فهرست مطالب mohammad yazdan panah

Despite the remoteness of the Shia political and administrative power and responsibility in most countries mainly kept them marginalized minorities, Social and political nature and capacity of Shias, to a large extent been neglected. In light of Iran's Islamic Revolution, Shiites in various countries outside of the political and social isolation and moved in the direction of gaining and renewing his identity. This gradually led to the formation of the idea of geopolitical developments in the Middle East were Shia.Since the Islamic Revolution of Iran was derived from the principles and ideals of Shias And in a society where the majority Shiite population had occurred, Shia other countries, especially neighboring Shias Iran They were influenced by the goals and objectives. The influence of the Shiite minority religious consciously be found across the national borders and then their desire for their rights And power sharing followed. The third wave of Shiite self-awareness and strengthen the formation of Shiite geopolitics United States of America to attack Iraq (Shia world's second largest) and the fall of the Baathi regime emerged in this country. According to countries in the Shia Geopolitics the Shiites in their terms of population and geography, are considered a minority or as a majority are and can affect international relations and power relations on a global level.This article seeks to explore theoretical perspectives of international relations to the formation of geopolitical Shia and the fact it's in the realm of foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran has been evaluated.

In the process of how countries’ foreign policy is shaped, a specific model of decision making becomes predominant considering the type of governmental structure, the economic-social system and the cultural features pertaining to that political unit. In reality, the model of decision making forms an important part of a state’s foreign policy which is formulated and carried out within a particular systemic framework. Therefore, studying just three cases of America’s military interventions, the present article tries to enumerate the internal and external sources of decision making in America’s military interventions, and then establish the priority of each of the sources. It follows that the main question in the research at hand is “under what circumstances is the probability of military intervention in America’s foreign policy increased”?To answer this question, the research hypothesis is that “under circumstances where the structure of international system (foreign variable) is conducive and the president himself agrees with military invasion, the military intervention in foreign policy becomes more likely”. From the viewpoint of James Rosenau, the role variables have the most and individuals have the least part in America’s process of foreign policy decision making. However, as the findings of this research show, the priority and position of the variables that give shape to America’s foreign policy in wartime are different than in peacetime. The importance and sensitivity of decision making in critical times causes personal and variables in America’s military decision making to have priority on governmental and social variables.

Based on America’s new national security, American military forces will mass in the Asia-Pacific area. The change in America’s continental approach from the Middle East to the Pacific has been influenced by several interconnected factors. The first factor originates from the qualitative development and the quantitative mitigation in the world’s military situations especially those of the United States. In fact, it is not only the geographical location that is changed, but that the nature and responsibilities of these forces are transformed as well according to the new doctrine of national security. The second factor relates to the necessity of establishing a new security-military multilateral alliance in order to contain and control the situation. In reality, a typical security belt will be stretched around China in order to contain the military and economic power of this country. The third factor is related to the failure in Washington’s interventionist strategiess in the Middle East area and North Africa. The increased role played by the traditional allies of America and the efforts made to prioritize the strategy of containment and sanctions in America’s foreign policy against the Islamic Republic of Iran can be cited as an implication of America’s decreased military presence in the region.