نشریه تحقیقات حقوق خصوصی و کیفری
سال سوم شماره 4 (پیاپی 7، پاییز و زمستان 1386)

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Central Asia has achieved a serious attention of theworld great powers especially the U.S. However, Central Asia was mentioned in the pastunder the “Heartland” and “Geo strategic” region. With addition of geo economic aspects,Central Asia has now turned to a major geo strategic and geo economic region.This region has shared borders with Russia, China, Iran and Afghanistan. The conversion ofCentral Asia to an intervention region for any power brings along the control of neighboringcountries which is very important as regards military and security aspects. On the other hand,the Caspian Sea is located on the west side of this region which ranks the second position ofoil reservoirs in the world.In addition to owning large reservoirs as well as natural resources, this region is situatedin a pivotal location which is a bridge connecting the East to the West and in particular the farEast to the near East.This article will review the U.S. national interests in Central Asia and analyze differentstrategies taken in this regard.

Writer believes that cyber space is in pursuit of enlightenment tradition and trying to survey thenew age effects on expansion or limitation of human rights. In this article digital opportunities aresurveyed by multidimensional approaches and finally a conclusion will be offered. Writer believesthat new space has provided opportunities for the uncompleted enlightenment project .On the otherside he believes that it provides an opportunity for states to have panopticon control over people.Writer believes that general use of the Internet and the easy access to television programs onsatelliteare main limitations for exercise of power. This is not meaning that the human rightdilemma is will be solved in the cyber space. Ideology, security and development are the mainreasons for a state to limit human rights.General use of the Internet and easy access to television programs on satellite will be themain challenges to states for exercise obsolete sovereignty. Therefore, states will begin torebuild and restate them in cyber space. New conversations about the Internet governanceare the signs of these attempts. These issues finally provide context to dialogue about a ruleof NGOs and civil societies in future governance.

In post September 11, the Great Middle East plan has been chosen by the U.S. as a long termstrategy in the Middle East region. The aim of this plan is a shift from political, economic andsocialnature of the whole region through a link between the U.S., Europe and the Middle East based ona series of Commitments.It is obvious that one of the objectives of this project is protecting Israel and providing security,mainly economic security. Israel alone in economic relation with the U.S. can not have a goodeconomic system and requires to establish economic relations with other countries mainly itsneighboring countries in the Middle East. The U.S. also follows to establish a good economic andpolitical relation between Israel and other Middle East countries through an economic securityproject that is justified into the general framework of the Great Middle East plan.But there is one question: “Is this project in accordance with the needs of these societies?” In thisarticle, the Middle East has been defined from Geopolitical and Geo-economic views, and also thestatus of this region for the U.S. has been surveyed from the point of security, energy and softwareaspects. Accordingly, the nature and substance of the Great Middle East have been reasonablyexplained.

The Presupposition of our Foreign Policy is achieving development through decreasingcosts and increasing opportunities. Providing Security is one of the costly projects of ourcountry and now that realistic approaches can not meet all the security needs of societies,confidence–building regimes in terms of the neo–liberal institutionalism theories as asecurity regime and regarding its successful experiences in Europe, Southeast Asia and SouthAmerica have been considered as an alternative security. Confidence–building is an armscontrolling regime that tries to demonstrate this claim that states have nonaggressivepolitical and military intentions, and they demonstrate this claim by accepting transparencyand regulation. The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) Which washeld in 1972 in the era of cold war with the participation of all of the European Countries(except Albania) and North America, during different meetings and periods have becomegradually a common purpose. The military projects have been exchanged by each otherunder regulation and transparency, and the culture of cooperation and confidence decreasedmost of the overwhelming costs and psychological insecurities of the leaders and thepeople. The process of confidence – building regime and its achievements in Europe canprovide useful experiences for developing regional security in world’s insecure regions.

This article has been written to analyze modern social movements in the age of globalization andtheir impacts on Iran’s political development. The Human Rights, Feminism, and the Environmentare the parameters which have been taken as modern social movements and whose effects on Iran’spolitical development have been taken into account. The Hans Peter Chris Pattern was used togain the result in which the impact of modern social movements on Iran’s political developmenthas been shown on the basis of theindex of impact on general politics, impacts on aspects ofdemocracy, impacts on beyond boundaries interactions, and impact exertion of Powers alongwith the appearance of elites.

In this article, different approaches as regards understanding deterrence mechanism to faceasymmetric threats have been presented. It will, then, attempt to find an answer to thequestion of “how we can take advantage of deterrence mechanism to counteract asymmetricthreats”.Having analyzed the mentioned model, I will bring out the most important theory in thisarticle under four titles: deterrence measures, force application measures, anti-establishmentmeasures, and anti–aggression measures. These approaches can be utilized for implementinga relatively successful plan of a mutual deterrence model.