روح الله ملکی عزین آبادی

The defeat in the 33 and 22 day wars against Hezbollah and Hamas institutionalized this definite understanding in the minds of the Israeli authorities That due to the different definition of the concept of threat and the culture of martyrdom, a mere military confrontation with the axis of resistance will result in nothing but defeat for this regime. Therefore, the question addressed in this article is what is Israel's strategy to strengthen its deterrence strategy in facing the axis of resistance and Iran? In response to this question, the hypothesis of the article in the framework of the theory of complex deterrence is that Israel's fear of falling into the trap of deterrence in direct confrontation with the axis of resistance in the West Asian region has caused Israel with the aim of delegitimizing the ideals of the axis of resistance, to adopt a strategy take alliance with Iran's neighbors.

After a relatively peaceful period, it seems that a new period has emerged in the life cycle of the Security Council with the selfish, ambitious and unilateral behavior of the United States. From the Americans point of view, international institutions and especially important structures such as the Security Council are supported and accepted as long as the interests of the United States are secured in them. With this approach and while in the new multipolar world, there are some gaps between the opinion of the United States and the other powers that are members of the Security Council and the member countries of the General Assembly, it seems that the United States is making new arrangements. Considering the unclear perspective of the structure of the Security Council and the approach of the United States and the international community in this regard, the main question of this research is what will be the consequences of reforming the structure of the United Nations Security Council in the framework of the national interests of the United States of America for the Islamic Republic of Iran? In response to this question, this research examines all possible scenarios and their consequences for the Islamic Republic of Iran with the aim of foresight and using Peter Schwartz's scenario writing method.Although in the past, the United States has a desire to make changes in the United Nations, but based on the current evidence, the United States is trying to pursue its goals and interests through the reforms of the Secretary General and with a justified appearance, from the reforms of the Security Council and the United Nations. In this framework, America's goal is to increase its influence and reduce the opposition power in this council. Based on the trends and considering the many variables and various obstacles to the implementation of any changes and reforms, the "scenario of the continuation of the status quo" can be the most likely scenario for the Security Council. This is definitely not the desired scenario of the United States, and basically for this reason, it has fueled the discussion of reforms and pursues this issue at the highest level of its government and interaction with countries. So it seems that another possible scenario is "Distributed Security Council". In this scenario, the main goal of the United States is to increase the influence of its own and allied countries, and to reduce the power of opposing countries (especially Russia and China). As discussed in the analysis of the national security strategy documents of the United States of America, in a broad and strategic effort, this country is trying to rebuild the existing key institutions or create new institutions in order to manage the world in accordance with the new era and the future perspective. . It is in this framework that Trump's reforms find their role. But the question here is what is America's strategy and Biden's plan in this regard? Probably, the United States has prepared plans like this in the form of the UN reform plan - the generalities of which were approved by the majority of countries.The general plan of the United States is a "behind-the-scenes strategy." For this purpose, the United States seeks to assemble a creative legal, institutional and political solution to circumvent Russia and China. By obtaining the support of at least two-thirds of the members of the General Assembly, legitimizing the use of military force beyond the current structure of the Council, attracting the opinion of the G20 members to the reforms, including its aligned members in the Security Council and limiting the veto, the United States seeks to Practically, the guidance and leadership of the council gained security. Probably part of the US plan is to convert the current "free veto". The hidden goal of this plan is to weaken the current decision-making process through future "reforms" and finally remove the "free veto", which means that this tool will be removed from the hands of Russia and China. To achieve this, the United States may raise a greater number of related and unrelated issues in the Security Council to highlight the inefficiency of the Security Council and challenge it. Creating a heavy workload and intensifying the mentality that the council with its current structure and members cannot provide its basic responsibility in the field of security is one of the goals of such a possible action. Another possible measure is to reduce financial support from the United Nations and the Security Council. This action is a practical threat that, in addition to creating real pressure, will also create the right psychological atmosphere to advance America's plan: a) Facilitate the entry of countries targeted by America, which also have adequate financial capacity to support. b) Imposing the share of financial support from other countries on the shoulders of newly arrived countries, which is the use of the motivation of these countries and at the same time can attract the support of other members of the United Nations in support of this plan. Part of America's plan may be to maneuver around the lack of council members and look for replacement or new members. In this framework, a 25-member Security Council is possible with the increase of fixed seats to 10 members and the increase of non-fixed seats to 15 members. There are many considerations in the selection of these members, but options such as Japan, Germany, Brazil, India and even Jordan are more fortunate and they are countries that happen to be under the influence of America and have a lot of alignment with this country. As mentioned, various scenarios regarding the future of the UN Security Council can be imagined, some of which seem more likely, but at the same time, from the point of view of national interests, less likely scenarios should not be ignored.Therefore, considering each of imagined scenarios, it is necessary to analyze the consequences and prepare the necessary measures. Also, in front of the alternative situations of the future, it is possible to design the scenarios of the confrontation accordingly, which, of course, requires the participation of thinkers, experts and politicians. All this, some joint activities and special measures can be prepared according to the total of scenarios or possible and desired scenarios, some of which were mentioned in the previous sections and the general summary It is shown below. According to the space drawn, it can be seen that compared to the current situation, nine of the thirteen possible scenarios lead to the aggravation of the conditions against J.A. Iran tends at the same time, some of these scenarios include some more room for diplomatic maneuvering and practical action. In contrast to the three scenarios, the message of a better situation for J.A. Iran, of course, is considered one of the less likely scenarios. As a summary, according to the drawn space of Security Council change scenarios, it is possible to display the actions and the general way of facing each category of scenarios in the form of the following figure.

The United States of America to restore its international dignity since September 11, 2001, it has devised and implemented strategies to reproduce its power, and has made great efforts to improve both its power generation resources and to deploy new sources of power. So the United States, along with compulsory, structural and institutional power, is trying to activate a new dimension of power as productive power. The question that arises is what is the source of the United States' international production of productive power? To answer this question, the paper assumes that international law is the most important source of US productive power after 9/11. To further understand this hypothesis, the evolution of the concept of international law by force in the context of the evolution of the principle of legitimate defense, humanitarian intervention, and international responsibility for protection after September 11 is examined as a case study in this article. This paper takes a descriptive-analytical approach and uses library resources to prove this hypothesis.

One of the main issues of the deterrence is rationality and logic of the enemies that have long existed as a theory and strategy, but in the contemporary international system it has taken a new dimension. In deterrence, the rationale of enemies is assumed, so if enemies are not rational, deterrence will not be possible. Indeed, if the enemies are not logical, none of the deterrent strategies will work. Therefore, the main question of the present research is that how will different perceptions of international actors of logic and rationality affect deterrence strategy?In this article, in the framework of constructivism, it is argued that in complex containment, on the one hand, to the extent that the common knowledge and similar structural features are more symmetrical among the actors, the relations are also more linear and the probability of optimal deterrence is increased. On the other hand, whatever components of the social structure of deterrence have less symmetry and more actors involved, the likelihood of a deterioration of the system into a malicious system and falling into the trap of deterrence and security challenge is further increased.

After the 11th of September of 2001, the United States, intending to reach a hgemonic position by institutionalizing new exceptions such as the fight against terrorism, humanitarian intervention, and liability for protection, has established its own international law. In fact, the United States used the capacity to regulate and regulate international law in order to secure its interests and impose its will. This study search the question: how has the United States, played a role in developing the norms of international law. The hypothesis of this article focuses on the international rights of the fight against terrorism and through historical-comparative methods and through citation-legal arguments, as well as the use of library resources. The new law, through Security Council resolutions, follows Chapter VII of the UN Charter after the events of 9/11. In this process, the impact of the unilateralism of the United States on the evolution of the norms of international law is also assessed, focusing on the fight against terrorism.

After collaps of former Soviet Union, Caspian Sea geopolitic region has recived new identity and become an active region with a new fuction. In this regard, connection between interests of the world actors such as United States, European Union, Turkey and China with the coastal countries has intensified the situation and complexity of the region; in the way that competition between the Great powers in the region has activated the strategic aspect of the regional activities. In this relations, existence of the energy source and attention to the region as corridor of business and transportation and also its role as a connection course between Europ and Asia, has resulted to some consequeces for regional countries in the field of political independence, democracy, stability and security and in particular the legal regime. Therefore, this research hypothises that the West strategy in the Caspian region, aimed at supplying its energy interests, has caused ambiguity conserning borders and the legal regime of Caspean Sea.

A review of international relations during the 20th century and after indicates that this academic discipline has experienced constant theoretical and conceptual evolutions. As far as the evolution of concepts in international relations is concerned, we have seen accentuation of semantics in the theories of the international relations. This has overshadowed the majority of traditional concepts of international relations such as power. In that regard, deterrence-with power as its nucleus – as one of the most important fields of study in international relations as well as related strategic studies, have undergone semantic evolution. Therefore, this paper hypothesizes that the evolution of the international system and the accentuation of semantics have paved the ground for evolution of power generating resources and the emergence of a concept known as “soft deterrence” to go with its traditional par of deterrence which is basically based on hard power. This paper intends to use a descriptive-analytical method to prove the above hypothesis.

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.