نشریه مطالعات بین المللی
سال نوزدهم شماره 3 (پیاپی 75، زمستان 1401)

Following the Islamic Revolution, Islamic Republic of Iran and Saudi Arabia entered a decade of conflict and confrontation as a recurring pattern in their relations. But identity, geopolitical, and international developments in the 1990s resulted in a change in the recurring pattern governing their relations. The purpose of this paper is to re-read the relations of Tehran and Riyadh in the post-war period in order to analyze “how and due to which causes, the two countries moved from conflict and confrontation to improving their relations”. The question in this paper is “what factors caused the dominance of the co-existence pattern instead of conflict in Iran - Saudi relations between 1989 and 1997?” The finding of this paper, which is a descriptive - analytic study, and uses two approaches of social (constructivism) and material (realism), is that “the social structure governing the relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia in 1989 – 1997 led to an improvement in the anarchic international and regional environment, which had caused suspicions and mistrust of the two countries. Moreover, the change in the hostility between the two countries, caused the co-existence of them based on non-conflict of identity, and the transformation of geopolitical conflict into competition, despite the structural pressures.

The central pillar of Israel’s macro policy is maintaining its survival and existence, and security has always been among the main concerns of Israel's political and security authorities over the past 7 decades. However, the fundamental developments in the 21st century and the unique features of the international arena in this new century have forced the Israeli regime to resort to an extended security policy along with use of force and military power. Nevertheless, the challenges that the Israeli regime is facing in the political arena are increasing both quantitatively and qualitatively, and existential security is still a major concern for it. This descriptive-analytical study employed the Copenhagen School's securitization framework to answer this main question: What effects and outcomes does the political situation of the Israeli regime have with regard to its security? In fact, the main objective of this study was to focus on the current political situation of the Israeli regime and the effects that it has on its security. The results indicated that racial segregation or apartheid, instability, corruption, low levels of political participation of the citizens, and the impasse in the Middle East Peace Process are among the political challenges influencing the security of the Israeli regime that face its security and legitimacy with existential threats.

Kant's idea of perpetual peace has long been the subject of much intellectual controversy; His realist critics, with the argument that the field of international politics is a place of power and anarchy, have come out against him and considered his idea as idealism. On the other hand, the idealists welcomed his idea and considered it as a goal that "must" be there, even though it is not currently there. The basic problem in Kant's idea is the relationship between domestic politics and international politics, which he himself tried to explain in a theoretical framework. In this article, the question has been raised that in the idea of perpetual peace, Kant has established a relationship between domestic politics and international politics? And what reactions have been encountered in the later theories of international relations? And which theories or schools have tried to use the idea of perpetual peace to establish a new relationship between domestic politics and international politics? The answer of this article to these questions is that Kant firmly believed that there is no possibility of perpetual peace without the relationship between domestic politics and international politics, and among the later theories, the critical theory of international relations and the approach of international society. By returning to Kant's idea, the international community has tried to use the theoretical possibilities of his thought to reconstruct this relationship. The method of this research is descriptive and analytical with a philosophical approach.

Cloud seeding has been used in many countries in recent decades to combat drought, reduce pollution, and mitigate global warming, among other things. Local and state laws govern the process in the United States. Due to differences in state laws, the broad extent of the land covered each time has perplexed seeders, affected people, and courts of law. Due to the sheer lack of federal laws and inconsistencies in state laws, those affected by the negative effects are legally helpless, while the offenders escape punishment. This research seeks to answer the following questions: “How well do existing laws meet current legal needs in this regard?” and “Is there a way to eliminate the potential shortcoming?” A descriptive-analytical approach is used to investigate issues arising from the lack of a federal law and the state jurisdiction of current laws. The goal is to demonstrate the inadequacy of existing laws and the need for comprehensive federal legislation. Giving the benefits and drawbacks of federal law regulation, presenting solutions to eliminate the drawbacks, and demonstrating the ineffectiveness of general responsibility laws, the benefits of developing such a law that governs state laws outweigh the drawbacks. The inadequacy of current laws in terms of their enforcement serves as further evidence of the necessity of establishing an organization to control, manage, and monitor cloud seeding.

The end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Communist system, along with the emergence of globalization and the advancement of science and technology have brought serious changes in international system. thus, low politics and issues related to economy, trade and culture became the most concern of state and non-state actors. The spotlight of economic development which has always been a serious concern of states since the second World War has gained momentum with the emergence of economic globalization. Therefore, in the context of globalization, states have put the economic development in agenda of their issues by adopting new policies in the framework of regional and international cooperation. In this regard, this research is an attempt to address this important question as to what effect did economic globalization has on Turkey’s economic development between the years 2001-2021? This article is an attempt to examine the economic components of globalization in Turkey and also to examine economic globalization on economic development in this country. The finding of research indicates that Turkey has succeeded in raising the level of economic development by adopting various program in order to improve the indicators of economic globalization. In this research the qualitative method with an explanatory prespective has been applied to examine the cause and effect relationship between independent variable(economic globalization) and dependent variable(Turkey’s economic development).

Wetlands are among the most important ecosystems on earth, protection of which enables the reasonable and sustainable use of them. Environmental protection is a common ground between municipal and international laws, and the Stockholm Declaration of 1972 is one of the first documents explicitly emphasizing the point. Environmental protection by which the present and future generations should have an improving social life is considered a public duty. Therefore, economic and other activities concomitant of environmental pollution and irreparable damage to environment are forbidden. Shadegan International Wetlands are a series of ponds registered in the Ramsar Convention, which are under a serious threat due to the surrounding development activities. This research attempts to figure out the international rules concerning the protection of Shadegan International Wetlands. This was a descriptive-analytical study with the aim of investigating the international rules on protection of wetlands, particularly the Shadegan International Wetlands, in the Ramsar Convention. The results indicated that according to the Ramsar Convention as the oldest international treaty, wetlands are protected based on the principles of international cooperation focusing on one of the rules of the International Environmental Law, i.e. the principle of environmental protection. Shadegan International Wetlands are conserved in accordance with the Article 50 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and non-governmental organizations.

Since 1977, the US Department of State has published annual reports on human rights practices in various countries. These reports are premised on the core principles and values of liberalism. The following paper examines the rhetoric and discourse used in such reports, concentrating on "Executive Summaries" prepared under Trump's presidency about international actors such as Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. The paper’s question is: What rhetoric and discourse were used in the US Department of State's human rights reports on China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel under Trump's presidency? This study uses an analytical-interpretive method to examine this hypothesis: the rhetoric and discourse used in human rights reports about actors such as Israel and Saudi Arabia are neutral and friendly, whereas reports about Iran, China, and Russia are biased and unfriendly. In these reports, the US Department of State represents its allies' political systems (for example, Israel) as multi-party democracies while portraying its adversaries' political systems (for example, Iran, China, and Russia) as authoritarian, one-party, and totalitarian regimes. As a result, the United States promotes its ideological identity using specific rhetoric, portraying its opponents as "the other" and therefore excluding them. In a nutshell, the rhetoric and discourse used in the aforementioned reports are influenced by and serve the policies and macro interests of the United States.

The Middle East is one of the world’s most vital, strategic, and geopolitical regions. With the victory of the Islamic revolution in Iran, the United States and Iran have pursued contradictory policies towards each other, as the two countries are considered to be rivals. Even the United States, pursuing this enmity, withdrew from the JCPOA agreement, which could eventually quell the enmity; based on this, the article’s primary question is what strategies the Islamic Republic of Iran has adopted to guarantee its security and national interests in the Middle East following the United States’ withdrawal from the JCPOA? This descriptive-analytical study aims to examine the methods of confrontation adopted by Iran following the United States’ withdrawal from the JCPOA. Overall, the article demonstrates that Iran, in response to the United States’ withdrawal from the JCPOA and its tension-inducing measures, has its own strategies, which include a gradual reduction of its JCPOA obligations, more support for Shia proxies (including Ansarullah, Hashd al-Shaabi, Hezbollah, …), a stronger military presence in the region, military measures against regional rivals (such as Saudi Arabia and Israel), and reinforcing its East- oriented policy in political and security fields in the Middle East in order to ensure security and national interests.

Incredible advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have affected various service sectors and social welfare policies in developed countries in recent years. As a result, AI and novel technologies (e.g., big data and machine learning algorithms) have shaped many social developments and forced policymakers to confront difficult challenges and questions. Similarly to the pre-digital era, pilot implementations of these technologies in the insurance and banking industries, health systems, and civil registration systems have resulted in widespread systemic violations of many human rights enshrined in international documents. However, domestic or international monitoring institutions have not defined the possibility of “responsibility acceptance” because these violations are automated (i.e., machine-based). It is hence impossible to activate an accountable mechanism through the current legal frameworks.

The right to water is stated in the General Comment No. 15 adopted in 2002 by the Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights; this Comment is the major document prepared to explain the legal fundamentals of this right and its relation to other economic and social rights. Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights also explicitly recognizes the right to water. As an environmental matter, the right to safe water entitles individuals to sufficient, physically accessible, and affordable water for personal and domestic uses. Since its establishment, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has played a key role in developing and promoting international rights. This descriptive-analytical paper intends to answer this question: What is the judicial precedent of ECHR about the right to water? Delving into several important cases on the right to water under investigation in ECHR, this paper concluded that an extensive and dynamic interpretation of Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and human rights resolutions clearly shows that they explicitly recognize the human right to water. All states are obliged to ensure the realization of this right in a non-discriminatory manner.

Central and Eastern European country (CEECs) from 1989 onward took a neoliberal turn despite having experienced decades of communist rule. At the same time, the European Union (EU) enjoyed a particularly attractive image—evoking the return to Europe—among the people and governments of the region. While CEECs’ security concerns were mostly of a military threat during communist rule, post-communism CEECs’ security concerns have undergone transformation and changed in nature. This study sets to answer the following research question: what role does the EU play with regard to security concerns of post-communist CEECs? To answer this question, the main hypothesis is that the EU—in the form of a neoliberal historical bloc—has brought about special security concerns for the CEECs. Regarding the research methodology, we adopted a qualitative method under the neo-Gramscian theoretical framework and carried through statistical analysis to examine the research question. The research findings indicate that under the workings of diverse mechanisms of EU neoliberal block, Central and Eastern European countries today deal with the issue of security from the economic dimension (the weakening of domestic industries, the housing crisis and the dependent capitalist economy) to political (political dependence), human (alienation and otherness), and socio-cultural one (elite recruitment in the neoliberal project and weakening of the higher education system).

The treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons  (TPNW) is a significant international achievement and a stable multilateral regime. It imposes limitations on developing, testing, producing, accessing, having at the disposal, storing, or threatening to use nuclear weapons. The pact was ratified in September 2017 and enacted on Jan. 22, 2021. Making this treaty universal takes purposeful political effort. Persuading nuclear and nuclear-armed countries to participate in enforcing the agreement is difficult. It will face vehement political opposition. Such involvement requires a different approach and a discourse-oriented atmosphere. Criteria associated with human rights, humanitarian rights, international ethics, and international security should be introduced into this matter. Sadly, despite the extensive efforts of peace advocates and the goodwill of numerous countries, the governments have taken no disarmament-oriented measures. This paper uses a descriptive-analytical method to answer the question, “How can we realize nuclear disarmament through TPNW?” Our results indicate that the wording of the treaty provisions makes nuclear disarmament possible through the global consensus of the member states.

Intellectual property is one of the branches of international law that has quickly established its place in international law issues. But the way of looking at this issue is not the same among activists; Therefore, it is necessary to address it. Considering this issue, the aim of the upcoming article is to examine the international requirements of intellectual property in the international community and its function in the laws of Iran and the United States of America. The main question is set as follows: What are the international requirements of intellectual property in the international community and how can its function be evaluated in the laws of Iran and the United States of America? The approach to answering this question is descriptive-analytical. The method of collecting information and data is library, internet and documents. The findings of the research show that in the American intellectual property rights system, due to its nature and economic analysis, it is instrumentalist, and on the other hand, Iran's legal system, whether at the stage of granting the right or after, has a duty-oriented view in line with traditionalism.

The regulations and foundations of two prominent legal systems known as the common law and the statutory law constitute the principles and regulations of international criminal proceedings in general and the International Criminal Court prosecutor’s jurisdictions and authorities in particular. The transactional nature of the common law, the investigative nature of proceedings in the statutory law, and the simultaneous acceptance of both approaches in the International Court of Justice led to practical uncertainties and ambiguities regarding the International Court prosecutor’s jurisdictions and his/her interactions with tribunals, especially with pretrial branches. Nevertheless, this intrinsic contradiction appears to be largely consistent with the reality of international criminal proceedings, and the current legal principles are adequately efficient in reaching the International Criminal Court goals from a realistic perspective. This contradiction is highlighted when it is considered in judicial idealism. Hence, any ambiguities in authorities will cause injustice and violate the rights of victims or the human rights of defendants. As a result, there is still a substantial gap between the exertion of a prosecutor’s authorities and the principles of idealism.