نئورئالیسم

Following the collapse of the bipolar system, many concepts in international relations underwent significant shifts in meaning. Among these, the concept of security experienced a transformation, shifting from a unidimensional military-focused approach to a multidimensional one. This transformation has influenced the foreign policies of various powers, including China, in the Middle East. This study seeks to answer the question: how has the evolution of the concept of security impacted China's foreign policy in the Middle East? The hypothesis proposed is that the transition of the concept of security from a unidimensional military perspective to a multidimensional one has led China to focus on various dimensions of security, such as political, economic, military, and cultural factors in the Middle East. To analyze the changes in China's foreign policy in the region, the study examines four key aspects: the role and significance of energy in China's relations with Middle Eastern countries, China's trade exchanges with the region, China's political strategy in the Middle East, and the significance of the Middle East within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative.

Currently, Iran and China are known as two revisionist actors in the international arena who, while opposing the unipolar international system, have succeeded in creating a multipolar system and changing the equations in their favor, and in this regard, they begin to develop comprehensive cooperation and relations. However, despite the strengthening of relations and the development of cooperation, the role of external and internal factors prevents the formation of strategic relations between Iran and China. Therefore, the main question of the research is what measures Iran and China have taken to develop cooperation and what are the reasons for not forming strategic relations between the parties? The hypothesis of the article is that the dissatisfaction and opposition of Iran and China with the unipolar system and American hegemony provides the necessary capacity and possibility for the development of cooperation and convergence between Tehran and Beijing. Nevertheless, influential external and internal factors and variables have prevented the formation of a specific and uniform pattern in Iran-China relations and these relations do not take a strategic form. The method used in this article is descriptive-analytical.

Middle East; Complex regions, with an intertwined structure and the structure of the international system, which includes the security of the region as well as the foundation of international relations of states in the future. The aim, therefore, is to answer the question of what effect the polarization developments in the international system between 1980 and 2021 have had on the conflicts and security of the Middle East? It can be said that the Middle East region is facing a pervasive and comprehensive insecurity due to the internal situation and the structure of the international system, so such regions can not, in terms of security, the impact of the international system on their orientations, policies and strategies. To prevent. In the current era of the international system, this influence on the Middle East sub-system has been very special. The findings of this study are based on the fact that with the disappearance of the bipolar system in 1991 and the emergence of the US-led unipolar system, the Middle East has experienced systemic turmoil, and the monopoly system (US) in 1991-2021 more than the bipolar system (America and the Soviet Union) In the years 1980-1991, he was influential in creating conflict and war in the Middle East. The expansion of the depth and scope of political, social, economic, and cultural instability in the Middle East is one of the consequences of such a situation. The research method is descriptive-analytical and using library resources.

In this article, we seek to examine the foreign policy of the United States of America towards Iran in the era of Obama and Trump based on the theory of aggressive realism. Aggressive realism seeks to answer the mystery of security, and in the meantime, the only way to achieve convincing security is the constant increase in power, so that in the light of those countries, by gaining relative power, they can achieve relative security (compared to others). This theory has the greatest ability to explain the foreign policy of the United States towards Iran during the period under study. This research, with a descriptive-analytical approach, seeks to answer the question, what was the foreign policy of the United States of America towards Iran in the era of Obama and Trump based on the theory of aggressive realism? In response to the mentioned question, this hypothesis is proposed:

Examining the theories about neorealism shows that this school has always been examined in terms of form and the basis of its difference has focused on a different formal attitude compared to other forms of cinema. Also, we should not forget Deleuze's ontological view and those of others, which are clearly based on the relationship between this cinema and reality as well as moving towards being more real.However, the main question here focuses on the whyness of moving to reality. What causes the formation of such cinema is the era before this cinema and the cinema before neorealism, that is, the era of fascism and the cinema of fascism.The cinema of fascism had distanced man from his own moral existence and equivalized being limited to power and denying human individuality replaced with a subordinated and unified population to the concept of nationalism.However, the failure of the government and the disasters caused by the war showed the Italian artists that when morality is trampled and individual rights are ignored, great disasters occur. Italian cinematographers came to the realization that they should remind the society that if man abandons his moral existence, he will become a dangerous being.Therefore, from such a point of view that emphasizes ethics and commitment, the emergence of form can only be achieved through the lens of showing reality, and the rest of formal techniques are aimed at introducing humans as social beings, ethical and committed.

Moving toward space was largely the result of the competition of terrestrial superpowers for planetary hegemony. Moving toward space has created a new criterion for recognizing the promotion of power and allocation of credit in the global community. The exploration and space technologies of the two superpowers, made the competition between them more intense. The launch of Sputnik 1 by the Soviet Union marked the beginning of the space race. Finally, the United States declared itself the winner of the space race by landing on the moon. But then not only did the rivalry between the two countries not end, but it also called on other countries, such as China, India, Japan and some European countries. From the beginning of the space age until now, military activities have been an important part of the goals of the powers. The main question is how space has played a role in intensifying competition between powers. The hypothesis of this article also believes that space has intensified competition between countries, especially space powers, by creating modern weapons and new conditions. From the point of view of neorealism, Space has become a new arena for intensifying competition between countries in the military field and gaining prestige.

Neoliberal Institutionalism sees the task of International and Regional Institutions and organizations as moderating anarchy and developing cooperation between members and the peaceful resolution of international conflicts and crises; But look at the performance of Institutions in International crises clearly shows that in practice, not in theory, Neorealists are right that international and regional institutions are just political phenomena that reflect the goals and interests of powerful actors And their effectiveness depends heavily on the key principle that their goals are in line with the interests of the great powers.To test this hypothesis in the present study, The Syrian crisis is being studied as a case study. The ongoing research on the Syrian crisis claims that the Conflict of interests between Great powers in the Security Council And also the regional powers in the Arab League on the Syrian crisis was the main reason for the failure of the UN and the Arab League to manage the Syrian crisis peacefully.

Studies show that the narratives of non-indigenous security schools about the origins of ISIL's threats in the Islamic world are ineffective. So, it is necessary to know the exact pattern of ISIL's behavior in the Islamic world based on a local theory.

The main method of the present study; Deductive and its approach is critical and analytical. The method of data analysis is also qualitative.

Now the question is, why can't non-indigenous security schools recognize the origins of ISIS threats in the Islamic world? And how does the system of dominance Theory (presented by Ayatollah Khamenei) identify these threats? The author argues that Western security schools are incapable of this because of their connection to humanism, power, and the specific geopolitics of their thinking.

Rsult: 

In contrast, the System of dominance theory with a monotheistic worldview, in spite of any particular consideration of power and with an indigenous approach, regulates the causes, methods and goals of ISIL in the Islamic world. In this regard, the causes of ISIL's threats are in sharing ISIL's interests with the leaders of the system of dominance. (Marginalizing the pattern of resistance).

Iraq's developments are one of the most important issues of West Asia, which in the years after 2003 involved somehow all foreign actors and the role of the United States as an interventionist player in Western Asian regional developments. Washington views the developments in Iraq as an important factor in redefining the regional order and has made the developments in its Middle East policy with the aim of achieving regional goals and interests. So the question is, what is the policy of the United States in its new strategy on the developments in Iraq? The research hypothesis is that the United States has adopted an aggressive and aggressive policy towards Iraq's developments in pursuit of its interests and objectives, such as reducing the regional influence of Iran and accessing Iraq's oil resources. Washington, by adopting such a policy, while securing the interests of the arms dealers, will launch on the pretext that the terrorists will not return to Iraq and to stabilize in the country to consolidate the presence and role of the United States in the future of Iraq.The research method is descriptive-analytic based on the theory of neorealism.

In recent years, the occurrence of small and large crises in the West Asian region has caused regional and extra-regional actors to try to strengthen the political order in accordance with their national interests. In the meantime, the foreign policy strategy of the Islamic Republic of Iran as a regional power and Russia as a trans-regional country is based on a new realist perspective based on success and its implementation based on national interests. Based on this, the main question of this research This is how the foreign policy strategies of Iran and Russia can be explained in relation to the political order in the West Asian region. The hypothesis is that Iran's strategy in the region is based on gaining Russia's support in order to counter the influence of countries opposed to Iran, and Russia's strategy It is based on the axis of security and influence as a trans-regional country. The research method is descriptive-analytical research and the collection of information from library sources. The findings of the research show that Iran's foreign policy strategy in relation to Russia in the region should be based on a realistic view based on international and regional cooperation, identifying goals. common and contradictory should be shared with Russia and avoid entering into conflicting areas between the two countries.

The war of Iraqi Ba’athist regime against Iran broke out in 1981 by the aggression of Saddam's regime against Iran. Regional and trans-regional actors influenced the processes involved in this war. In other words, it was the only international war in which all regional and trans-regional powers reached a theoretical and hardware consensus to defeat one side, Iran. In the meantime, the role of the Security Council in managing the crisis in the imposed war of iraqi Ba’athist regime against iran is quite significant. Accordingly, the main question of this research is: “what was the role of the UN Security Council, as the main custodian of international peace and security, in managing the war of Iraqi Ba’athist regime against Iran?” To answer this question in the context of neorealism, the researcher hypothesizes that: The UN Security Council was intended towards the interests of the great powers in managing the imposed war of iraqi Ba’athist regime against iran, and was not free to decide on the basis of the rules of collective security. In fact, from a neorealist view of international institutes, the Security Council acted not as an entity of providing collective security, but as an instrument in the hands of the great powers in the war of Iraqi Ba’athist regime against Iran.

Cooperation and conflict of interest are features of the behavior of governments in international politics, and the international self-help environment has led governments to seek effective tools of war and military advantages to defend their totality and existence. This struggle for survival and self-preservation in an insecure international environment has led to a shift in warfare technology and military weapons. So that the types of chemical, microbial and nuclear weapons known as weapons of mass destruction have been invented by the great powers and the advanced industrial governments and have been distributed and propagated among other actors. This shift in the tools of war has resulted in significant environmental and economic costs. In other words, along with the progress and development of societies developed in the modern era, various types of military weapons have been added, which has caused various costs and damages. This article examines the rules for the prohibition of the use of weapons of mass destruction and its challenges with respect to neo-realist theories, as well as the norms, rules and values ​​that affect the prohibition of the use of weapons of mass destruction in international conflicts. The passage has been examined

The South Caucasus region faces a series crises and conflicts that have persisted for many years, and in the near future, we cannot be hoped for a settlement. Russia's role in these crises seem to be decisive. Therefore, the analysis of Russia's interests in these crises can help identify the roots and dimensions of these crises and draw a vision of their resolution. In this study, by examining the conflicts in the South Caucasus and Russia's relations with the countries of this region, it has been attempted to answer the main question in the framework of neorealism school. The research question is: What role does Russia play in these conflicts and what goals and interests are pursued by this country? The findings of the research show that Russia, according to its political and security approach, has defined the near abroad, especially the South Caucasus, as its natural sphere of influence. Russia, therefore, does not tolerate any foreign intervention and influence of Western countries in that region. By intervening in existing conflicts and helping to continuation of the crisis, Russia pursues a policy of dependence of the countries of the region on Russia and the prevention of the influence of other powers. In this study, theoretical framework of research is neo-realism in international relations; the research method is descriptive-analytic; and the method of collecting information and data was library.

Foreign policy of the major powers in international issues and regional developments are very important. Such a way that sometimes, their presence The political fate of a country Has undergone a remarkable transformation. Yemen witnessed violent conflict in recent years that the internal conflicts started and now has become the arena of confrontation of regional and trans-regional powers. political crisis in the these country was started in 2011 after the departure of Saleh and the creation of Mansur hadi ended and in 2015 the crisis appeared in another form. Saudi Arabia is a major player in Yemen That Always trying to The weakening of Yemen to increase their influence in the country. The fall of Saleh and the creation of key Saudi Arabia Mansur hadi, And popular opposition at the same time, Yemen has involved a tension Until now there. America in the face of these developments, special partnership with Saudi Arabia Has implemented. This paper aims to address this question: What is the America and the Fsaudi arabia foreign policy towards the Syrian crisis? The main discussion of the paper is that Saudi Arabia's Yemen Development, Policy status quo With Invasive approach And United States of America to protect its own interests That Sometimes at odds with the policies of Saudi Arabia, towards thees developments, Convergence approach is adopted by Saudi Arabia. The research method in this paper is descriptive analysis with using library tools.

This paper examines the Look East approach in foreign policy of Islamic Republic of Iran and the fragility of the cooperation in the framework of Neorealism. The method in this paper is descriptive - Analytical and data collected for Library from various sources and then analysis based on the theory of research. Look East policy Fans say Orientation to the East Asian powerful nations and alliances with them can meet Iran's national interests and resolve strategic ally for Iran's lack. In this regard, often to Russia and China, which over the years have shown that wish to expand its relations with Iran. This trend is consistent with the assumption of Neorealism that when the structure of international goes toward hegemony, Governments that are subject to security policies of hegemony are close together. At the same time, Neorealism is pessimistic to cooperation in the anarchic arena. They believe that the cooperation not feasible just in socio-economic and politically low levels and not to the level of survival. In addition, in the anarchic international system, states are concerned about Absolute gains of cooperation. Accordingly, China, Russia and India cannot be standing a nuclear state with regional ambitions on your side.

Security is the vital and important subject in international relations. Theories of International relations provide different views about the states of creating secure condition or emergence of insecurity. Thus, the question of security has been a mind-challenging subject for theorist of the field for a long time. The question that is about to be addressed in this paper is: what homogeneities and heterogeneities exist between postmodernism and neorealism in the security domain? In this matter the hypothesis is that regarding the positivist and post-positivist approaches of the two, neorealism and postmodernism schetch different views about security. Using library resources and with comparative methodology, the present inquiry tries to deal with discussions about security from the viewpoints of neorealism and postmodernism, to show similarities and differences in this respect. The findings indicates that neorealism has reinforced -super-governmental dignity in the field of security. However, the common basis of all postmodernist derivisions critiisizes state as a main and exclusive actor in the established positivist security approach.