فصلنامه روابط خارجی
پیاپی 1 (بهار 1388)

The increasing importance of Iran along with its unique regional position has motivated many Western thinkers and researchers to recommend Western and especially American politicians to grasp more precise knowledge about this country. This article argues that the U.S. needs to have a sound understanding of Iran's foreign policy which is based on great enthusiasm for independence and resistance to domination of foreign powers. On the other hand, Iranian people's historical memory remembers how Western countries, especially the U.S., despised them during the years before the advent of the Islamic Revolution. Therefore, the author argues that Iran does not accept any pressure or threat during negotiations and is ready to negotiate in an atmosphere of mutual respect. The U.S. should also recognize the legitimacy of Iran's revolution and have an objective assessment of Iran's power in the Middle East. The U.S. administration should revise its reliance upon the policies seeking containment and sanctions, because these policies do not affect Iran's government, rather they punish Iranian people, which the U.S. claims supporting.

All countries ponder deeply and find it difficult when change becomes necessary in their foreign policy. A change that involves posturing, style of conduct and conceptual alterations may not signify arduous processes but change that surfaces oscillations in fundamentals is painful. This article tackles the issue of fundamental twists in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. While engaging in a comparative analysis with both developing and developed states, the author postulates that basic changes in Iran’s foreign policy are almost impossible. In doing so, the author organizes his thoughts around four issues. They are: an endured de-linkage between Iran’s foreign policy and its foreign economic relations, ideological nature of Iran’s power structure, the linkage between Iran’s national security and current foreign policy, and the inseparability between Iran’s foreign policy and legitimation processes.

During the past three decades, the foreign policy of the I.R.I has witnessed many different developments and trends. Interestingly, even in the framework of fundamentals and basic principles, it has showed distinct behaviors. On the other hand, despite great changes in the domestic and foreign spheres, some of its behaviors have remained the same. Therefore, this basic question that what are the main motivations and roots of the I.R.I's foreign policy behavior has been always a relevant one. In answering this question, the theories of foreign policy analysis and international relations explain Iran's motivations primarily based on the concept of physical security. But, this article explains them based on the theory of ontological security. From this theoretical stance, the most important motivation for Iran's foreign policy behavior towards sustainable disputes is seeking ontological security. That is to say that in the sphere of foreign policy, the I.R.I is concerned for safeguarding its identity as an Islamic state. Thus, its priority is to enhance its ontological security which means the maintenance and continuation of its Islamic identity.

The main question of this article is whether Imam Khomeini's leadership has created unavoidable and definitive bases for the present and future of the I.R.I's foreign policy. In other words, has he created a destiny for the I.R.I's foreign policy? This article argues that Imam Khomeini's leadership imposed all Iranian history on Iran's foreign policy. As a result, his guidelines are consistent with the potentials of Iranian history with an emphasis on resistance to obstacles as a rational choice.

This article investigates the roots of Iran's rising role, its goals and strategies in the post-Iraqi crisis Middle East. The prevailing view in the West, especially in the U.S., is that the main goals of Iran's foreign policy are primarily 'expansionist', aiming at increasing its 'relative power' in the Middle East. I argue instead that these goals are rather 'defensive', intended to increase the country's 'relative security'. To examine this hypothesis, I apply the two theories of "offensive" and "defensive" realism in a careful study of Iran's regional policy. I also term the two main approaches of Iran's foreign policy as 'accommodating and adjustment' policy and 'alliance and coalition' policy, attempting to explain that the aims of both approaches are to increase Iran's relative security and to remove the political-security threats in particular times of insecurity in Iran's immediate borders after the 2003 Iraq war. These threats are stemming from the US military presence on the one hand, and the recent geopolitical changes in the region's transformation into a new political-security order on the other. The orientation of Iran's regional foreign policy is shaped by the two elements of 'geopolitic's and 'ideology', which have increased Iran's regional role in post-war Iraq. I conclude that maintaining a balance between these two elements is a key to guaranteeing Iran's national interests and security.

Interdependence combined with intertwined global economy created a situation in which the U.S. financial crisis took on, very quickly, international dimensions and led to a global economic crisis affecting a wide range of countries to varying degrees. The U.S. financial crisis mostly stemmed from crisis in housing market, falling U.S. dollar exchange rate, increase in oil prices, military expenditures in Iraq and Afghanistan and finally interdependence of U.S. and European financial systems. Since there is a close relationship between economic instability and inequality on the one hand, and political and social instability on the other, and given increasing expansion of economic crisis throughout the world and the threat facing international financial and monetary security, international security and current world system and structure are exposed to a great change. The historical study of previous economic crises in the world shows that in such cases, states resort to protectionist policies resulting in deepening world recession, while it is expected that great economic powers keep open their markets to exports. Holding G-20 Summits in Washington and London aimed at crisis management and international financial system reform. This article explains the roots and various dimensions of the crisis and studies the suggested solutions. Finally, it addresses the impact of this crisis on energy market and Iranian economy.

The assumption here is that there is a need to a radical revision of the foreign military sales policies of the extra-regional powers towards the Middle East. The recent history of the involvement of the major powers in this strategic region has shown that the use of military instruments of foreign policies, particularly the unrestricted arms sales and transfer of military equipment and technology have contributed to the instability of the regional states. The arms races have been major obstacles to the regional economic integration and political convergence. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction will exacerbate the problem of insecurity in the region.

The political geography of the seas is one of the major branches of political geography studying the role of seas in the policies of states, international relations, and state's behavior and sovereignty limits in relation to sea environment. Today, along with globalization, conquest and vast presence in the seas are interested by a majority of world countries. Although, during the history of human civilization, maritime commerce has been always one of the main pillars of world communications, competition over this kind of commerce has become very intense and the seas have increasingly gained centrality in state's policies, because of the increasing importance of the seas and expansion of maritime commerce in the era of globalization. Today, maritime commerce is among the physical foundations of globalization and the countries which are situated in the focal point of globalization have a greater role in the seas and especially in maritime commerce. With the increasing importance of maritime commerce, international straits enjoy a special place in the modern political geography; although in the past, important straits had been very important, their current importance is rather of economic nature. On this ground, this article tries to study the role and importance of international straits in the framework of globalization and post-Fordist economy, using an analytical-descriptive method.