نشریه سیاست دفاعی
پیاپی 106 (بهار 1398)

The classical deterrence theory is not limited to developing an explanation of stability in the relations maintained by the superpowers that have strategic coordination globally. However, this theory is not capable of explaining how deterrence functions in complicated and riot-stricken regions. In other words, in cold war era, the deterrence system merely acted in the relations between superpowers through nuclear deterrence, which subsequently resulted in the transferring of conflicts to regions further down, including the West Asia region. However, in the wake of the cold war era, the world is witnessing the performance of the deterrence system in the West-Asia region as a complicated and riot-ridden regional order, that can explained through the complex deterrence theory. Complex deterrence system includes various actors and subsystems, an important one of which is the actors that play their role in the anti-systemic groups that have a determining role in the deterrence subsystems in the West Asia region. This aspect has been ignored in regional studies and international relations. Now, the present question in this research is that what is the function and role played by the anti-systemic groups in the deterrence system in West Asia's regional order. The hypothesis in this research is that "anti-systemic groups cause the deterrence system in West Asia region to function in disparate and asymmetric circumstances". Therefore, the present research is aimed at providing a theoretical model on the role that anti-systemic groups play in the complex deterrence system in order to help enrich the theoretical literature of the international relations field. This research has been organized and conducted by using causal functional-structural method.

As an element of national strategy and diplomacy, deterrence is not a new concept. However, it one of the old means which has been of widespread use in military history. At its simplest form, deterrence is a specific type of political relation where one side endeavors to influence other party’s behavior for its desired purpose. Deterrence is a theory in international security which has been taken into consideration in the regional and international anarchic order. However, the missile defense system is a means used for deterrence, which off course has different functions in different regions especially in times of instability and stability, hence the regional order and security being different. Aimed at studying the impacts of missile defense system on the regional deterrence of the Islamic Republic of Iran, this research intends to answer this question. What effect does the establishment of missile system by the intervening power in the West Asia region have upon IRI’s regional deterrence? Using the library sources and documents available as well as descriptive method, and addressing concepts such as deterrence, defense systems and missile strategies, this research has addressed the effects of missile defense on the security of the region. The findings of the research indicate that missile defense systems have bidirectional effects on the regional security of the countries. Also, as the main system that amplifies IRIs deterrence, IRAN missile system is capable of strengthening the national security of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Donald Trump should be considered as one of the most important Presidents of the United States, whose offensive policies towards the Islamic Republic of Iran has generated the most tensions and challenges among the two countries. Of these instances, one can refer to the United States withdrawal from JCPOA, banning Iranian people from entering the US, provoking political rivals such as Saudi Arabia as well as Israel against Iran, including Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in the list of international terrorist groups, appointing anti-Iran politicians to important offices in the United States, imposing the harshest economic sanctions on Iran, and threatening Iran to military invasion. Here, what matters is to explain the nature of Trump’s offensive strategy against the Islamic Republic of Iran, and to analyze its security and military consequences. So, the author puts all his energy and efforts into giving a compelling answer to the question: What are Donald Trump’s policies in his repeated threatening statements against the Islamic Republic of Iran. In other words, what are the reasons why Trump has embarked on adopting offensive strategies against the Islamic of Iran? The article's hypothesis shows that the absence of the hegemony intended by the Neoconservatists in the Middle East region accounts as the most important reason why such policies have been adopted. Also, using the theory of Realist hegemony as well as the written and virtual sources and descriptive-analytical methods, the article assumes that the revitalization of the United States’ hegemony in the form of negating Obama’s theory, the inefficiency of the sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran, the disrupted convergence of Shia resistance front, committing to Israel’s security, developing militarism in the region with the centrality of escalating conflict between Wahhabi and Shiite ideologies indicate Trump’s offensive policies against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The environmental terrorism in the sense of employing the environmental factors in terrorist attacks is recognized as the most complex types of terrorism. So far, no definite theory concerned with why there is a tendency towards utilizing these factors in the course of terrorist attacks has been supported. Mass casualties with epidemic effects and creating chaos plus unnatural conditions in the society, and even in the entire world appear to be the central nucleus of most of these attacks, something which has been realized in most of these attacks. The most important objective beyond these attacks is the sense of taking revenge produced by the inability to assert oneself in politics as well as helping realize a worldwide cause devoid of Satan and satanic forces, something that has been vaguely intermingled with a few apocalyptic ideas. An increase in the number of apocalyptic cults together with misunderstandings about various religions and their combinations, and promoting a rationally unacceptable version coupled with their intense tendency towards using environmental, especially biologic factors has led us to address one of the most important and complex dimensions of environmental terrorism. The main objective of this research is to explore the factors creating the tendency towards environmental terrorism, especially using biological factors as well as the identity of its perpetrators. In reality, this research plans to present a personality model of the perpetrators of environmental terrorism. The findings of this research indicate that there are psychological disorders, an apocalyptic and fundamentalist mindset as well as religious motivations for vindictiveness towards secular and non-religious governments on the part of the perpetrators of environmental terrorists.

Acquiring an understanding of the futures of events is one of the main obsessions of authorities in any country. In so doing, many methods have been explained, one of the most famous of which is the Game Theory that predicts how rationalized is the position of actors in a multilateral interaction. Firstly, game theory includes general principles for modeling, and secondly, it has various methods (strategy) in order to analyze the process of gaming and achieve the final result. One of the most prominent of IRI's strategic problems that has been presented internationally as the most important multilateral issue in recent years is the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action which finally led to failure as the United States withdrew, and Iran's economic interests were not met in the nuclear deal. Now, the question is whether the JCPOA could have been able to meet Iran's demands and other actors simultaneously? Was the U.S withdrawal from the JCPOA due to change of the governing party, or was so planned from the outset? Once an analysis of the economy section of the JCPOA by game theory was carried out, it was proved that the future of this deal cannot be predicted from the perspective of the optimal strategy of Pareto. Also, Finally, the common answers proved that the economy section of the JCPOA, even with the analytical methods of the Game Theory, had no answer from the very beginning, and that the United States caused it to fail. It follows that in order for the agreement to take place, one of the actors should have to withdraw from their demands and preferences.

With the cold war out of the way, the establishment of the European Union and the contagion of economic convergence to other cultural, political and security dimensions, the motivations and conditions required to form the E.U. common security regime were realized. Additionally, the development of new international events including the 1990s Balkan crises which severely jeopardized Europe's security strengthened the motivations of a number of Europeanist leaders of this continent including Germany to move on towards the realization of Europe's military-political independence and unity. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, NATO suffered from an identity crisis, but it managed to survive the crisis by redefining itself and its peripheral security environment, and specifically in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, it tried to more objectively highlight its new goals concerned with the strategy of action outside NATO's realm in order to preserve and implement peace, in the process of which Germany too played an active and efficient role. The present research intends to address Germany's approach in composing and implementing EU's defense and security policies using analytical-descriptive research method and collecting sources with library method. The research hypothesis states that Germany in Post-Cold era has been able to maintain an active presence in NATO in order to amplify the operational performance and conducting its new missions beyond the realm of NATO, while at the same time promoting EU's security-defense convergence.