جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "حل منازعه" در نشریات گروه "علوم سیاسی"

Despite the increasing recognition of sports diplomacy, a more comprehensive understanding of its impact on conflict resolution is felt. This study seeks to address the current gap in the literature by providing a nuanced exploration of the role of sports diplomacy within the context of 'sport and conflict resolution.' The main question is: "What is the role of sports diplomacy in conflict resolution for state and non-state actors?". It is hypothesized that the strategic deployment of sports diplomacy is an effective tool in establishing communication and strengthening dialogue in conflict resolution between the involved parties. The research findings indicate that the state actors have used sports diplomacy to fulfill their foreign policy goals to secure their direct or indirect interests. In fact, for states, sports always come second after survival and security, and non-state actors, who are often established as mediators to create and promote peace, use sports diplomacy to remove friction and resolve conflicts between state and non-state actors, create stability, strengthen peace, and ultimately provide human security. The qualitative research method is based on description analysis, and data collection was done through library and virtual resources.

Moderation did not use to play a significant role in contemporary Iran as a major political approach. In addition to that, during the past few years, the domestic and foreign policies were affected by the extremist approaches inside the country. The moderate movements, however, emerged recently as an answer to the increased internal and external issues and they utilized the slogan of moderation during the last general election. This effort was received gladly among various social and political groups in the country and led to the victory of the proponents of moderation in the latest presidential election. Nevertheless, the consistency and durability of moderation in Iran’s contemporary political environment faces many obstacles and challenges. One of these obstacles is lack of equilibrium in political structure that is mostly manifest in the imbalanced relationship between government and society, institutional incompatibility, antagonistic relations between political groups instead of rationality and conversation, and dominance of Clientelism in the political system. An improvement in the equilibrium standards of the political structure and relations is the key for the moderate policies and programs in economic, social, cultural, and foreign relations to be successful. The advocates of moderation can begin the strategic equilibration of the political process with reforms in the management of the executive branch, optimizing the decision-making and policy-making methods, and modifying the political manners of the statesmen. Then, they can strengthen their social and political base through performing détente and conflict resolution policies in foreign affairs, providing prosperity and transparency in the economic sphere, supporting political and cultural expansion, preparing desirable conditions for the oppressed institutions to compel them to be active, and empowering the vulnerable groups. Finally, the moderate administration can utilize an interactive approach in its relations with other political groups and institutions to strengthen the compromise and consensus over macro policies and programs and provide for an improved political equilibrium in the country.

Iran and the United States have experienced more than three decades of conflictual relations. Although there have been chances for resolution of their conflict, all conflict resolution initiatives have failed. Despite this, the interim nuclear agreement between Iran and the United States (in the framework of Iran – P5+1) in November 2013, has revived arguments about the possibility of the resolution of the nuclear conflict, despite failure of all the past reconciliatory initiatives? In response to this question and relying on Ripeness Theory, the main argument of this article is that the start of direct negotiations between Iran and the United States and reaching a nuclear agreement are due to the ripeness of the Iran-U.S. conflict as a result of a mutual hurting nuclear stalemate. Along with examination of this hypothesis, the article studies the factors hindering the resolution conflict between the two countries under the condition of ripeness and presents four scenarios for the future of the nuclear conflict resolution and its impact on the resolution of the two countries overall conflict.