نشریه تحقیقات سیاسی و بین المللی
پیاپی 48 (پاییز 1400)

Obama believed that the mere and superficial pursuit of American interests in the past and the lack of attention to the internal situation of the countries in this region has led to popular dissatisfaction in these countries; This is a potential threat to US long-term goals in the region. comes. Assessing US national security policy and the pattern of US strategic action will also require recognizing the perceptual differences of presidents. Comparative US security policy requires recognition of the national security document, the four-year defense document, State Department documents, and analytical formats published in the field of US security policy. In addition to the Presidential National Security Document, which is published in turn, there are various indications of the security models and processes available to the State Department, the Department of Defense, and strategic agencies. The US Department of Defense has been publishing the US defense strategy for four years. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the comparisons of US national security policy during the time of Barack Obama and Donald Trump in Southwest Asia. The research method was qualitative.

US foreign policy toward Iran during Donald Trump's presidency began with misread of the nuclear deal, and then withdrew from the JCPA in 8102 to reach a better agreement, violating UN statement 8820 .finally, by unilaterally reinstating sanctions against Iran, as well as creating preconditions for renegotiation, it pressured other members of the JCPA to withdraw from the agreement.The Trump government chose a win-lose policy over a win-win policy, using the option of maximum pressure and the tools of power instead of diplomatic and peaceful methods. The goal of the Trump administration in reaching a new agreement was a better agreement in the name of its own government with the IslamicRepublic of Iran, which was more influenced by his character than the national interests of the United States. He sought to destroy all the gains of the previous Democratic administration, both internally and externally, by populist rhetoric, corrupting the ruling elites and the American structure. In this article, by analyzing the personality of the US President based on Anagram theory, an attempt has been made to this question is answered how much Trump's personality has caused the US government to pursue its policies towards Iran with an aggressive approach.

This article looks at America's policy regarding international system during Obama and Trump presidency. This research tries to answer the question as to what role did the "individual"variables(Obama and Trump)play in America's approach towards international system, and how influential they were? In answering this question, therefore, the hypothesis of the article is:" given the deciding role of presidents in American foreign policy making; and also the difference in terms of thought and outlook bye the two presidents, the " individual" variable has had a great influence on America's approach to international system. The purpose of this article is to examine the extent to which the "individual" factor influences the US approach to the international system and the scientific and realistic knowledge of Obama and Trump's personality traits and their impact on US foreign policy and the US approach to the international system. Based on the findings of the article, it can be said that the role and influence of individual variables in the foreign policy of this country has been high at this time; So that their foreign policy was due to the fact that they were two different and somewhat contradictory personalities, which originated mainly from their individual characteristics.

This study is to "evaluate the impact of Iranian strategic culture on Tehran's response to Washington's coercive diplomacy. The question is, "How has the strategic culture of Iran affected its response to Washington's wills i.e. giving up the ideals of the Islamic Revolution. The findings of the study, obtained through an inferential methodology and analyzed relying on the power of individual understanding, show that the nine components of Iranian strategic culture in regard of diplomacy and defense, including "martyrdom", "resistance", "emphasis on deterrence", tactical flexibility, "Strategic ambiguity", "strategic patience", "self-reliance", "strategic loneliness and a sense of vulnerability" and "the mission of the leadership of Islam and the region" and its 5 characteristics including "achieving the truth of trust", "courage" , "rationalism", "intelligent and thoughtful leadership" and "hybrid and multidimensional nature has led Iran to understand the extravagant and self-reinforcing nature of coercive diplomacy and the importance of resisting US pressure and to prevent an onset for the domino of being blackmailed by US. Thus, the interactions between Iran and US during the past four decades have been based on either the principle of "privilege for privilege" or "reciprocity."

The outbreak of the coronavirus has raised the question of whether it is possible to transfer power from the West to the East and form a new world order based on China-centric Eastern values.Using the power cycle theory in response to this question, this article argues that given the current trends in the relative decline of US regulatory and hegemonic power in the international arena, as well as China's rise as an emerging power in the international arena. , The international system seems to be witnessing a period of transition and transfer of power from west to east; However, this transfer of power is a gradual process, and China does not currently have all the resources and capabilities to become a hegemonic power. Issues such as the yuan's influence and parity against the dollar in the international economy, the attractiveness and universality of Chinese values, human rights, civil liberties, and China's controlling system are among the most important issues influencing the speed of the power cycle.

Saudi Arabia and Israel, two key players in the Middle East, have expanded bilateral and regional relations over the past decade. The main purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between these two actors with the focus on new developments in the region. This descriptive-analytical study, using the theory of threat balance, raises the main question: what is the most important reason for the expansion of Saudi-Israeli relations over the past decade and how can it be explained? In response, it pursues the main hypothesis that the main reason for the expansion of bilateral relations is joint cooperation with Iran in the region. The findings show that Saudi Arabia and Israel, based on the variables of threat balance theory including total power, geographical proximity, offensive power and offensive intentions, consider Iran as a threat and try to form a coalition and balance against it. The most important joint approaches of the two sides in dealing with Iran also include Iranophobia, supporting terrorist groups, challenging Iran's regional allies, Shiaophobia, influencing the US withdrawal from the JCPOA and expanding the normalization of relations with Israel among the Arab Gulf states.

Proper planning based on future trends to advance national security goals and national interests is one of the most important tasks of strategists in each country.Considering the importance of scenario planning in strategic studies, present paper attempts to use the research methodology of the future research and using the TAIDA model, which focuses on the five approaches of " Tracking, Analyzing, Deciding, and Action", The author seeks to examine possible scenarios for regional order in the event of the withdrawal of US troops from the region. With this statement, the main question of the present study is: What will be the possible scenarios regarding the regional order of the withdrawal of American troops from the region?Scenarios include: - The vacuum of power and the development of the activities of non-governmental forces such as ISIS and the resulting disorder.- The possibility that some countries in the region will prevail and its order will be formed based on their interests.- Formation of regional convergence for security by the countries of the region.Finally, the author will try to express the desired scenario from the point of view of the Islamic Republic of Iran.