نشریه تحقیقات سیاسی و بین المللی
پیاپی 21 (زمستان 1393)

According to United Kingdom’s defense ministry international defense engagement strategy document 2013, this country intends to make use of soft power potentials in field of defense diplomacy for achieving national interests and objectives. This program includes the participation of defense ministry in election process, formation of legislative assemblies, forming the structure of governments and judiciary in countries where they are passing through transition to democracy. It also includes defense cooperation in cyber, cultural and educational fields. The present article by a descriptive-analytical method examines the content of this new defense diplomacy and its negative implications for Iran. The underlying hypothesis of the article is that the United Kingdom wants to strengthen its presence and influence in the Middle East particularly in security zones surrounding Iran and this strategy is a threat to Iran’s national security. The article after analyzing 2013 document and its strategies and policies has come to a conclusion that the defense strategy of the United Kingdom is a serious threat to national security of Islamic Republic of Iran.

Globalization as a process that highly affects human interactions and relationship and have attracted special attention among people’s public opinion, governments and international organizations, in a way that the role and place of human being and the rights that he is entitled to, have become very important; such that we are witnessing the globalization of human rights has become jus cogens. On this basis globalization of human rights has led to adjustment of the principle of sovereignty and non-interference. As a result the grounds have been prepared for military intervention in the internal affairs of the countries on the pretext of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility about the breach of individual human rights. In this regard it becomes necessary to evaluate the level of desirability and legitimacy of humanitarian intervention in Syria taking into consideration the crisis in this country and the ensuing events that are considered as violation of human rights. An understanding which shows the real truth behind the intervention in Syria and violation of her sovereignty under the pretext of humanitarian intervention is not under the impact of global developments of human rights and the globalization process which supports human rights and object the breach of them but it is all done with political motives and the justification behind it is the violation of human rights.

Some parts of the political behavior of international actors is reflected through geopolitical challenge in relations of political units, the aim of which is to impose their will or increase the material and spiritual cost of the rival country. The Persian Gulf geopolitical region is witnessing confrontation of two belief and identity systems among the littoral states, i.e. Iranian Shiite identity and Arab Sunni identity. In this context the differences of Iran and the United Arab Emirate on the three Islands (the Lesser Tunb, the Greater Tunb and Abu Musa) have created diplomatic and media row. The Iranian people are historically very sensitive about national and territorial integrity. In a way that all political groups not withstanding their ideological tendency are united on the question of national and territorial integrity. The present article with a descriptive analytical method and using library data wants to answer this question that what intention the United Arab Emirates is pursuing? What consequences do the territorial claims by UAE will have for Iran? The finding of the study shows that the United Arab Emirates on the one hand wants cover up her own basic weakness of national cohesiveness of seven emirates and on the other hand by posing a geopolitical challenge to Iran and internationalizing the problem makes the principle of non-negotiability of the issue of the three islands more costly for Iran. Contrary to this expectation this UAE challenge has led to more solidarity and national integration among the Iranian people.

The fast and quick developments of global politics in globalization and information and communication technology era on the one hand and theoretical developments associated with this evolution on the other hand have made profound impact on international relations and its sub branches. These developments on its turn prepared the ground for defining and examining concepts in discourses and paradigms multiplicity and diversity of new concepts in international relations, studying human action and the practices of international actors and its impact on this field. Therefore, one cannot have a deep understanding of the subjects and method of comprehension of international relations until examines the developments in concepts and the place of semantic multiplicity and also the impact of theoretical diversity on semantic multiplicity and concept development. Therefore, the hypothesis of article is that the developments of world politics and the semantic diversity associated with it prepares the ground for development in four fields, i.e. the science of international relations, fundamental concepts, semantic affairs and thematic scope which the present research deals with it.

In recent years, Iran’s nuclear policy has become one of the most important and controversial issues in international relations so that it is being discussed in most international meetings despite the absence of Iran. Some believe that Iran’s nuclear policy and way of decision making about the alternative choices cannot be explained on the basis of existing theories of decision making or analytical paradigm; therefore, there is the need for a new theory and different decision making approach. The present article initially introduces and explains principles and assumption of “cybernetic theory of decision” then it concludes that this theoretical framework has a better explanative ability for examining the nuclear policy of Iran. The authors are of the view that within the framework of cybernetic theory focusing on vital variable of “obtaining nuclear fuel cycle” has been the pivot of Iran’s nuclear policy.

In countries like Iran where there is ethnic and religious diversity the question of attracting the ethnic group to national mainstream which leads to national integration is important for maintaining a durable and sustained security. The present article wants to examine the obstacles on the way of attracting the Kurdish ethnic group to national mainstream and formation of a national identity. The Iranian Kurdistan province due to its proximity to Iraqi Kurdistan, Turkey’s Kurdish populated provinces and separatist and ethnic propaganda and unrest and tension gets affected. For this reason it becomes necessary to pay special attention to this region for maintaining peace, stability and security. The underlying hypothesis of the present article is that Iranian Kurds have kept their affinity with mainland despite distorted and divisive propaganda but this relation is facing challenge and obstacles. These challenges relate to economic problems, unbalanced regional development and separatist propaganda and security oriented look to the region. Therefore there is a need to have a comprehensive and expert look at the region to evaluate the problems and find solution for it. The present article gives suggestion for solving the problems of Iranian Kurdistan province in four sectors, i.e. political, cultural, economic and religious. The authors are of the view that the existing approach to region should be revised.

The purpose of writing the present paper is to study the Umm al-Qura, Iranian Civilization and the coalition and alliance doctrines. Which one of the above doctrines is related to foreign policy of Iran? Why among the three said doctrines, the doctrine of Umm-al-Qura can better explain the foreign policy of Iran and shaping of the post Imam Khomeini era foreign policy behavior? The underlying hypothesis is that taking into consideration the universalistic and Islamic feature and objectives and also prescriptive discourse of Iranian foreign policy, prevalence of Islamic culture in foreign policy, based on idealistic Shiite Islam, the doctrine of Umm- al-Qura has a better capability for explaining and interpreting Iran’s Foreign policy. The finding of the study shows that the other two doctrines are not suitable to explain Iran’s foreign policy due to their lack of attention to role of Islam in foreign policy and undervaluing the Islamic idealistic Shiite interest in connection with national interests. The method of data collection is library materials and analyzing data is explanative-comparative.

John Rawls model of “democratic peace” by recognizing “peoples” and distinguishing between the “democrat liberal”, “hierarchical nobles”, “Burdened”, “Benevolent Absolutism” societies and outlaw governments in international arena visualizes international justice in line of “reasonability” and not rationality in relations among the countries. This concept of justice puts aside universal moral foundation in favour of “political overlapping consensus”. Now the question is whether this model of democratic peace recognizes cultural diversity in international arena. The critical argument of the present paper is this model is trying to recognize this diversity with taking advantage of the concept of reasonable pluralism, but eventually it also leads to a dream of universal utopian image of the moral foundations necessary for well-ordered international community, in a way which can proceed to humanitarian intervention and just war against the detestable “other”. The finding of the study is that by certain modifications in “democratic peace model” we can consider it successful in recognition of cultural diversity. Therefore, on the basis of this modification democratic peace by offering a “minimal approach”, “conceptual essentialism” and “realistic-utopian view” neutralizes cultural radical relativism and universalistic liberalism in world policy making.