فصلنامه مطالعات راهبردی
سال بیست و ششم شماره 4 (پیاپی 102، زمستان 1402)

With fifteen neighboring countries on its land and water borders, Iran is the second country with the largest number of neighbors in the world after China. However, when considering a broader neighborhood (including secondary neighbors), an additional ten countries can be included, bringing the total count of bordering and non-bordering neighbors to 25. This extensive neighborhood presents both challenges and opportunities for Iran. While it offers potential avenues for cooperation and growth, it also poses threats that require careful consideration. Paying attention to this issue from the perspective of opportunities or challenges shows the necessity of placing it at the top of the country's foreign policy priorities. However, despite the emphasis in foundational documents on the significance of the neighborhood environment in foreign policy, the absence of a strategic approach in this regard over the past four decades has led to the creation of threats rather than opportunities for the national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In response, the 13th Iranian government has critically assessed the historical neglect of neighboring countries in Iran’s foreign policy. As a result, it has introduced the doctrine of ‘neighborhood and integration’ to capitalize on these opportunities and effectively address the associated threats. Based on this, the paper aims to explore the meaning and application of this doctrine. Specifically, it delves into its principles, goals, and strategic approaches in the context of developing relations with neighboring countries.

This study employs a qualitative research method, specifically the ‘descriptive-analytical’ approach. It draws from documentary sources, official statements by foreign policy officials, library research, and online resources. The analysis of the 13th government’s neighborhood doctrine is presented in six sections: 1) Neighborhood and integration in international relations knowledge; 2) Historical gaps in Iran’s foreign policy neighborhood approach; 3) Neighborhood and integration as a focal point in the 13th government’s foreign policy; 4) Principles of neighborhood and integration policy in the 13th government; 5) Strategy for neighborhood and integration policy by the 13th government; and 6) Implementation of the neighborhood and integration doctrine in practice.

Iran, as the second country with the largest number of neighboring countries in the world, possesses significant potential. This potential can be both an opportunity and a challenge and largely depends on the perception of political governance and its orientation. Unfortunately, in Iran’s contemporary history, the challenging and threatening aspects of the neighborhood environment have often prevailed. While the ever-changing geopolitics and shifting borders of Iran’s neighbors contribute to this situation, other critical factors come into play. Notably, past governments have often overlooked the importance and position of the neighborhood environment in foreign relations. Their minimalistic approach and the absence of a well-defined strategic framework have also exacerbated the situation.
In addressing these issues, the 13th government has anchored its foreign policy on the doctrine of neighborhood and integration. Within this framework, fostering relations with neighboring countries and promoting regional integration serve as crucial components of foreign relations and act as a balancing factor in the country’s overall foreign policy. The government extends the concept beyond mere good neighborhood, taking a comprehensive view that encompasses both immediate neighbors and secondary neighbors. This approach is guided by principles such as respect for territorial integrity, non-interference in internal affairs, nurturing an endogenous regional order, cooperative security, and mutual interaction. These principles are deemed essential for establishing strategic and systematic relations with neighboring nations and are seen as prerequisites for successful regional integration.
The 13th government has characterized neighborhood policy as a stable and enduring strategy, rather than a temporary or fleeting tactic. Consequently, its advancement necessitates a well-defined plan and a specific strategic approach. Within this framework, the government acknowledges the region’s realities, particularly significant challenges such as security issues and the limitations of regional cooperation. It firmly believes that the region cannot swiftly extricate itself from these complexities. Instead, the path forward lies in building mutual trust, fostering regional stability, enhancing economic cooperation, and extending coordinated and collective security efforts.

In recent decades, the concept of a security governance model—where public and private sectors collaborate with the government to provide security—has drawn significant interest. Its potential impact on reducing security costs has prompted scholars in the field of politics and security across various countries to explore its characteristics, implementation methods, influencing factors, and underlying foundations.
While limited theoretical and practical work has been conducted on this issue, it appears that political parties play a crucial role in security governance within different societies, including Iran. Recognizing their significance in providing security, both the broader political society and security practitioners should prioritize their establishments in programs and policies to ensure comprehensive security.
This paper aims to examine the influence of political parties on security governance. It assumes that political parties significantly impact security governance through functions such as promoting accountability, fostering culturalization, and facilitating coordination among security agencies (which form the foundations of security governance). Additionally, political parties contribute to increased participation from public and private sectors, resource accumulation for providing security, and the advancement of decentralized policy-making and decision-making (which serve as indicators of effective security governance).

This study adopts the theory of structure-agent or structuration. According to this approach, both structuralism and voluntarism represent single-causal and simplistic views that fail to fully analyze complex events in human society. Consequently, a synthesis of these perspectives is necessary. While structuralism emphasizes the supremacy of structures, attributing socio-political events to their influence, voluntarism takes the opposite stance. In the voluntarism perspective, the role of the human agent is central, and structures are seen as products of voluntary action.
However, the structuration theory adeptly combines these two perspectives in a nuanced and innovative manner, effectively addressing criticisms of the methodology. According to Anthony Giddens, one of the early proponents of this theory, the interaction between agents and structures situates actors within their action environment. Consequently, the outcomes of individual actions are shaped by both the specific actions themselves and the broader contextual framework. These structures play a dual role: they mediate agents’ actions, that is, shaping the conditions within which those actions occur, while also undergoing reconstruction through those very actions.
This paper seeks to examine the role of political parties in security provision within the security governance model, drawing on structuration theory. By adopting this approach, we gain insights into the geographical, cultural, and political structures that either constrain or enhance the influence of political parties in Iran. Additionally, it enables statesmen to grasp the limitations and capabilities of political parties, emphasizing their pivotal role as a decisive factor in achieving effective and comprehensive security within the security governance framework.

The initial step toward developing security governance in Iran involves the establishment of robust political parties. Subsequently, socio-cultural structures must be crafted, alongside the realization of security governance indicators. These structures encompass important metrics such as culturalization, public acceptance, coordination, and responsibility. Their significance is such that constructing an effective security governance model hinges upon them.
Governance indicators involve various metrics, including private and public sector participation, decentralized policy implementation and decision-making, resource mobilization for security, geographical decentralization, and the cultivation of a comprehensive security perspective. Consequently, statesmen play a crucial role in recognizing the significance of political parties. Simultaneously, their attention to historical and existing structures is vital for realizing an effective security governance model that aligns with Iran’s present and future context.
The current model of security governance in Iran is both desirable and necessary. It is desirable because citizens have the right to participate in political and security affairs. Moreover, it is necessary due to the complexities of providing security in today's decentralized, complex, and interconnected world. Achieving cost reduction and optimizing security mechanisms require active participation from both the public and private sectors within the security governance framework. Iran, like any other country, is intricately connected to the global network of governance. Therefore, understanding the efficiency and necessity of such a model is crucial. An important question for future research is to what extent the existing political system is prepared to adapt and embrace the requirements and dimensions of the security governance model.

“Judicial security,” a relatively recent concept in security studies, remains a subject of ongoing debate with no universally accepted definition. Despite the varied interpretations, a recurring theme in prior research is the notion of “ensuring citizens’ access to justice through legal proceedings.”Securing judicial integrity is crucial in building citizens’ confidence in the judiciary. If people perceive justice as elusive or feel the judiciary may fail to deliver it, they might opt for independent conflict resolution. Consequently, judicial security plays a pivotal role in bolstering national security, underscoring its importance in preserving national stability.Acknowledging the significance of judicial security, this paper seeks to explore the query: How can we ensure judicial security? To address this, we first need to pinpoint the precise definition of ‘judicial security’ by reviewing existing research. The paper subsequently presents methods for preserving judicial security and concludes by highlighting potential risks that could undermine it.

The research approach is qualitative and thus has benefited from qualitative research tools. Also, for exploring the concept of judicial security and presenting strategies, it is analytical-prescriptive and is applied in terms of purpose; because it has provided a solution for solving the problem of how to ensure judicial security.  The data was collected and analyzed through library research.

Ensuring judicial security is a crucial step towards fostering societal peace and psychological safety. The term ‘judicial security’ is interpreted in various ways by experts. For a more nuanced understanding, it’s beneficial to separately explore the concepts of “security” and “justice.” Security refers to the state of being free from threats and preserving stability, while justice pertains to the resolution of legal conflicts in accordance with the law and through due legal processes. When these two notions are merged, judicial security can be encapsulated as the assurance citizens have in the judicial authorities’ ability to uphold threatened rights or reinstate violated ones.In this interpretation, judicial authorities form the foundation for the establishment of judicial security. The objective of judicial security is twofold: to safeguard rights that are under threat and to reinstate rights that have been violated. The government, in its broadest context, holds the primary responsibility for the creation of judicial security. Achieving judicial security necessitates the formulation of strategies that can instill a sense of security within the structure of judicial institutions, both objectively and subjectively. These strategies are designed to enhance predictability, ensure the realization of justice, and furnish mechanisms for dispute resolution within judicial institutions.To improve judicial security, five key strategies are proposed: 1. The establishment of a judicial order; 2. The creation of relative stability in laws; 3. The utilization of expert legal counsel; 4. The implementation of effective media management; 5. The assurance of client satisfaction. Additionally, maintaining judicial security necessitates the mitigation of threats in this domain. These threats encompass fraudulent documentation, the inability to substantiate rights, collusion with judicial authorities, and the lack of access to the litigant.Moreover, judicial security is endangered by three issues in the citizen-government relationship: 1) the inability to initiate a lawsuit; 2) the preference for informal ways over litigation; and 3) judicial corruption. Judicial security is also compromised in the relationship between the government agent and the government itself, with the most significant factor being the impact of political slogans, such as anti-corruption campaigns, on the judicial process. It’s important to note that ensuring judicial security is a long-term endeavor that necessitates multi-year and ongoing planning. Furthermore, the perception of judicial security among the clients of judicial institutions is contingent upon its sustainability.

The relationship between Iran and European nations has experienced many ups and downs over the past two centuries. During the Cold War, Iran’s affiliation with the Western Bloc and the general congruence of policies led to an expansion in these relations. However, the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979 brought about significant shifts in its political orientation, particularly in its foreign relations with the West. This resulted in a period of notable decline in Iran’s relations with the European Union. The current state of their relations does not match the potential of the two sides. This situation is attributed to a combination of fundamental issues and fabricated barriers, such as the influence of the United States and Israel. Overcoming these challenges hinges on the steadfast commitment of both. In this context, the utilization of their broad economic, political, cultural, technological, and security capabilities can foster collaboration and improve their mutual ties. This paper, while pointing out the obstacles in the path of fostering relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the European Union, seeks to present a geopolitical solution to overcome them.

This paper is part of applied and problem-solving studies. Its research method is “descriptive-analytical” and the data, in addition to documentary sources, have been collected from interviews with relevant experts. Also, the method of data analysis is based on the authors’ inferential analyses, which, by considering the factors affecting relations (especially the obstacles to the development of relations), examines the strengths, weaknesses, advantages, and limitations of Iran and the European Union in different areas. After explaining the mutual needs, the areas of appropriate relationship development based on common interests and within the framework of a complementary strategy have been described.

An examination of the relations between Iran and the European Union in recent decades shows that although in some periods and cases, we have witnessed the development of their relations, there have been many ups and downs and their relations have been tense and even critical at some times (including today). Various factors influence the current situation, the most important of which are political and cultural. However, given the different value-based, cultural, and normative contexts, the unresolved issues will prevent the further development of relations. In this regard, we can refer to the differing viewpoints of the two actors on issues such as human rights, terrorism, democracy, and regional developments, particularly the issue of Palestine. On the economy, although there are multiple contexts and mutual needs for the development of appropriate relations, including in the energy sector, we have not seen any progress in relations due to various reasons such as the heavy shadow of political issues, interventions by third parties, and sanctions. Regarding security, it is necessary to note that Iran has a unique geopolitical position and is a country that always plays a prominent role in global equations. The European Union is also seeking to consolidate and strengthen its position and become a major international power, and in this path, it prioritizes a “geopolitical approach over a normative one”. Therefore, although Europe and Iran do not have common interests in some areas, they do have shared security threats. In general, it can be said that the current situation of relations from a political, economic, and security perspective is not only not in the interest of either party, but also poses threats.At present, Iran and the European Union lack a strategic relationship. Despite the ongoing conditions and regardless of the prioritization of the impact of effective factors in their relations, each of them has geographical and geopolitical advantages and limitations. The examination of these reveals the mutual need for the development of appropriate relations. Considering this inescapable reality, the importance and necessity of creating a pattern and process of participation and cooperation on a strategic scale become evident.In the framework of this study's proposed strategy, known as “complementarity”, the two sides can act as complementary units of each other and address their respective needs. Based on this, some advantages and capabilities of the European Union and its members can meet Iran’s needs, and vice versa. In this way, a kind of complementary cycle and process can be created between the parties. This complementarity can occur in economic, political, security, cultural, scientific, and media fields.Therefore, the position of the European Union in the international system and the regional and strategic role of Iran have created requirements for establishing a proper and comprehensive relationship. Despite the existing obstacles to developing relations, common threats such as terrorism, drug trafficking, organized crimes, migration, war refugees, and also mutual needs in areas like energy, trade, transportation, investment, technology, and sustainable security can pave the way for reducing and resolving misunderstandings, ambiguities, and tensions. This can lead to the formation of constructive relations within the framework of a long-term strategic agreement in various political, economic, cultural, and security fields.In conclusion, although the negative political factors significantly influence the relations between Iran and the European Union, both can settle the problems, improve the situation, and even develop strategic-level relations by desecuritizing issues, adopting a geopolitical approach, and designing their relations based on a strategy of complementarity.

Protracted or intractable ethnic conflicts are a type of clashes that, despite fluctuating levels of violence, seem to have no foreseeable resolution. An example of such a conflict is the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) crisis in Turkey. Despite its four-decade history and significant political and social impacts on the country, there appears to be no clear end in sight. The persistence of these conflicts not only jeopardizes the security of the conflict-ridden nation but also has a ripple effect on neighboring countries, draining their resources and hindering their development and prosperity. This paper aims to comprehend these enduring ethnic conflicts and analyze the factors and causes influencing them, using the PKK as a case study.

When it comes to the causes of ethnic conflicts, there are numerous theories and models, but their universality and comprehensiveness are often questioned. For instance, Ted Robert Gurr proposed four categories: salience for ethnocultural identity, incentives for action, dynamics for protracted conflicts, and capacity for action, each with its own facets and dimensions. Another scholar, Stuart J. Kaufman, believes that the outbidding of ethnic elites and their manipulation of ethnic symbols play a significant role in inciting hostility against the government or other ethnic groups. Shiping Tang, on the other hand, considers the four master drivers: emotion, interest, capability, and opportunity. As for the prolongation of conflicts, James Samuel Coleman identifies four dimensions: the context of the conflict, the issues at stake, the relations among ethnic groups, and the processes, outcomes, and consequences of the conflict.This paper proposes a model based on the philosophical principle that “the persistence of an effect is contingent on the persistence of its cause”. According to this model, the perpetuation of dissatisfaction or the emergence of new dissatisfaction (either through the ongoing framing of contentious issues or their reframing) results in the perpetuation of the cycle of violence and revenge. This situation is further exacerbated by the enduring presence of international supporters or the emergence of new backers. Concurrently, these conditions solidify the geopolitical factors that have played a role in initiating and perpetuating ethnic conflicts.

The PKK emerged during the radical period of the 1970s in Turkey. This group highlighted the need to secure the national and ethnic rights of the Kurds, in addition to addressing the underdevelopment of Kurdish regions. The initiation of armed conflict by this group provoked a strong governmental response, leading to forced displacement, the declaration of a state of emergency, and an escalation in violence. Consequently, a broader segment of Kurdish society was drawn into the conflict.Despite the fulfillment of some Kurdish demands during Erdogan’s tenure, particularly in the early years, the PKK and affiliated groups introduced new demands and a fresh framework of issues and conflicts. This group maintains its financial resources by engaging in smuggling and a variety of illicit activities. It has gained international supporters, in part due to the rise of ISIS and the need for extra-regional powers to leverage the PKK forces in combating it. By establishing a monopoly over Kurdish representation and eliminating potential competitors, the group has managed to maintain its position in the political landscape of Kurdish society and Turkey. Meanwhile, the geopolitics of the Kurdish regions remain relatively unchanged. On the other hand, the limited control exerted by Turkey’s neighbors over the country’s southern borders has not impeded border crossings, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the Turkish forces’ military pursuit of the PKK group.

In political science and terrorism studies, the main emphasis has traditionally been on comprehending the nature of terrorism and its progression. Yet, the study of how terrorism evolves and the modus operandi of terrorist organizations has become increasingly crucial in today's world, sparking a significant increase in dialogue and exchange of views on this topic. This is because terrorist organizations are becoming increasingly sophisticated each day, compared to their predecessors. They adapt to environmental changes and various counter-terrorism strategies and techniques, preventing their collapse and enabling their proliferation in any environment. In light of this, the present paper aims to elucidate the concept of "postmodern terrorism", and chart the evolution of terrorist activity models in Iranian society from the traditional model (from the 1960s to the 1980s) to the postmodern model (from the late 1980s to the present). Here, we also discuss strategies suitable for “postmodern counter-terrorism” within the context of terrorism studies. For an operational definition, one could state that the features that set postmodern terrorism apart from earlier forms include a focus on identity in motivation, a global perspective in the scope of action, and an organizational structure that is both networked and virtual.

This explanatory paper employs a library data collection method for research and utilizes a qualitative approach for data analysis. The research methodology is explanatory in nature as it aims to explain the transition from traditional terrorism (spanning the 1960s to the 1980s) to postmodern terrorism (from the late 1980s to the present) within Iranian society. The qualitative data analysis method is chosen due to the nature of the study, which is largely focused on the influence of ideology, religion, culture, politics, ethics, and similar factors on human behavior. Such studies typically require qualitative and rational analysis methods. The article further delves into the evolution of terrorist patterns in Iranian society, analyzing the impact of ideological and semantic issues to explain the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of this evolution.

The emergence of any new threat to national security invariably necessitates the creation of new institutional structures or the revision of existing ones. This is primarily because past institutions were typically designed and regulated to counter and manage previous threats, rendering them ineffective against new threats. Given the multifaceted nature of postmodern terrorism, particularly the intertwined nature of its hardware and software aspects, this need is more pronounced than ever. Furthermore, the Islamic Republic of Iran, which, according to available evidence, is under the threat of postmodern terrorism, requires this institutional development more than any other political system in the region.Primarily, the new structures must ensure coordination among all relevant and responsible organizations to prevent duplication or lack of cooperation. This is crucial to avoid any loopholes that could lead to system penetration or malfunction, as these could result in unexpected outcomes and strategic failures. Secondly, it is essential to devise a long-term strategy that takes into account the various aspects of postmodern terrorism. This strategy should be designed in a way that accommodates both the software and hardware dimensions of this form of terrorism, and is applicable at internal, regional, and global levels. Hence, it is crucial to have security-intelligence and military collaboration with other nations in this battle. The new structures should incorporate a robust and professional department dedicated to monitoring, collecting, and analyzing electronic and virtual data of these groups globally, with a particular emphasis on virtual social networks. A key aspect of post-modern counter-terrorism is that the intelligence gathering about these groups should encompass human, social, and technical dimensions in a balanced and simultaneous manner. The past experiences have shown that many surprises and strategic failures in combating terrorism have resulted from an over-reliance on technical and telecommunication intelligence while neglecting human and social intelligence.In general, intelligence agencies require social awareness to effectively combat postmodern terrorism. This is primarily because nascent terrorist groups initially develop and recruit members within a specific social context, and they also employ a distinct social strategy. Specifically, their strategy involves integrating the group into society and establishing a social foundation for themselves, making it challenging for intelligence and security organizations to fight them. In the event of any setback or blow, these groups can retreat to their supportive social bases and reorganize themselves.