, potentially leading to the collapse of existing social and political capital. Therefore, decision-makers and policymakers must develop well-defined, realistic programs, seriously address the root causes of the weakening political and social order, and take decisive action to counter these trends. Failure to do so could lead to a range of dangerous consequences, including the escalation of popular protests, increased internal tensions, irreparable social problems, mass migration, a sharp decline in educational attainment, and, ultimately, a widening gap between the people and the ruling authorities. This would pose a serious threat to the future stability of the political system.

South Africa, as Africa’s second-largest economy and a major industrial hub, finds itself at the center of the economic and political rivalry between China and the United States. Both global powers seek to expand their influence through economic cooperation, albeit with differing priorities. China has concentrated its efforts on securing minerals, energy resources, and infrastructure development, while the United States emphasizes democracy, human rights, and trade relations. This dynamic competition significantly shapes South Africa’s economic growth and political trajectory, influencing its development strategies and global partnerships. Recognizing the profound implications of this rivalry, this study aims to explore its multifaceted dimensions and assess its broader impacts on South Africa’s economy and political landscape.The article’s theoretical framework is based on Robert Gilpin’s theory of hegemonic stability, which examines power dynamics within the international system, particularly in economic contexts. This theory suggests that global stability is maintained when a single hegemonic power dominates, but the rise of emerging powers, such as China and the United States, disrupts this equilibrium, leading to significant shifts in global power structures. In the context of South Africa, the competition between these two nations reflects their broader struggle for hegemonic influence in Southern Africa, with far-reaching consequences for both regional development and the global economic order. Additionally, the framework incorporates the concept of economic imperialism, highlighting how dominant nations extend their influence over weaker states through strategic investments and economic leverage. Together, these theoretical perspectives provide a lens for understanding the complex interplay of power, competition, and economic dominance shaping South Africa’s position in the global arena.

The study utilizes a comparative research method, a fundamental approach in social sciences for analyzing international relations and policies. By identifying similarities and differences, this method uncovers behavioral patterns and interactions between key actors. The research specifically examines the economic competition between China and the United States in South Africa through a case-based comparative lens, focusing on their investment strategies and the resulting impacts on the country’s economy and political landscape. Data is drawn from a variety of sources, including academic literature, international reports, and statistical analyses, to provide a comprehensive understanding of the broader consequences of this rivalry on South Africa’s development trajectory.

The economic relations of both China and the United States with South Africa and other African nations are deeply shaped by the political, economic, and social histories of these regions. Since the Cold War, both powers have actively sought to expand their influence across Africa, though their approaches and strategies have diverged significantly. China has prioritized economic engagement through infrastructure development, resource extraction, and trade, often framed within initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative. In contrast, the United States has emphasized democracy promotion, human rights, and trade partnerships, aligning its efforts with broader geopolitical goals. These differing strategies reflect the unique historical contexts and priorities of each nation, while also highlighting the evolving dynamics of global power competition in Africa.China has emerged as one of South Africa’s largest trading partners, significantly expanding its economic relations since 2000. By 2023, the trade volume between the two nations reached $42 billion, marking a substantial increase over the years. South Africa’s exports to China grew from $8 billion in 2010 to $12 billion in 2023, while imports from China surged from $11 billion to $21 billion during the same period. This growing trade relationship underscores South Africa’s increasing reliance on Chinese goods and the deepening of commercial ties. China’s engagement in South Africa spans several key areas, including investment and infrastructure, where it has funded transportation and energy projects such as roads, bridges, and solar energy initiatives. In transportation and logistics, China has collaborated on developing ports and rail lines, including the Cape Town-Pretoria railway project. Additionally, China is a majorexporter of goods to South Africa, supplying machinery, electronics, and construction materials, further solidifying its role in the country’s trade and industrial sectors.Conversely, the United States, as the world’s largest economy, has made significant investments in South Africa, particularly in technology, education, and healthcare. From 2010 to 2023, U.S. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in South Africa increased from $5.13 billion to $18.36 billion, indicating a steady upward trend. American tech giants like Google and Microsoft have been instrumental in advancing South Africa’s digital economy, with Microsoft notably establishing a $300 million cloud data center in thecountry. In the areas of education and healthcare, the U.S. has committed substantial resources, including over $7 billion for health programs focused on combating infectious diseases. These investments underscore the United States' dedication to fostering long-term development and capacity building in South Africa, contrasting with China’s emphasis on infrastructure and trade. Together, the economic activities of both nations reflect their strategic efforts to strengthen influence in South Africa, each utilizing distinct approaches to shape the country’s economic and social landscape.South Africa's exports to the United States have experienced notable fluctuations from 2010 to 2023, rising from $7.15 billion in 2010 to $8.43 billion in 2023. In parallel, imports from the U.S. have also fluctuated due to varying economic conditions and changes in trade policies. In contrast, China, one of South Africa's largest trading partners, achieved a trade volume of $42 billion in 2023. China remains a key exporter of goods to South Africa, supplying a diverse range of products, including machinery, electronics, and construction materials.The political impact of China on South Africa is primarily evident through the expansion of economic and diplomatic relations. By establishing infrastructure projects and increasing investments in the country, China aims to enhance its influence across Africa. The close ties between the two nations, highlighted by their participation in organizations such as BRICS and G77, reflect China's commitment to bolstering South Africa's economic and political standing. These connections position China as a strategic partner and a crucial source of funding for the development of South African infrastructure.As a global power, the United States has sought to maintain its influence in South Africa, though recent years have posed challenges. During the Obama administration, relations were strengthened, reflecting his African roots. However, subsequent politicalchanges in the U.S. have negatively impacted these relations. The U.S. has worked to protect its interests in South Africa by providing economic aid and development programs. Nevertheless, South Africa's growing ties with China and Russia have presented challenges for the United States, affecting its role in the country.

The competition between China and the United States has produced both positive and negative effects on South Africa's relations. The article outlines 18 impacts stemming from this rivalry, emphasizing the complexities of balancing these influences while pursuing national interests. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S.-China rivalry has become a central aspect of international relations, with Africa emerging as a crucial battleground for influence. South Africa, significantly affected by this competition, serves as an important case study for analyzing the economic, cultural, and political impacts of Sino-American rivalry from 2010 to 2023. This research aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of South Africa’s policies while identifying opportunities for national development amid the competition. Additionally, it offers insights for South African policymakers on how to optimize benefits from this rivalry and informs Iran about leveraging its relationships with South Africa to enhance its influence in Africa and foster strategic cooperation.

After the events of September 11, the fight against terrorism was pursued with particular seriousness by the US government, which was manifested in a military form, specifically by the invasion of Afghanistan and then by the invasion of Iraq. As time passed and the imposition of extensive military costs on the US, the country, by aligning its interests with regional allies, identified a range of militant groups in the Middle East and West Asia that were aligned with the Islamic Republic of Iran as terrorists and adopted mechanisms to counter their influence. The groups that were mostly gathered around the discourse of the Islamic Revolution of Iran outside the borders and included the Syrian government, Hamas militias and the political-military group Hezbollah, and then resistance groups in Iraq and then Yemen were added to them. With the coming to power of Obama, the United States of America has adopted a new strategy to repel threats against itself in various regions, which, although not accompanied by direct participation, military presence and open intervention, has a significant impact on the course of affairs. Using the capacity of regional actors aligned with its interests and its allies in West Asia, including Israel, Turkey, and some members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, in the form of coalitions, having military bases, and involving them in the counterterrorism program and remote management, has created a new approach to maintaining its influence in West Asia. This approach has created confrontations, given the presence of the Islamic Republic of Iran as an effective actor in the region and having multiple interests and state and non-state actors fighting for their independence and popular and ideological power. Some of these confrontations are threats to Iran's national security, which is defined beyond borders and has placed the fight against tyranny and support for oppressed and Muslim nations in its foreign policy agenda. In this regard, the present study seeks to examine the US counterterrorism policy in West Asia and discuss its relationship with the national security of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The necessity for conducting such research is to identify the hidden threats of America by involving its allies in the region and confronting them, which is pursued in the form of coalitions and alliances or military and civilian agreements between America and its allies. If this procedure is not managed wisely, it will put the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the region at risk, which requires identification and confrontation. In this article, a descriptive-analytical method and library tools have been used.

Due to its special geopolitical position, Ukraine has inadvertently been involved in international conflicts, conflicts that are mainly between the three powers of Russia, the European Union, and the United States. Due to the geographical and geopolitical position of Ukraine, the United States and the European Union are seeking dominance and influence in this country in competition with Russia, which represents the height of the differences and geopolitical competition between them. The foreign policy of each of the involved parties does not allow the fire of this crisis to be extinguished. In this research, using library sources and descriptive-analytical research method, we have sought to answer the question of what has been the foreign policy of the United States as a major global power in this field, because the ups and downs of the Ukraine crisis and its results are subject to the pattern It is the behavior of big powers like America in this field. Finally, we have come to the conclusion that America, as a superpower, has taken interests for itself everywhere in the world; This can also be seen in the Ukraine crisis. Confronting Russia's reassertion of power and playing a role as a hegemon is one of the factors affecting the US foreign policy in the Ukraine crisis. Analysis of the foreign policy of Russia and the United States regarding the crisis and war in Ukraine

Containing regional threats in US foreign policy and upstream documents has always been considered one of the most important elements of this Great power foreign policy behavior. In all regional networked systems, identifying and confronting state entities that pose a threat to US foreign policy has been placed on the foreign policy agenda. The Eurasian region is one of the regions where regional and global powers are present. This region is important due to its oil and gas resources as well as regional threats. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States are in strategic competition with each other in this region.Research question: What does the US strategy against the Islamic Republic of Iran include in the Eurasian security network system?

Research hypothesis:

 Within the framework of the strategy of containing the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Eurasian region, the United States uses a network approach that includes components such as containing threats based on mass creation and concentration of power and preventing growth in the power cycle.

Methodology and theoretical framework:

 The research method of this article is analogical modeling. In this method, using the theoretical foundations of international relations, an analytical model is presented and in the following sections, the field application of the proposed model is carried out. The research approach used in this article is the network approach. In this approach, the order and strategic environment in which states interact are considered as a network of communication nodes.

With the increasing complexity and network nature of the security order in the Eurasian region, the strategy of containing regional threats in US foreign policy has become a network and the Islamic Republic of Iran as a power with a high capacity to expand its influence in this region has been challenged within the framework of the above-mentioned control system. America's foreign policy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran after the victory of the Islamic Revolution has been based on perception of threats. In the US foreign policy documents, the Islamic Republic of Iran has always been portrayed as a threat to regional interests and its allies and its containment has been designated as one of the priorities of the US regional policy. By defining its regional identity in the form of a regional power, the Islamic Republic of Iran seeks to play an effective role commensurate with its national capabilities in the region to determine the security order. In the Central Asia and the Caucasus region, which encompasses the most important environment and arena of Iran’s strategic behavior, it is considered one of the points of conflict between Iran and the United States. The Eurasian region is one of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s spheres of influence, providing many geoeconomic, geoenergy and geopolitical opportunities to strengthen national capabilities in order to be at the forefront of the regional power cycle. Given the increasing level of complexity of regional interactions and the high degree of permeability against trans-regional powers, the Eurasian region has become a network of interconnected communication nodes that can be categorized into four subject areas: geopolitics, geoeconomics, geoculture and geoenergy. Each subject area is connected to other sub-networks in the form of a sub-network. By manipulating communication nodes in the afore-mentioned subnetworks, it is possible to influence the security order of this region. The optimal security order network of regional and trans-regional units is formulated and reorganized in contrast to the optimal order of competing units.The presence of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Eurasian security order network has provided this country with a suitable space to strengthen regional cooperation and strengthen national power resources in the fields of hardware and software. The United States, within the framework of a regional control and containment system, seeks to weaken Iran's position in the Eurasian region in order to reduce its regional deterrence. The adaptation of US regional control and containment system to the changing security order of the region is something that has happened in recent years. Containing Iran's network in the Eurasian region requires a complex control system whose principles and components can be identified with respect to US foreign policy documents and its regional behavior.

The American network control system is an environmentally oriented and outward-looking system in which threats are contained and controlled using communication nodes of the regional and global order network at various thematic levels. The network control system consists of two parts: the logical principles that constitute the system and the system components. The logical principles of the network control system are summarized in three principles, based on which the system is designed and operated. The principles of the American network control system are based on three principles, which include a network approach to threats, containing threats and preventing growth in the power cycle. For example containing threats is carried out in the form of policies to create critical mass and concentration of power, which is pursued in the form of strengthening Azerbaijan's military power and escalating border tensions in Aras River. Preventing the growth of the power cycle is also pursued by manipulating communication nodes in the geo-energy and geo-economic layers using regional allies. Placing Iran in a cycle of underdevelopment and depletion of national resources, along with preventing it from achieving regional partneship opportunities are the goals that the United States pursues in the form of regional containment of Iran

The hierarchy of power in foreign policy decision-making includes the leadership, the executive branch but According to the Iranian constitution, the Islamic Council, and the Supreme National Security Council, the Guardian Council, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are also very important. The nuclear conflict is one of the most important issues of Iran-US foreign policy. Therefore, the main question of the current research is this: what factors are effective in determining the approach of the parliament in the Iran-US nuclear conflict? In response to the mentioned question, this hypothesis is proposed that: The role of the parliament in nuclear decisions depends on the factional affinity of its majority with the government, the approach of the speaker of the parliament, and domestic and international conditions. The findings of this research show, in some periods, the parliament followed the government's foreign policy, sometimes accompanied it, and finally tried to have a decision-making and policy-determining position. According to this article, Graham Allison's theory, which gives importance to the domestic influencing factors in foreign policy decision-making, is a suitable approach to deal with this issue. Also, this research has investigated the topic in an explanatory way using documents and library and internet resources.

With the onset of the Syrian crisis, various domestic, regional, and international actors adopted distinct strategies in response to the situation. This was particularly evident due to Syria’s critical geopolitical and geostrategic position in West Asia. As a global superpower with extensive interests, the United States pursued an interventionist strategy aimed at safeguarding its interests and those of its regional allies throughout the Syrian crisis. Initially, the U.S. supported efforts to overthrow the Syrian regime by backing Arab opposition forces. However, as the opposition weakened and faced defeat against the Syrian regime and its allies, the U.S. shifted its focus to the Kurdish forces, seeking to maintain its strategic interests through a new partnership. This study aims to answer the main question: What strategy underlies the U.S. approach toward the Syrian Kurds? The hypothesis suggests that the relationship between these two actors is not characterized by the deep commitments typical of a strategic alliance. Instead, the U.S.-Syrian Kurds partnership is more accurately described as a dynamic alignment—temporary, conditional, and responsive to immediate threats, particularly in combating ISIS terrorism and containing regional powers such as Iran and Turkey. This article examines the factors shaping this dynamic alignment and the limitations that have prevented it from evolving into a strategic alliance. The research is qualitative, employing a descriptive-analytical approach based on the theory of dynamic alignment. Additionally, this study is document-based, utilizing library research methods (both printed and digital sources) for data collection.

Hybrid warfare is an important phenomenon in international relations, involving a combination of hard, semi-hard, and soft tools to achieve strategic goals. In this context, modern diplomacy plays a fundamental and complex role. Given the importance of Iran's position in the region, understanding the effects and functions of modern diplomacy in the context of hybrid warfare seems essential for analyzing US policies. Therefore, the main question of this research is how modern diplomacy is used as a tool to combine hard and soft power in the US hybrid war against Iran (2015-2023) and what are its effects? The research method is descriptive-explanatory and the findings show that the US uses tools such as public diplomacy through institutions such as NAAC and the Advisory Council, second-track diplomacy with three approaches of compromise, deterrence, and war, military diplomacy, coercive diplomacy, and cyber diplomacy through platforms such as Twitter and Instagram.

The South China Sea holds strategic importance in U.S. foreign policy in East Asia. China's economic growth and, consequently, the strengthening of its military capabilities—particularly its navy—and the activities of this force in the South China Sea have raised concerns among coastal states and the United States about Beijing’s dominance in the region. This issue has led to Washington’s intervention and extensive presence in East Asia under the pretext of supporting freedom of navigation operations, but in reality, to curb China's rising influence and create a balance against it in the region. Therefore, the main question of this research is: What policy does the U.S. pursue to prevent China's rise in the South China Sea? The article’s hypothesis is that since China's increasing economic and military power, and consequently its expanding regional influence in the South China Sea, is considered a strategic threat to coastal countries and the United States, Washington has sought to counterbalance China's growing power in the region by expanding its presence and forming alliances with coastal states in the South China Sea. This approach, in addition to preventing China’s increasing power in the region, can also curb Beijing’s hegemony and dominance over the waters of East Asia. The research data has been analyzed using a qualitative analysis method. This study is qualitative in nature and based on a descriptive-analytical approach, while information has been collected through library research.

For decades, media propaganda has been used as a powerful tool to shape public opinion and influence global policies, significantly influencing decision-making. News narratives and reports target the general public and are sometimes inaccurate. This article examines the propaganda of these two media outlets during the Iranian nuclear crisis after the United States violated the JCPOA (May 2018 to December 2024) using content analysis and citations of CNN and BBC news extracted from their websites. Of the total of 1,276 selected news items, reports, interviews, and news analyses related to Iran’s nuclear program during the aforementioned period, from the websites of these media outlets, citations to CNN were 529 (41.5%) and to BBC were 747 (58.5%). 100% of the evidence was extracted directly from the websites of these two media outlets, which indicates the authenticity and first-hand nature of the sources and provides new information on various topics and events related to Iran's nuclear program. The article focuses on these two questions: 1) What role did BBC and CNN play in reflecting a true picture of the Iranian nuclear issue after the violation of the JCPOA and in what framework did they play their role? and 2) What were the similarities and differences in their roles in reflecting the issue?; It seeks to analyze these hypotheses that 1) the aforementioned media outlets played a decisive role in guiding policymakers' decisions regarding the Iranian nuclear issue and 2) they had a different approach to the issue based on their dominant ideologies. This means that BBC, which tries to convince its audience and convey its hidden goals in a specific direction with a biased, purposeful and indirect view; In contrast, CNN takes a frank, transparent, and unbiased view of the issue, presenting its objective directly, somewhat in line with reality, and with more or less convincing arguments.

The present study seeks to conduct a comparative evaluation of the nuclear policies of the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hassan Rouhani administrations from the perspective of David Easton's systems theory. The primary research question is whether systemic factors have led to differences in the approaches of the Ahmadinejad and Rouhani governments toward nuclear energy. The hypothesis posits that considering the systemic impact of domestic and international factors and the primacy of internal and international structural constraints over foreign policy decision-makers, despite the political and ideological differences between Ahmadinejad and Rouhani, the two presidents' approaches to nuclear energy have not significantly diverged. The research method employed in this dissertation is explanatory and utilizes a causal-structural mechanism. The results indicate that the Ahmadinejad administration, from the outset, pursued its nuclear policy by severing relations with major powers and disregarding sanctions imposed by the United Nations and the United States. However, with the rise of Hassan Rouhani to power, although he initially pursued a path of engagement with major powers regarding nuclear energy—ultimately culminating in an agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with world powers—his administration eventually reverted to the same policies and orientations that had been adopted by the Ahmadinejad government. The reason behind the similarity in nuclear policymaking between the two administrations, despite their distinct political perspectives, lies in the structure of the international system. The behavior of the Rouhani administration toward major powers on the nuclear energy issue, particularly after the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA, followed the same trajectory previously experienced by the Ahmadinejad administration. Given the primacy of structure over agents in the international system, political ideologies and partisan affiliations have not significantly influenced the foreign policy decisions of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding nuclear energy. Instead, the structural constraints of the international system have been the determining factors shaping Iran's foreign policy in this domain.

With the gradual decline of the United States of America's dominant position, there is an increasing focus on power redistribution and the reshuffling of roles in international politics. This situation has given rise to a significant conflict between countries advocating for the status quo and revisionist powers such as Russia, China, and Iran. The outcome of this conflict holds direct implications for the future of international relations, encompassing elements such as structures, actors, communication patterns, norms, as well as key trends like balances, institutions, and the global economy. Hence, the primary research question at hand pertains to the approaches undertaken by Russia, China, and Iran in countering the goals and plans of the United States as the hegemonic power in international relations. Specifically, the inquiry seeks to ascertain whether these three revisionist countries have adopted similar approaches and reactions against the dominant power. In order to address these questions, we propose the hypothesis that the behavior patterns of Russia, China, and Iran as revisionist countries, in response to the foreign policy of the hegemonic power, are shaped by their respective advantages in terms of geography-geopolitics, politics, defense-security, culture-civilization, and bilateral relations with the United States. Consequently, their experiences and processes differ significantly.

The possible victory of Donald Trump in the upcoming US presidential election could have profound effects on the development of the West Asian region. Given Trump’s previous foreign policies, which were strongly defined in line with the interests of the Zionist regime and in opposition to Iran, the main question of this article is how Trump’s re-victory could affect the political and security future of the West Asian region? Based on the hypothesis that Trump will seek to strengthen relations with Arab countries and continue to pressure Iran, this article examines the possible consequences of these policies on key developments in the region, such as the Palestinian issue, the future of Gaza, and the normalization of Arab-Zionist relations. The research method of this article is descriptive-analytical and, using library resources and discourse analysis of Trump's policies, attempts to predict the possible effects of his victory on the region. The initial findings of the research show that Trump's re-election could lead to an acceleration of the process of normalizing relations between Arab countries and the Zionist regime and further weakening the position of Palestine. Also, these policies will likely be accompanied by increased tensions between Iran and Western countries and the US's regional allies. Meanwhile, the future of Gaza is increasingly uncertain due to the US's unilateral support for the Zionist regime. The findings of the article show that Trump's possible policies, if he wins again, could lead to a realignment of regional forces and increased tensions in various security and political areas, which will ultimately face new challenges for the prospects for peace and stability in the region.

The political behavior of leaders is shaped by a complex interaction of personality traits, motivations and contextual factors. Recognizing the personality traits and political behaviors of leaders can also help predict their future behaviors and prevent unfortunate events at the national and international level. In view of Trump's victory in the 2024 US election and the crimes that Israel has committed under the pretext of the events of October 7, 2023 in the region led by Benjamin Netanyahu, the need to study the compatibility of the personality characters of these two leaders can be the necessity and importance of this research search. The research methodology in this paper is analytical descriptive and at the same time adaptive to the use of documentation and library tools. The question is, how is the need to study the compatibility of Trump and Netanyahu's behavior in the current situation justified? Both political leaders seem to have many moral and behavioral similarities, but Trump looks more at politics with a self-centered, self-centered economic view, while Netanyahu has a reckless, security-oriented aggressive approach based on the use of force and military this could be considered a difference.As a result, preparing for dangerous scenarios in the worst case scenario to face such a situation can be considered one of the approaches of mutual governments with the Zionist regime (in economic, military war).

The Islamic State of Khorasan Province is one of the branches of ISIS that is not only still active three years after its establishment, but is currently expanding its regional influence. The capture of Kabul by the Taliban in 1400, along with the withdrawal of the United States and the collapse of the Afghan government, created a new opportunity for ISIS Khorasan to regroup and resume its violent attacks. The terrorist acts that ISIS has so far registered in its name have also provoked a reaction from the Taliban, to the extent that this group has given ISIS the nickname "Khavarej". ISIS Khorasan seeks to disrupt the existing order in the region through violent methods. Given the geographical proximity of Afghanistan to the Iran and the goals of ISIS Khorasan and its regional and extra-regional supporters, this article seeks to explain and identify this group, examine the current status and strategy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The region east of the Euphrates due to its geopolitical position in the geographical connection of Syria with Iraq and bordering Turkey, as well as having rich oil and gas reserves and having a prosperous agriculture with major cultivation of wheat and cotton and the passage of the Euphrates and Khabour rivers, has an important place in the developments of Syria, especially in the shadow of the intensification of economic disturbances, the increase in fuel prices and the decrease in the value of the national currency in this country.
The strategic value of this region due to the presence of fertile and oil-rich areas, as well as its proximity to the important and strategic Bokmal crossing and the role of this crossing in connecting the territory with Iraq and neighboring Turkey, makes it one of the important and strategic areas for all regional and international actors involved in the Syrian crisis.
The Syrian Kurdish militia known as the Syrian Democratic Forces or "QSD" are known as the main actor of this region in the military-security field, and its political branch known as the Syrian Democratic Council or in other words "MSD" is also responsible for political affairs and foreign relations. In the current situation, due to the imposition of severe sanctions by the United States and European countries against the Syrian government and people, and as a result, the devaluation of the country's national currency and the intensification of the economic crisis , the region east of the Euphrates due to the presence of rich resources of oil and gas, water and Agriculture has a special and strategic position for the Syrian regime. The presence of American elements in this region is considered as the most important and main deterrent factor in restoring the sovereignty of Damascus over the mentioned region and the tendency of Kurdish militias towards the Syrian government. The supreme leader of the revolution, in his meeting with the president of Russia in 2022, clearly raised the issue of expelling America from this region.

The degree of internationalism in different Administrations of the United States has a direct influence on the degree of interventionism of this country and especially has affected the security and national interests of Iran. Unlike to democratic Administrations, this type of tendency in Republican Administrations has changed its direction twice from a traditional tendency to isolationism to a militant internationalism, during the last century. In order to answer the reason for such a change in the foreign policy preferences of the Republican Party, the present research has used the framework of the neoclassical realism theory and the historical research method and tried to analyze the dynamics in the foreign policy preferences of the Republicans in two historical periods World War II and War on Terror, to identify the factors influencing the occurrence of such a change. The results of the mentioned studies show that in both periods, despite the inherent lack of desire for internationalism, the Republicans have shown a considerable tendency towards a militant internationalism, the first time in order to deal with the emergence of the great threat of Soviet communism after the World War II and the second time It was due to the manifestation of the threat of terrorism after the September 11 attacks. In this way, the results of the foreign policy preferences of the Republicans indicate that in consequence of increase in the degree of major threats against the security of the United States, their tendency to internationalism has increased significantly. A feature that is not seen so strongly in the Democratic Party.

 The Gaza crisis, which erupted following the “Al-Aqsa Storm” operation on October 7, 2023, has become one of the most intricate crises in the history of international relations. This crisis, marked by ongoing violence, infrastructure devastation, and what many view as acts of genocide by the Israeli regime, has drawn intense attention from the international community. Developments in Gaza—especially military conflicts, the humanitarian situation, and internal and regional political shifts—have inevitably influenced U.S. foreign policy approaches and priorities. Thus, the primary research question posed here is: what are the foundational elements shaping U.S. foreign and security policy during the Gaza crisis from 2023 to 2024 ?To address this question, the following hypothesis is proposed: U.S. foreign and security policy in the Gaza crisis is driven by a paradoxical attempt to simultaneously uphold its role and credibility as a defender of human rights and democracy, while also safeguarding the strategic and geopolitical interests of the Israeli regime in the region. Research findings indicate that these policies manifest through a dual approach: on one hand, public statements supporting Palestinian rights and managing international criticism, and on the other, substantive support for the Israeli regime in the form of financial, military, security, and diplomatic aid. This apparent contradiction between discourse and action creates a dualistic image of U.S. foreign and security policy in this crisis.This study employs both quantitative and qualitative analysis within the scientific framework, utilizing a descriptive-explanatory approach and gathering data through library research and documentation methods.