پژوهش نامه ایرانی سیاست بین الملل
سال پنجم شماره 2 (پیاپی 10، بهار و تابستان 1396)

Cosmopolitanism is a body of thinking and practice committed to building a more just and sustainable international order, but it has never been systematically applied to the question or practice of security. This article argues that international threats as well as abusing of the security notion to cause insecurity pave way for a compelling normative and empirical case for a new security paradigm: security cosmopolitanism. Security cosmopolitanism is theoretizied to criticise and reform both national and collective security policies and processes through developing norms and ends, redefining their ontological foundations, and generating guiding ethical principles. It contributes to understanding of global security as a universal good by which the security of all states and all human beings is of equal weight, causal chains and processes spread widely across space and through time, and security actors are committed to consider the global impact of their choices. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: This study tends to use the theoretical framework provided by Anthony Burke to outline the fundamental, ethical, and ontological frameworks of a security vision that challenges the dominant ontological foundations of national security and international community based on a social contract between the citizen and the state. This article further develops and cuts across core themes in critical security studies from the normative agenda of the English and Welsh Schools to the hypercritical concerns of post-structuralist security studies as well as biopolitics, liberalism, governmentality, and universalism. The theory of security cosmopolitanism advanced here draws upon and contests elements of all these critical approaches. It challenges the reluctance of poststructuralist writers to advance normative claims or theorize the responsible exercise of power and governance, and supplements the Kantian and Habermasian ethics of the Welsh School. 4. RESULTS & DISCUSSION Security cosmopolitanism argues that not only states cannot contain and immunize the national social body from external threats but also insecurity derives from intenational threats caused by choices, powers, and systems of modernity. It generates a new analytical model for global security. CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS: Focusing on Anthony Burke's deep-seated and critical research that challenges critical frameworks, national security, and international society, this study reviews the security model of cosmopolitanism was presented. Security cosmopolitanism aims to promote security for all human beings through a series of transformations in three levels: the identity forms and policies of states; the structures, norms, commitments, and operations of global governance; and the actions of corporations and other non-state actors that impact the security of people and ecosystems.

In recent years, Iran-Turkey relations have experienced different situations from friendship to rivalry and even enmity. The ambivalence has raised various explanations among observers in international relations and foreign policy. This article aims to assess durability of Iran-Turkey relations regardless of their disputes. In other words, the main question here is why Iran and Turkey have not been subject to a long-term tension despite their critical rivalries in recent years. We hypothesize that linkage between securitizing and destabilizing processes affecting both states has obliged them to prevent falling into crisis and welcome cooperation. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: It seems that regional security complex theory could be helpful here. Security complex theory was first sketched out by Barry Buzan. Security complexes address the level of region located between national units and international systems. So, the theory focuses on the regions as the objects of security analysis, and offers an analytical framework for dealing with them. This theory aims to highlight the relative autonomy of regional security relations. In this regard, seven factors including geographical neighborhood, models of amity and enmity, existence of two influential actors, relative independence, security interdependence, cultural-civilizational relationships, and economic relations have been examined in many regions from the Middle East to South and East of Asia. We employed an explanatory method. In the recent century, Iran and Turkey have managed to cope with some crises in their bilateral relations and prevent damages to themselves. This constitutes our dependent variable: Crisis-declining of Iran-Turkey relations. Several factors are involved in this situation, but we think the key factor is security linkage. We extract seven indicators using regional security complex theory based on which we examine the relation between dependent and independent variables. DISCUSSION & DISCUSSION: As it was said above, security linkage between Iran and Turkey discussed in seven sections are as follows: a) Geographical neighborhood: Thanks to their location in the AsianEuropean pathway, Iran and Turkey are subject to similar geographical issues. These similarities include vicinity to Caucasus, accessibility to strategic straits such as Bosporus and Hormuz, direct access to South Asia and South Europe (respectively by Iran and Turkey), subjecting to historically common external threat especially by Russia, and so forth. b) Models of amity and enmity: In this section, problems such as border disputes, ethnical concerns, and historical relations are addressed. In this regard, Kurdish irredentism has unified the two countries’ policymakers. c) Existence of two influential regional actors: A regional security complex comes into effect on the basis of its actors. In this case, every one accepts that Iran and Turkey are two key actors. Both are playing very important roles in the economic and political processes in their surrounding environment. d) Relative independence: The next factor influencing security complex is relative independence in security relations of one region regarding the other. In this framework, there are two joint concerns between Turkey and Iran distinguishing them from other countries in the Middle East and Levant: First, they tend to encounter Kurdish irredentism; second, they oppose radical religious fundamentalism out of their control. e) Security interdependence: The survival of each player within a security complex interacts with the survival of the other players. Accordingly, Iran and Turkey cannot neglect each other in protecting their security.
f) Cultural-civilizational relationships: Iran and Turkey share certain historical political traditions. These traditions, today, constitute a base for a vast linkage between the two nations. For example, their similar literary tradition or life style leads to their intersubjective vicinity. g) Economic relations: Iran and Turkey are among the economic partners of each other experiencing a wide bilateral trade. CONCLUSION & SUGGESTIONS: Findings of the article show that Iran and Turkey avoid deepening mutual tensions due to their belonging to the same security complex.

In the new round of Iran's nuclear talks with the P5 + 1 countries in the Rouhani's administration, Iranian diplomats took advantage of "media diplomacy" along with political diplomacy to continue nuclear talks and “the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Center for Public and Media Diplomacy " increasingly took advantage of the media as diplomatic channels to enhance the process of Iran's nuclear talks with the West. This effort has determined the international community's diplomatic approach to the Rouhani’s administration and the international community's view on the Iran's nuclear file. The subject of this study is to examine the role of media diplomacy in changing the international community's approach to the Islamic Republic of Iran at the time of nuclear talks in Rouhani's government. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: The theoretical framework of this research is based on the theory of media convergence. In the model of media convergence in nuclear talks, the media and the Department of State's media diplomacy of the ministry of foreign affairs should be considered as two main axes, and this convergence ataffects the world public opinion, the public opinion of the P5 + 1 countries, the public opinion of Iran,theopponents and domestic critics of the talks in Iran, the members of the negotiating team of Iran, and the members of the negotiating team of 1 + 5. The method doingapplied in this research is a combination of (quantitative and qualitative analyses.First, by referring to direct (interviewing) and indirect (library) sources, with the discussion of media representation in the process of nuclear talks, the effects of media diplomacy on the outcome of the nuclear negotiations are measured operationally. Then, using quantitative analysis, the data obtained through SPSS is analyzed. The qualitative part of this research is also done utilizing grounded theory. In the model of media convergence in the nuclear negotiations, the relationship between the main actors of convergence with the audience (public opinion of the world, public opinion of the P5 + 1 countries, public opinion of Iran, opponents and domestic critics of the negotiations in Iran, members of the negotiating team of Iran, and members of the negotiating team of 5+1) is a two-way relationship. Indeed, if the main actors of convergence achieve their media diplomacy goals and advance nuclear negotiations, they will succeed in maintaining their two-way and interactive relationship with the audience so that they can change the public opinion about the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear issue and can find the strength and power to deal with the media diplomacy of the P5 + 1 countries, including the United States. CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS: Media diplomacy in the nuclear talks has changed the international atmosphere in favor of Iran in the negotiations. The world realized that it reached agreement with the Iranian people based on logic, respect, dialogue, mutual understanding and shared interests. Accordingly, negotiations were pursued vigorously and a comprehensive nuclear agreement between Iran and the P5 + 1 countries was reached. Proposals are being made to promote media policy and media diplomacy in dealing with the modern media environment and international developments; 1. Iran needs more investments in the development of media with a regional and transnational impact level and to do this, the position of international journalism in Iran should be upgraded. 2. Developing a strategy and media attachment for domestic media is necessary for the purposes of media diplomacy in the country. 3. The establishment of a Media Diplomacy Center or Strategic Communications Center can help identify outreach issues and determine the direction of domestic media in dealing with topics that are defined as national interests.

INTRODUCTION: In accordance with domestic and international law, torture is prohibited. However, there remains a question: whether torture is absolutely prohibited and is not permitted in any circumstances or it can be prescribed in necessity cases. According to this research, although emergency may be justified, application of this institution in torture confronts with important challenges. The prohibition of torture is absolute in domestic and international law. Unnecessariness, invalidity and unreliability of information obtained under torture indicate the absolute prohibition of torture . THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: It seems that there is not disagreement regarding the prohibition of torture in domestic and international law. For example ″Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984″that is the most important document prohibiting torture. Article 1 of this Convention defined torture: ″Torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.″ Moreover, in Iran’s domestic law, Article 38 of the Constitution states that torture is prohibited. On the other hand, the definition of necessity should be considered. Emergency is defined as to compel to accept harm. In legal terms, necessity and emergency are often synonymous and are one of the justifications and it is a defense that breaks the law in order to prevent greater harm. The question is whether the torture is permissible in urgent circumstances such as protecting the country? For example it can be noted “Ticking Bomb Scenario” in international law. The ticking bomb scenario is a hypothetical “thought experiment” that is used to question the absolute prohibition of torture. It can be formulated as follows: “Suppose that a perpetrator of an imminent terrorist attack, that will kill many people, is in the hands of the authorities and that he will disclose the information needed to prevent the attack only if he is tortured”. In customary international and treaties law, as well as the different legal systems has answered the question. For example, Jay S. Bybee, Assistant Attorney General in America 2002, to the resorting of “Self- Defense” to justify torture and states that the use of torture is essential to obtain information in order to prevent imminent threat to the Unites States and its citizens. Therefore two views exist regarding prohibition of torture in urgent circumstance in the legal: One group holds that torture is prohibited; but torture is permitted in urgent and emergency circumstances to protect and secure the society. But in contrast, the second group believe torture is absolutely prohibited. The method of research in this study is descriptive- analytical. Data are collected from library sources, articles, books, document and scientific publication to analyze and compare the issue. The importance of the prohibition of torture has been recognized at the domestic and international law. Among international documents and treaties concerning this issue is the ″Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984.″ Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 2 of this Convention state: ″No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.″ ″An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.″ Two views have been discussed regarding torture in international law. One group holds that torture is prohibited except in urgent and emergency circumstances protect and secure the society. This group point to cases such as self- defense, urgent defense, and coercive interrogation and mitigation circumstances perpetrators of torture to justify torture. In contrast, the second group maintain that torture is absolutely prohibited. Slippery slope, inessential, invalidity and unreliability of information obtained under torture are some of the facts this group refer to. This research argues that torture is absolutely prohibited in domestic and international law. CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS: In accordance with domestic and international law torture is absolutely prohibited. Those who believe that torture is permitted in urgent circumstances resort to cases as self-defense, urgent defense, coercive interrogation and mitigation of punishment to perpetrators of torture. They believe that torture is necessary to obtain information from the. It is worth noting that there is no self- defense or urgent defense in such circumstances. The most important condition of self- defense is imminent aggression that doesn’t exist in this case. Arrested suspects are not a threat. Rather, they are only defenseless victims and can never be considered an imminent threat. In addition to the most important condition of urgent defense is necessity that does not exist in this case. Although sometimes torture may lead to obtain information but there is no guarantee that in all cases, the accused under torture will tell the truth and we can’t make sure that the accused have information. On the other hand, torture is contagious (slippery slope). Once torture is permitted, it may not be stopped. Torture will be used to punish convicted criminals, to extract information from suspects and even witnesses in routine criminal cases, and to intimidate political opponents. So torture should be absolutely prohibited in domestic and international laws. Therefore, it is necessary to hold training courses to enhance the scientific level officials and training cause of absolute prohibition on torture, even in cases of emergency in order to protect civil rights.

The study of political bordersborders is one of the major issues in political geography. Borders are important because they separate territories and determine sovereign states. However, all borders are not equally important It is essential to identify the factors that determine border importance and why some borders are more important than the other.This issue has caused problems in planning and controlling of the borders due to the lack of knowledge about such factors and their on border planningAccordingly, the present study attempts to extract the factors influencing the importance of borders , organize the planning and design of the border regions, and control and managethe land borders. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: The border lines that draw on the lands between countries and separate the range of sovereignty, ownership, and jurisdiction of governments in spatial domains are called land borders. The extent of control, military forces employed and security measures taken to maintain and secure borders determine their importance. Highly important borders are subject to potential disputes between two or more political entities. These borders will allow governments and even nations to take more care to maintain the integrity and security of these areas. The more important a border, the more costly it is to secure. This conflict can have internal or external origins and may be due to the territoriality of the neighboring country or because of the independence and rebelliousness of the internal borderland. These factor in turn depend on economic significance, military significance, political importance, historical significance, and cultural significance of borders. This research is conducted using descriptive method of analysis. is the data were collected using libraryand field survey (questionnaire) methods. The questionnaire is designed to include two steps. In the first step, the 40 factors extracted from the various views and perspectives related to the discussion of the five-section (very much to very little) should be verified or rejected. In the second step: each of the factors in the desired dimensions was weighted (From one to five). The statistical population selected to respond to the questionnaires included three groups: 1- Professors: including professors of political geography, political science, international relations, etc. 2- students and graduates of Ph.D. in the above fields, 3- Executive officials including the executive authorities of the country in the border area. Existing theories on border importance measurement, show that several factors can affect the importance of borders in different ways. We divided the 40 most important factors in 8 categories:1. Geographic dimension including, border geomorphology, distance from the center (distance) natural geographical isolation, border location, border shape.
2. Demography: quantitative characteristics of the population living on the border, population quality, kinship relations across the border, distribution and dispersion of the population in border areas, unauthorized crossing of border.
3. Economic dimension: the level of development on the two sides of the border, the existence of common border resources (fluid and constant), the valuable resources in bordere areas, the cross-border situation of the border region, the economic development of the border region. 4. Cultural dimension: Ethnic, racial, cross-border links, religious links on the two sides of the border, cultural links with the center of the country, cultural development in the border region, the morale and specific cultural characteristics of the frontier.
5. Security-defense dimension: strategic location of the border area, the existence of protected parks and security areas in the border area, the existence of insecure neighbors, the density of threats, military contracts of neighboring states with supranational powers.
6. Legal-identity dimension: the presence of ancient artifacts in the border regions, the presence of the burial ventures and religious and national myths in the border regions, the ambiguity in the contracts, historical affiliation, the refusal of previous contracts concluded by the new governments.
7. The political dimension: the communication policy of the two countries, the internal policies of the border regions, the ideology and strategy of the border of two countries, the border policy, the political system of the two neighboring countries.
8. Regional and global dimension: the location in an insecure area, the number of neighbors, the regional geopolitical structure, the global geopolitical structure, the presence and support of some countries and powers in the border region.
In order to use the opinions of researchers and relevant experts, a questionnaire was distributed between three members: Professors in political geography, political science and international relations, PhD candidates and graduates in the fields and border guards holding master's degree. t-test was used to test the data credibility. In this test, the standard deviation is important so that if the standard deviation is less than 0.05, the relationship will be established and verified. The results of the findings of the questionnaire show that out of the 40 factors derived from library findings, only four of the factors were rejected, and the rest were confirmed. These factors include "the existence of parks and protected areas of the military" in the security- defense dimension and two indicators of "the presence of antiquities" as well as "the presence of burial ventures and religious and national myths in the border regions" related to legal identity dimension. CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS: The political borders and border regions define the limits of the sovereignty of countries and the confrontation and encounter between neighboring governments and nations, that interact with the world around them in this area. Therefore, borders are important, but sometimes the factors increase or decrease this importance from various aspects. So far, research on the importance of borders has been limited to the factors leading to geopolitical significance, military significance, and border or communication security functions. Therefore, in this research, all the factors that matter to a border are extensively explored and analyzed as far as possible. In the theoretical part of the research, factors affecting the importance of borders should gather based on the study of theories and perspectives and resources related to the borders. According to these studies, 40 factors can be effective in increasing the importance of borders. The results of the questionnaire's findings indicate that authorities and experts also confirmed the extracted factors, and only 3 factors of 40 factors including the existence of protected parks and protected areas in the border region, "the existence of an ancient artifacts in the border region " and " The existence of burial ventures and religious and national myths in the border regions" was rejected. Also, leveling of factors in each of the eight dimensions with the help of weighting factors by allocation method showed that in the geographical dimension, "geographical location of the border", in the demographic dimension, "kinship relations across the border", in the economic dimension, "cross-border position of the border region", in the cultural dimension, " Cultural links with the center ", in the security dimension, "the existence of insecure neighbors", in the legal- identity dimension, "the existence of ambiguity in Contracts ". In the political dimension, " The ideology and strategy of the two countries bordered "and in the regional and global dimension, " locating in a region Insecure " factors were selected as the most influential factors in their respective dimensions. Also, at the end of each dimension, they were ranked as follows: 1. Defensive Security Dimension, 2. Economic Dimension, 3. Political Dimension, 4. Geographic Dimension, 5. Regional and Global Dimension, 6. Demographic Dimension, 7.Cultural dimension, and 8. legal –identity dimension.

Iraq was born after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire in 1918 and was recognized as a sovereign state in the international system. Before the emergence of Iraq as an independent country, Iran and Iraq had intertwined historical and geographical links coupled with a reciprocal geopolitical dependency. However, with the birth of a new Iraq, a combination of geographical inequalities and geopolitical bottlenecks gave rise to intensified geopolitical rivalries between Iraq and Iran. This situation tempted both countries to tap into their maximum geopolitical potentials to enhance their national power and meet their national interests which in turn swept aside their dependency for a geopolitical challenge.Domestic turmoil and absolute authoritarianism in Iraq transformed political parties and ethno-religious groups into sources of pressure on the Iraq state. In response, the Iraq state began to utilize geopolitical capacities to pose geopolitical challenges to regional countries, in particular Iran. The main question we are seeking to answer is “what are the most important geopolitical foundations influencing Iran-Iraq relations”? A number of factors have been proposed in answer to this question which, among other things, includes hydro-politics, the Kurds’ struggle for independence, national identity, religious divisions, rivalries of political factions and geographical borders. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK :
2.1. Geopolitical foundation
Geopolitical foundations are the result of the effects of geographical factors and interplay of geographical and political phenomena in the environment which lead to the generation of power (Hosseinpour, 2013, P.169). Geopolitical foundations depend on geopolitical relations which bring about the geopolitical superiority of geographical and political phenomena. Geopolitical components are geopolitical foundations which may determine global, regional, and national geopolitical constructs. Of geopolitical components with inherent potentiality of geopolitical foundations, the following items could be mentioned: 1. Central and historical cores (associated with national or regional identity, ideology or centers for generation and development of governments), 2. Capitals and political centers (political axis, hub and realm of the state, the reciprocal behaviors of the public and the state), 3. icomenies (the most active economic regions), 4. Effective national and regional territories (with acceptable resources and a massive development potential), 5. Empty and unpopulated areas (defensive depth), 6. Borders (boundaries of political realms of regions, hotbeds of conflicts), 7. Heterogeneous areas (regions targeted by minorities for secession, government’s gaps) (Cohen, 2008).
2.2. Geopolitical relations
Geopolitical relations refer to a set of relations among political actors based on politics, geography and power. Geopolitical relations are characterized by different communication patterns such as interaction, rivalry, conflicts, hegemony and influence.
2.3. Geopolitical Code
It refers to assessing geographical locations and forms the basis for formulation of micro and macro strategies as well as designing operation plans of national and trans-national development in overseas operation agenda (Taylor, 1994). Descriptive analysis is conducted in this research. The research materials were collected via employing library method (books, journals, and the Internet), interviewing academic professors, military, and security experts, and attending relevant meetings of experts. Iraq geopolitical codes have been categorized as stable and variable. The most important stable geopolitical factors in Iran-Iraq relations include Iraq’s restricted access o to the Persian Gulf, geopolitics of Najaf and Karbala, hydro-politics of the Arvand River (Shatt al-Arab) and border disputes over division of water. The intellectual significance of Baghdad and Mosul, Arabic identity, annexationist movements and the plurality of the religious, tribal, and political entities are among Influential geopolitical codes. CONCLUSIONS & SUGGESTIONS: Over the past fifty years, Iran and Iraq have viewed each other from a security perspective. Under the current circumstances, the increasing positive attitude towards Iran among Iraqi actors leads to Iran-Iraq security cooperation. Geographical locations, connecting roads to important regional countries, water networks and other stable geopolitical factors are the Iraq government’s sources of power. A proper foreign policy is one that can truly reflect the national power of a country and extend its geopolitical range. This is realized when the foreign policy of a given country can utilize all available capacities (and even apparently unavailable ones) as strategic assets and resources to enhance its power range at national, regional, and international levels. Most of Iraq’s geopolitical codes affect its relations with Iran either positively or negatively. However, it is the level and range of Iran’ geopolitics which must be analyzed within the framework of geopolitical strategies of both countries. For Iraq, the national power is not recognized within its geographical and political factors and it thus defines geopolitical codes for itself which exclusively affects its relations with Iran. In contrast, Iran’s geopolitical codes have regional coverage. The geopolitical strategy developed for Iran is to play an influential role at the regional level. The most favorable geopolitical strategy for Iran would be utilizing Iraq’s geopolitical codes to enhance its level, depth, and influence across the region. For the same reason, Iraq’s application of its geopolitical codes to adjust its relations with Iran greatly influences the quality and orientation of Iran’s geopolitical strategy in the region. In other words, Iraq’s geopolitical elements help improve its relations with Iran. This amity in turn helps Iran use such geopolitical codes to further its geopolitical range in the region.

Under President Ahmadinejad (2005-2013) and the dominance of following the revisionism and justice-seeking discourses in his foreign policy, Iran tended to unify and coalesce with ultra-leftist Latin American leaders with whom the sitting President shared discursive principles However, as Hassan Rouhani took office in 2013, Iran decreased interest in coalition with Latin American countries. The reason why during President Hassan Rouhani’s terms the Islamic Republic of Iran turned away from Ahmadinejad’s approach regarding Latin American countries in favor of digression and lack of relationship is a question that the present paper seek to answer through an explanatory method. Therefore, it is hypothesized that transformation at the level of policymaking resulted in the reduction of Islamic Republic of Iran's relations with countries of this region which in turn has changed and transformed the available sub-discourses in the arena of foreign policy. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: In the present study, an analytical model of structure-agent is used to explain Rouhani’s foreign policy towards Latin American countries. It should be clarified that, the focus is on internal structures and agent factor as well as the role they play in determining the foreign policy. The analytical model is used to identify the influence of agent factor on Iran’s foreign policy. The present study applied the explanatory method. In order to gather data, the researchers use books, articles, and authentic websites. Research findings indicate that structural factor has more influential power in comparison to human and agent factor in Iran’s foreign policy. If changes and developments do not intervene and contrast with the grand discourse of the Islamic Revolution, governmental agents can play their roles more creatively, and therefore, enter their believes and values into the policy making and decision making processes. CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION: The present paper aims at explaining the factors that made Iran turn from Latin American countries. It hypothesizes that under Hassan Rouhani as the new president of Iran, which subsequently led to the transformation of available sub-discourses, Iran paid more attention to Latin America than the Middle Eastern and Central Asian countries. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad tended to establish relations with Latin American countries following his revisionist approach to the international politics. This tendency, however, became less important in Iran's foreign policy under Hassan Rouhani while détente subdiscourses and constructive engagement with the world are dominant. Contrary to his predecessors, Rouhani does not tend to unite with Latin American. Rather, he establishes relations with neighboring countries, favors détente policy with the west, particularly the U.S, and constructive engagement with the international community. With the rule of moderation discourse, he seeks to put an end to a decade of stagnation and radicalism in Iran's foreign policy. He believes that as a result of close relations with and extremist tendencies toward Latin American countries and paying less attention to neighboring countries in order to serve national interests and security during the past two years of presidency, Iran's foreign policy stayed away from moderation,. Therefore, efforts should be taken into account as soon as possible to eliminate such deficiency in Iran's foreign policy. According to president Rouhani, an appropriate policy is the one that serves national interests and security. He also states that if foreign policy guarantees the national interests and leads the nation to development and growth, or in other words, reduces the costs and increases the benefits, then this type of foreign policy will be suitable. Meanwhile, since the U.S. keeps a close eye on the Latin American developments, it is a bad idea for Iran to get involved in this region. Otherwise, Iran’s national interest and security may be threatened by new U.S. sanctions. Thus, once Rouhani took office, he sought to reduce tensions and increase constructive engagement with the world and he also tried shift attention from Latin America to the Middle East and Central Asia.