نشریه مطالعات سیاسی جهان اسلام
پیاپی 35 (پاییز 1399)

After the transition to democracy began in 2010 in the West Asian region, it did not take long for the wave of democratization to reach Syria and Bahrain. Expectations from the UN Security Council for peace and security increased as the ground for peace was restored and human rights abuses were widespread. In such circumstances, the United States, as one of the most influential permanent members of the Council, has taken a questionable stance on the developments in Syria and Bahrain, which has been the subject of this article. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to answer the question, what considerations and motives have led to such a contradictory orientation and behavior by the US government?

In order to achieve this goal and provide an answer to the question, analytical-comparative research method has been used, relying on documentary and library data.

The findings of the study indicate that with the follow-up and support of the United States, so far 21 recommendations for the reduction of violence in Syria have been approved by the Security Council. The United States has also engaged in active diplomacy to pass binding resolutions on Chapter VII of the Charter, including a deadline, sanctions and military intervention, and has drafted eight resolutions, but in the case of Bahrain, it has even proposed a non-binding resolution in the Council. Has not given.

While the United States has made great efforts in the Security Council to put pressure on the Syrian government, it has not considered any mechanism to limit Al Khalifa through the Security Council; As a result, the priority of US strategic interests over democratic and human rights considerations in pursuing a balancing strategy in West Asia has led to this contradictory performance in the Security Council.

Understanding a political life can be obtained from recognizing and analyzing its socio-political currents. The present article aims to use the model of traditional-modern cross-sectional gaps to divide and format the socio-political currents of contemporary Islam and to examine how they play a role.

The research method of this article is analytical-descriptive and has been written by applying the theoretical model of tradition / modern gap and collecting information and data in the form of library and documentary research.   

The findings show how pluralistic and conflicting socio-political currents in Muslim societies can be categorized and what their role is. They also explain that the currents of contemporary Islamic societies are in three general categories and their socio-political currents are divided into four main categories according to the tradition / modern gap and twelve socio-political currents are branched out from among them.               

To study the action and role of socio-political currents in Muslim societies, firstly, there is a kind of intellectual diversity and pluralism, value-orientation and function in them, and secondly, a unified and absolute view of the nature of socio-political currents would be a misunderstanding of this phenomenon. They include different discourses, and instead of convergence and amplification, they are focused on colorfulness, multiplicity and intense competition. The general conclusion of the research is to present a new formulation and formatting in the discussion of the political currents of contemporary Islamic societies.

Islamic ideas are promoted at different religious, social and political levels under the influence of different currents. One of the main Islamist currents that has carried out its covert and widespread activities around the world and has gathered populations of millions is called the Tablighi Jamaat. Recognition of different levels of performance and discourse of the Tablighi Jamaat is based on an academic model.

The study uses the theory of critical discourse by Fairclough (2001) and source analysis of Tablighi Jamaat as its methodology. The data collection of this article is based on library studies and descriptive-analytical method.

 It indicates that the grammatical-textual and discourse values of this group have influenced their performance in the social and ideological spheres.

 It also shows that the grammatical-textual and discourse values of the Tablighi Jamaat have led to their withdrawal from politics and the group's desire to invite, travel and propagate ideological principles through populist and informal methods.

In this article, the authors aim to provide a reasoned answer to the question of how Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has shifted the nature of power in the country to an authoritarian system, and what will be the consequences for Egypt?

In this paper, the method is analytical-descriptive.

Egypt has never been able to achieve a model of a democratic government in the Arab world after the fall of the government of young officers in the conflict of the Islamic Awakening. Apart from the Praetorianism that ruled the political system from the time of Nasser to the early fall of the Brotherhood government of Mohamed Morsi, Egypt has not made significant achievements in the political and economic fields.

Reviving the tradition of officers in suppressing Islamists, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, amending the constitution, holding engineered elections to stay in power, widespread financial corruption in the Sisi government, significant decline in the Egyptian economy and large debts, deterioration of Egypt's political position in the Arab world, and ultimately gross human rights violation are major issues that have led the Sisi government to form an authoritarian government and, in a way, to return to the era of Mubarak and pre-Morsi rule.

After decades of social and political activities, the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood succeeded in establishing “the largest Islamic movement of the twentieth century” with hundreds of thousands members throughout Egypt. However, in despite of political achievements such as winning the 2012 Presidential Election, they lost political power by a coup-revolution at the end of the 2011-2013 revolutionary period. In contrast, the Islamist movement of the combatant clergies succeeded in achieving dominance in the Iranian 1977-79 Revolution and seizing power in the post-revolutionary political system. The objective of this article is to explain, from a structural perspective, the historical contexts which make such distinct situations possible for the Islamist movements in Iran and Egypt.

This article is in the tradition of comparative-historical studies of revolutions and uses the concept of “political opportunity structures” to explain the success and failure of the Islamist movements in these revolutions.

The main differences regarding the political opportunity structure for the Islamist movements in the Iranian and Egyptian revolutions are: more intense conflicts between the clergy and the non-clergy Islamic-political activists in Egypt made the accumulation of resources in a united Islamic front more difficult; more armed forces autonomy from the head of the state in Egypt strengthened the possibility of their surviving as a structural barrier against the success of the Islamists in revolution; and in a stark contrast to Iran, Egypt observed a retreat from state secularism in the decades leading up to the revolution, which, along with the benefits of the Islamic institutions from government budgets, increased the political influence and satisfaction of the conservative Islam, and, consequently, weakened the possibility of the combatant Islamists to gain dominance during the revolution.

Aside from the cultural, cognitive and agency factors mentioned in the existing literature, the structure of political opportunity was more favorable to the success of the Islamist movement in the Iranian revolution than in the Egyptian one.

With a centralized political and security structure, Iran has a variety of formations of internal and external factors that organize and implement security policy. The researcher seeks to answer the question "how has Russia-Syria relations from 2011 to 2018 affected the Islamic Republic of Iran's security policy".

In this study, a descriptive-analytical method was used.

One of the important external factors affecting Iran's security policy is the Syrian crisis and the role of various countries and groups such as Russia. Russia is one of the extra-regional powers that intervened in the Syrian crisis in favor of Bashar al-Assad's government. Expanding and maintaining Russian-Syrian relations has increased stability and reduced the cost of security policy for the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The first positive consequence of Iran's national interests has been the maintenance of Syria's ruling system as Iran's strategic ally. Second, in Iran's view, Russia can balance Iran's position on international issues, especially the West, and deter other regional powers and disrupt their efforts to eliminate Iran's role in the region. The fight against terrorism and extremism and its relative overcoming are other benefits of Russia's approach to Iran for Syria.