فهرست مطالب reza dolati

Authoritarian policies that prioritize state power often hinder the development of constructive international relationships, fueling tensions and reducing opportunities for cooperation. This is particularly evident in the Middle East, where countries in the Tigris and Euphrates river basins are deeply affected. The region's unique geopolitical and hydropolitical context makes it especially vulnerable to such conflicts. In recent years, relations between Iran, Turkiye, and Iraq have grown increasingly complex due to various factors, including dam construction, persistent droughts, and Turkiye's authoritarian policies. These elements have heightened sensitivities in their relations, compounding the challenges of their already tumultuous history.In such a complex environment, it becomes increasingly crucial to accurately understand and thoroughly analyze the ongoing regional processes. Additionally, forecasting future trends is critical for preventing international crises. A detailed examination of the impact of dam construction on the flow of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, coupled with an assessment of the consequences of recurring droughts on the region's water resources, is essential. Analyzing the water policies of key regional players, particularly Turkiye, can also further enhance our understanding of the current situation and inform more effective responses.Furthermore, exploring how these policies affect relations between neighboring countries can provide valuable insights. Through such studies, it is possible to propose solutions that promote more effective cooperation in water resource management. This could involve sharing information, creating joint mechanisms for managing water resources, and developing collaborative projects focused on sustainable usage. Ultimately, prioritizing cooperation over competition and hostility can foster a more constructive environment for addressing regional challenges. Achieving this, however, requires a shift in attitudes and broader policies among regional countries, but it can safeguard the long-term interests of all parties involved.

Research methods generally fall into three categories: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed (a combination of both). This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach to assess and interpret the current situation. In the descriptive phase, data is gathered through library research, while the analytical one applies a deductive method, utilizing Peter Haggett’s Hypothetica model and Ashok Swain model for data analysis. In the quantitative section, Food-Energy-Water (FEW) indicators are employed to demonstrate and derive key concepts.The research process involves gathering information, conducting a thorough analysis of the collected data, and identifying patterns based on the assumptions of the two models. The final step is to pinpoint and articulate the challenges that need to be addressed to enhance the current situation. To clearly and comprehensively present the research findings, diagramming software is used to infer and illustrate the conceptual model. This model visually represents the relations and connections among various research elements. This integrated approach enables a deep, multifaceted examination of the topic and leads to a well-rounded and actionable analysis.This mixed-method approach, which combines descriptive-analytical techniques with quantitative analysis using FEW indicators, offers a strong foundation for the study. It facilitates a thorough examination of the current situation while also enabling a data-driven analysis of trends and patterns. By integrating the Hypothetica and Swin models into the analytical process, the study gains a deeper interpretation of the data, revealing insights that might be overlooked when using a single methodological approach.By clearly mentioning the existing challenges, this research goes beyond merely describing the current state—it also lays the groundwork for potential solutions and improvements. This forward-thinking approach significantly enhances the study's practical relevance, making it valuable for policymakers and stakeholders alike. The comprehensive methodology, which seamlessly integrates qualitative and quantitative approaches and is further supported by visual modeling, allows for a detailed and nuanced exploration of the topic. As a result, the research not only provides valuable insights but also establishes a strong foundation for future studies and practical applications.

Authoritarian or power-centric policies focus on consolidating and expanding governmental authority, both within a nation and in its foreign relations. However, an excessive reliance on this approach can hinder constructive international engagement, often leading to tensions and even potential crises. The Middle East, particularly the Tigris and Euphrates river basins encompassing Iran, Turkiye, and Iraq, is especially vulnerable due to its unique geostrategic importance and the complex interplay of regional dynamics.The findings reveal that Turkiye's unilateral and authoritarian management of water resources - primarily through large-scale dam construction and hydropower projects designed to enhance agricultural development - has deepened regional disparities and heightened tensions. Iraq's geographical disadvantages, combined with its limited financial and technological resources, have left it ill-equipped to effectively counter Turkiye's actions. The advanced dam projects in Turkiye, along with similar initiatives in Iran, have severely affected Iraq's water resources, exacerbating water scarcity and contributing to environmental degradation.Turkiye's centralized and dominant approach to dam construction has worsened the region's water supply and demand imbalance. At the same time, internal conflicts and divergent water priorities between the Iraqi government and the Kurdistan Regional Government hinder a cohesive response to regional water disputes, underscoring significant organizational weaknesses within Iraq.As Turkiye's influence expands, Iraq's vulnerabilities become increasingly evident, largely due to its central authority deficiencies and organizational weaknesses. Iraq faces significant consequences, including environmental degradation and threats to human life. However,Turkiye is also affected by its actions, such as diverting water from the Tigris and Euphrates, which disrupt Kurdish regions in Iraq and risk fueling unrest and instability.The Swain model demonstrates that population growth, driven by the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) nexus, leads to resource depletion and heightened tensions. This growth further intensifies water scarcity and regional instability. As a result, population growth strategies centered around these components become increasingly costly and demand a fundamental reassessment by the countries involved.An analysis of the Food-Energy-Water (FEW) components shows that Turkiye holds a relatively stronger position compared to Iran and Iraq, though this advantage may not be sustainable in the long run. However, with its abundant water reserves and extensive dam infrastructure, Turkiye is not on the verge of a water crisis. Iran, although better off than Iraq in terms of water resources, still confronts considerable challenges. Iraq, in the most vulnerable position, faces severe threats to its water supply, underscoring the serious security and environmental implications for the country.

Active and close cooperation between Iraq and Iran in managing water resources is crucial. This partnership can foster the creation of joint programs and strategies for water management, helping to maintain a balanced approach to resource usage while easing regional tensions. Through such collaboration, both countries can improve water security in the region by addressing risks and ensuring that the water needs of affected communities are met effectively.At large, addressing barriers and challenges to sustainable and equitable water management in the region requires a multifaceted approach: 1) Strengthened regional cooperation; 2) Adoption of water-saving technologies; and 3) International interventions and mediation. By implementing these strategies collectively, the region can move toward more sustainable water management practices and reduce tensions in this geopolitically sensitive area.

The Middle East and North Africa have always been of great interest to global thought and power due to their strategic location and huge fuel resources. One instance was Nazi Germany, which had specific geographical considerations for the region. This study seeks to answer the question: "How did the change in the role of German geopolitics from Haushofer's Ideas to Hitler's affect the fate of Iran during Reza Shah's reign?"; We will explain what happened, and why it happened. This research is descriptive-analysis in terms of its nature and method. In this article, an attempt was made to use graphical models to better understand concepts. The results indicate that Nazi Germany's ideas for conquering the world under Adolf Hitler and Rudolf Hess were very different from those of Haushofer. In World War II, Haushofer’s theory was replaced by Hitler's viewpoints. This change had a direct impact on Iran's strategy; Reza Shah adopted a neutral strategy during this period, which eventually led to defeat and military occupation of Iran. Thus, when Nazi Germany's strategy shifted from Haushofer’s to Hitler’s, Reza Shah should have changed his approach too.

Throughout history, the often presence of "power" and "wealth" alongside "ideology" and "competition" has led to the formation of hostile relations between countries. Among the regions of the world, the Middle East and North Africa have more complex relationships to achieve security due to the presence of countries with special characteristics and if the wrong strategies are adopted by the powers that be in this region, the result will be unsolvable. As we approach the third decade of the twenty-first century, headlines from the Middle East are dramatic and worrisome, and often characterized by upheaval and change. The MENA are the sensitive areas of security and energy in the world and have witnessed many tensions and conflicts. The contemporary conflicts including Palestinian occupation, Iran–Iraq War, Invasion of Kuwait, United States invasion of Afghanistan, 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Arab Spring and the emergence of Islamist groups like Taliban and ISIL. One of the influential poles in this region is Iran, which is one of the most influential countries in the region. Middle Eastern and North Africa countries have very complex relations with each other. In order to secure their interests and security, each of the countries in the region seeks political and security cooperation with other countries. On the other hand, countries with higher geopolitical weights will be more influential. Therefore, in order to reveal the reciprocal and constructive relationship between the countries of the region and security, the concepts of "region" and "security" must be opened. Finally, we evaluate the interaction between the security of the Arab countries and Iran, which has led to major changes in the geopolitical relations of the region and we look at the security situation in the region in light of these developments. What historical, social, and economic factors explain the similarities and the differences that we observe?

The descriptive-analytical research method and the reliability of the research have been evaluated through the quasi-Delphi's questionnaire and the reliability of the assessment tool with Cronbach's alpha test. The situation of security discourses in Iran and the Arab countries in the region has been assessed with three values: solidarity (1), negative solidarity (1) and non-solidarity (0); And through the questionnaire, 10 countries were selected and the numerical weighting of the Likert scale (between 0 and 5) was performed, and we obtained the coefficients of "geopolitical weight in the region" and "communication with Iran". To measure the reliability of the statistical test questionnaire with Spearman-Brown's prediction of 0.75, Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.72 (acceptable) was obtained. All findings have been analyzed with the Excel software model and converted to a concept model in the form of a diagram by iThoughtsX and Ps 2018 software. Statistical population: Experts and students, sample community: 10 professors and 20 students as "Convenience Sampling" method through a questionnaire (5 professors and 10 students) and "non-structured interview" (5 professors and 10 Students).

since 1979 has reduced poverty and expanded its middle class and literacy rates, which has boosted Iran's power. Iran’s growing power and Saudi Arabia may remain powerful and influential relative to states in the region that are grappling with instability but they will be at odds with each other on a variety of issues. Recent developments in the Middle East are a manifestation of the "conflict" pattern. As another pole, Saudi Arabia alone cannot play a geopolitical role due to its low geopolitical weight compared to Iran in the region. Given the combination of communication and geopolitical weight, this description correctly shows that there is a weak connection between the two influential poles of the region, namely Iran and Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, it should be noted that according to Buzan's theory, poles in the Middle East and North Africa determine the direction of the region and that means defining the region's line and mesh by two conflicting powers. In this regard, Iran can take into account its geopolitical weight and national strength and recognize its true position in order to have a realistic assessment of the existing threats and opportunities.

Unfortunately, the evidence shows that the region's political systems do not work for collective security. The geopolitical limitation of the region can be considered as a lack of sufficient attention to the "position" and "role" of Iran by the Arab countries of the region. In other words, the countries of the region are aware of the influential geopolitical role of Iran, but they are weak in terms of their relationship with this role. The key to achieving this security in the region is the realization of convergence and the growth of the positive correlation coefficient with Iran in both groups of countries with "negative" and "cross-sectional" interactions which paves the way for convergence and access to regional security in the Middle East and North Africa security complexes and if that happens, it will lead to convergence with Europe and the international community. The results show that Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan, Egypt and Morocco are in the same group. Also, the countries of Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, Libya, Tunisia and Algeria are present in a cross-sectional communication group. At one time, these countries were pro-Iranian and at other times pro-Saudi; and they generally follow the "principle of national interests" and the "principle of ideology". And finally, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, which in most cases have aligned themselves with Iran's goals.Because the two countries, along with their allies, have created almost the same geopolitical weight, they are unable to eliminate each other. The conflict between them will only make the situation more critical and complicate the balance of power, so the convergence of these forces must be at the forefront of the goals of Iran and Saudi Arabia, otherwise we will never achieve regional security.

The history of political groups and political parties in the Islamic world, especially in the Middle East, is rooted in Islamic thought and its affiliations over the past few hundred years, so that after the Ottoman period we see these ideas and their transformation into political parties and groups. The most important part of the developments in the Middle East takes place in the Islamic world. From 1918 to the Treaty of Lausanne in 1921, they were practically an integral part of the Ottoman Empire. However, with the arrival of nationalist ideas and serious concepts, including the nation-state, the country, the party, etc., a new trend in the intellectual development of Muslims was formed. Islamic intellectuals and nationalism intellectuals and groups in the Middle East While the formation of both ideology and organization was affiliated to the West, However, these events for the first time made the Western world realize that the Islamic world is something beyond the Ottoman Empire. The formation of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Islamic groups in Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran showed that the Islamic world in the Middle East is changing. Therefore, in this article, with a descriptive-analytical and quasi-Delphi approach, it is explained the structural and functional evolution of the intellectual and political currents of the region and pathology in the form of a conceptual model.