مسعود آخشی

Turkey can be considered one of the important regional players that has adopted an "aggressive approach" in its foreign policy since 2015; Ankara, which once pursued a policy of "zero tension" with Davutoglu's neighbors, has since entered the political arena into several levels of political, security, and military tensions in the Middle East and the Caucasus. Critical points in the mentioned areas of role-playing and active presence of its behavior have changed in the form of play with the sum of zero. In fact, after the popular uprisings and the formation of three fronts of political (Shiite) Islam in central Iran, Saudi Salafi Islam and the Turkish Brotherhood Islam, the competition for leadership and introduction as the authority of Islam among the three actors intensified. Balanced in the form of network communication against the threats of Iranian political Islam. In this study, using the facts in the region and based on the analytical-descriptive method and using library and Internet resources, the main question is how Turkey has used the network deterrence strategy against Iran?The research hypothesis emphasizes that Turkey's foreign policy after the Arab uprisings of 2010 in order to create a balance of power through relations with national and ethnic actors in the political, economic, cultural, ideological and security dimensions

For more than a decade, especially since the popular uprisings in the Middle East in 2011, Russia has emerged as an active trans-regional power in the Middle East and North Africa. The adoption of such a role and approach has been particularly noticeable in Russian foreign policy since Putin's presidency. Russia's most important presence can be seen in the Syrian issue in 2015, during which Moscow played an active role in the developments in West Asia, and this trend has continued in the region. The present study has tried to answer the question using descriptive-analytical method and library and internet collection tools that: The most important factors in increasing the role of Russia after the 2011 developments in the Middle East in the last decade Which ones? In response to the main question of the research, the hypothesis is raised that the increasing role of Russia in the form of supra-regional and intervening power in the Middle East and North Africa in order to create a balance of power with multifaceted characteristics - multiplicity in the power structure of the international, geopolitical and security system. In the Middle East after the 2011 unrest, in the absence of Moscow in the Syrian crisis, the balance of power in the structure of the international system and the components of power at the regional level (resources, allies / partners, spheres of influence) would be dominated by the West and the United States. Also, Russia's strong presence in the Middle East has been carried out under the influence of security, political and economic contexts and stimuli in the region and in order to counter American unilateralism and order, as if the balance in economic, trade, geopolitical and ... There is also an important need for the continuation of Moscow's active Middle East foreign policy in the coming decades in the region.

Any behavior by any government in international relations that crystallizes in the foreign policy of that country carries special messages, ideas and meanings that are the product of the environmental conditions inside and outside that country. In the meantime, Turkey, under the rule of the Justice and Development Party since 2003, has always been trying to increase its influence and regional power in the peripheral regions, especially in the Middle East. In this regard, following the developments of 2011 and the popular uprisings of Arab countries in the region, within the framework of Davutoglu's doctrine of strategic depth; Ankara has tried to improve its position in the Middle East with several tools. During the last two decades, the element of water and hydropolitics has become one of the important, influential and strategic tools in the domestic issues and foreign policy of this country, along with other tools of Turkey such as (Brotherhood ideology, military power, energy hub, transit); Accordingly, in this article, an attempt has been made to answer the question of what role water plays in Turkey's regional policies in the Middle East using descriptive-analytical methods. The hypothesis of the research emphasizes the fact that during the last two decades, Turkey has tried using its hydro-hegemonic position in the hydropolitics of the Middle East to use water in order to increase its internal political authority (increasing legitimacy, food security, energy security) on the one hand, and also, Use it as an asset, a tool, and also a strategic weapon in its foreign policies in the Middle East, on the other hand, in order to become a regional hegemon in the region. Therefore, some cases of using water as a weapon by Turkish leaders, regardless of jeopardizing the environmental security of countries in the region such as the Mughan plain in northwestern Iran, will result in acute security dimensions; In such a way that the possibility of Baghdad's internal and regional policies being dependent on Ankara is not out of the question; If in the analysis of the crisis in Syria, one of the important factors of the instability of this country can be considered the lack of access to water resources by the rural population.

The North Korean nuclear test on October 9, 2006 was one of the most significant developments in East Asia, with significant security implications for the East Asian region and international politics on the eve of the 21st century. This article uses James Rozena's linkage theory in the form of a historical-descriptive method to answer the question of what factors have led North Korea to adopt a security approach to foreign policy? The research findings show that according to James Rosena's linkage theory, a set of internal and environmental factors (personality characteristics of leaders, system, role, government, society) in the process of shaping North Korea's security policy has led the country to move towards self-help policy in the form of nuclear testing. The second question is related to the consequences of North Korea's security policy. The results of the study indicate that North Korea's nuclear policy has had various consequences at the domestic, regional and international levels, the most important of which are: resolving the issue of revival of North Korean political system, increasing the number of Nuclear powers in the international system, increasing the US military presence in the region, weakening the non-proliferation international regime, and ultimately shifting the balance of power in favor of the China-Russia axis.

As Iran’s regional geopolitical power has increased since 2006 in West Asia’s political geography to the eastern shores of the Mediterranean, we are witnessing the rise  of region’s geopolitical status in the international system and upsetting the balance of power resources. These have been realized in the form of deep systemic forces including economic (geo-economic), identity (culture and ideological) and political (geographical, military) forces in the Middle East order. Deep systemic forces, by evolving two concepts of order and patterns of behavior through the creation of processes and structures, have produced a systemic environment and a new international system in which conflicting interests of actors in various subject areas have led to the formation of divergent dynamics and acceptance of diverse roles based on geopolitical changes in order to create a balance of regional power. In this article, the researchers attempted to examine the main factors in the formation of anti-systemic groups such as ISIS in the Middle East. To answer the above question, the hypothesis is that the emergence of anti-systemic groups in the Middle East is due to the link between changes at all three levels (systemic, regional and government) and for balancing the power of political forces. In this context, we can first look at the structural-geopolitical developments of the new international system and the role of the great powers of the international system including changing US tactics from Bush’s “pre-emptive strike” and  “regime change” strategy to Obama’s “aggressive diplomacy” policy and waging asymmetric war through creating a regional coalition and planning to destabilize countries via geopolitical engineering in chaotic regions and turning them into “safe collapsed states”. Also, at the regional level, we can mention the feature of the unstructured order of the Middle East region along with the geopolitical identity conflict in the form of war inside the civilization. Finally, at the internal level, we can refer to factors such as the fragile state-nation-building process in the Middle East and the internal political structure that have led to the emergence of sub-government agents  such as religious extremists and micro-political factors in the form of nationalist and subversive minorities such as ISIS.

Police diplomacy from the early of third Millennium CE, was regarded as one of the new forms of diplomacy in the field of Security Cooperation between countries, in which police played central and considerable role. In this regard, the study have pursued the question that what factors have been caused to formation of this diplomacy in the international level? The authors believed that the rising of new security (non-traditional) and common threats are among the important consequences of globalization phenomena that have been aimed to government’s security. Therefore, security authorities of countries in order to confrontation with this security threats, by using of element of police in security discourses and dialogues between countries have dealt with to increasing cooperation and enforcement of international and regional security convergence and exchange of police’s experiences through discourse and diplomacy such as formal diplomacy in the multi-dimensions and mutual form in the fashion of organizations (International Police / European Police) and concordats that such a process has been led to formation of new pattern of diplomacy in the area of international security in the form of Police-based Diplomacy. Second question is related to the goals and functions of police-based diplomacy. Findings indicate that policing diplomacy in the subject to confrontation with non-traditional security threats have been caused to increased international cooperation among countries so that whilst reducing its harms, to increased national power of countries in providing security for their citizens in order to confront with drugs smuggling, illegal immigrations, fake passports, border security, protection of diplomatic places, prevention of human smuggling, terrorism, organized crimes, extradition of an offenders, exchange of security – secret information, exchange of educational experiences and encounter against terroristic activities  of international and state anti-system groups.

The strategic importance of Central Asian region emerged within the framework or global security challenges following 9/11. NATO engagement in Afghanistan and the US strategic shifts from “energy security" to "fighting against terrorism" in the region, together with its new approaches in various political, military and operational fields within the context of comprehensive theory of "cooperative security" encountered with the formation of Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)and the formation of new regional security arrangement within the context of neo-regionalism theory. These developments indicate the importance of the Central Asia Region in the world politics and amongst major players of these two organizations namely US, Russia and China over the past decade.
This article tries to answer the main question by using a comparative-descriptive How could security policies of NATO and SCO in Central Asian Region be studied and theoretically compared? The authors believe that, over the past decade, member states of the two organizations have shared tactical interest such as the stability of Afghanistan, the fight against drug trafficking, organized crimes and terrorism, all realized in terms of partnership mechanisms for NATO peace and NATO-Russia council. Therefore, despite the existence of mechanisms of cooperation to achieve tactical shared interests, two organizations disagreed on strategic subject matters such as the long term goals of the US in the region, the expansion of NATO to the East and the controlling and managing energy security in Central Asia. In the meantime, there are some elements such as NATO’s bilateral relationship with some Central Asian countries being affected by China and Russia policies, contradicting goals of major players, and lack of comprehensive institutional mechanism of consultation and cooperation in the two organizations have deepened the differences among them.