جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « منافع ملی » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran have always been rivals in the Persian Gulf region, and more importantly, the developments in Bahrain are considered a common area of ​​influence for both countries. This article aims to answer the main question by using descriptive, analytical and library sources, what are the effects of Saudi influence in Bahrain on the national security of the Islamic Republic of Iran? The hypothesis of the article is that Saudi Arabia's actions in the Persian Gulf region, especially in Bahrain, include threats such as disrupting regional deterrence and the balance of power, intensifying militaristic policies, economic hegemony, and propaganda and political threats in order to induce Iran's obstruction in the realization The peace of the Middle East knows, and at the same time, it will lead to opportunities such as the expansion of Iran's soft and networked power and the failure of American and Saudi strategies in the region.

The increase of Russia's presence in West Asia in recent years has affected regional and international order and security. The Russia's approach in this region towards other players influenced Russia-Iran interactions and Iran's interests at the regional and global levels. This paper aims to address this question: How Russia's regional policies in West Asia have affected Islamic Republic of Iran's national interests? The paper is based on the theory of balance of power. The paper’s findings show that the most important effects of Russia's soft and hard balancing act on Iran's national interests in the region are: Help countering Takfiri Salafi terrorism, increasing Iran's strategic depth, improving Iran's regional deterrence power, strengthening the Axis of Resistance, reducing the influence of America and the West in the region, and intensifying the strategic interactions of Russia-China and Iran and their confrontation with the liberal world order and unilateralism of America.

Within the realm of governance, the effectiveness of a government hinges on the engagement and utilization of collective wisdom. Research indicates that in less developed countries, debates often center around the fundamental principles of governance and the wisdom behind governmental actions, while discussions concerning policy formulation, planning, and decision-making are relatively scarce. Conversely, in more developed nations, controversies tend to revolve around specific decisions and policies, with little emphasis on questioning the underlying rationality of governance. This prompts the question: what underlies this disparity, and what are its implications? This study employs an analytical approach, distinguishing between two forms of rationality: foundational and policymaking. It argues that the strength of a nation lies in having foundational rationality, governance principles, and related matters largely settled and accepted, thus remaining outside the realm of everyday controversies. Conversely, issues surrounding policymaking rationality and national interests often become subjects of debate. It contends that a broader and continuous engagement with public opinion, along with a wider utilization of collective wisdom, leads to more optimal decision-making and policy outcomes. However, in weaker countries, both executive bureaucratic systems and external adversaries attempt to limit debates to matters of the first type, albeit with varying motivations. Consequently, they exclude issues of the second type from collective participation. This undermines the concept of governance and results in decisions related to national interests, policymaking, and decision-making lacking the input of collective wisdom. This scenario paves the way for autocracy within bureaucratic systems and middle management.

Hassan Rouhani's foreign policy has been studied and researched, mainly from a discursive viewpoint. The current research, contrary to this practice, has tried to evaluate the foreign policy of Hassan Rouhani's administration from a performative viewpoint and based on the national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran (in a broad sense). According to the trend analysis, Rouhani's foreign policy can be divided into six periods, with focus on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA): 1) From the beginning of the administration to the JCPOA agreement; 2) from JCPOA agreement to Donald Trump election as the 45th President of the United States ; 3) From Trump election to US withdrawal from JCPOA; 4) from the withdrawal of the United States from JCPOA to the failure of INSTEX and negotiations with Europe; 5) From the failure of negotiations with Europe to the election of Joe Biden; 6) Biden's victory in 46th US election and the efforts to revive JCPOA. Accordingly, the main question of this article is: "To what extent does the foreign policy of Rouhani administration served the national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran?" The findings show that "Rouhani's foreign policy – due to its one-dimensionality and overfocus on nuclear negotiations and the lack of a successful balancing effort (inadequate balancing) at the domestic and foreign levels after the US withdrawal from the JCPOA – failed to meet an acceptable level of national goals and interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Bureaucracy has penetrated rapidly in various economic, cultural and political systems of Iran. One of these systems that is involved in the concept and examples of bureaucracy is Iran's research system, and of course its most important infrastructure is research journals. Apart from the advantages of this type of bureaucracy, it seems that this situation has also brought disadvantages or problems; Failure to pay attention to them can cause depression or deviation of the country's scientific development path. Now, from various aspects, there are problems in the process of accepting and judging and publishing Iranian research journals, and especially in the lack of coordination and integration of scientific publications in the style sheets of articles. In this article, while presenting some of these problems and suggestions around them, it has been noted that during investigations and researches, the problems faced by authors and researchers and their suggestions should be collected and counted, and should be included in the structure and

Since the Safavid era, the Eastern Mediterranean region, has affected the Iran's national security and interests. The current research seeks to answer the question, "What are the components of the continuity of Iran's foreign policy in the Eastern Mediterranean during the Safavid period and the Islamic Republic?" The temporary answer that the researchers put forward as a hypothesis is that "Security-strategic needs and cultural-religious commonalities have been the most important reasons for the continuity of Iran's foreign policy in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the difference in Iran's approach to Europe has been one of the differences between Iran's policy in the two periods." The findings show that the similarity of the type and role identity of the Safavid statesmen and the Islamic Republic of Iran led to the definition of common interests and similar foreign policy approaches by them. Iran's continuous strategic competition with other regional powers and the need to contain their threats far from the borders, the role of Shiites in the Eastern Mediterranean in advancing Iran's goals, economic interests and the dependence of Iran's geopolitical competition on identity and ideology are the most important reasons for the continuity of Iran's foreign policy during the two periods.

Developments in the South Caucasus region have an impact on the national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran due to the geographical proximity and ethnic, religious and cultural affinity that the people of this region have with Iran. In this regard, Iran adopted a policy of active neutrality in order to play a role in the first Nagorno-Karabakh crisis. This is while during the second crisis, Iran spoke more openly about "Karabagh" belonging to Azerbaijan. This article examines the change of Iran's foreign policy strategy in the second Nagorno-Karabakh crisis and answers the question, "What factors caused the change in the foreign policy strategy of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the second Nagorno-Karabakh crisis?" It seems that Iran's policy as an Islamic and Shia country and in the shadow of factors such as ethnicity and religion led to a change in Iran's foreign policy strategy in the second crisis in the form of emphasizing the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan while respecting the rights of ethnic minorities and the inviolability of international borders. The basis of descriptive-analytical methodology and library resources has been done.

This article is prepared and organized based on the security conditions of the Persian Gulf and providing solutions for stability and security in this sensitive international region. Stable security in this geo-strategic, geo-cultural and geo-political region of the world is of great importance due to the route of energy passage and estimation of more than 90% of fossil energies (in 2030). The geography of the Persian Gulf, which is separated from the Sea of Oman by the Strait of Hormuz, consists of the following countries: Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar, which are important and vital for the world in terms of economy and fossil energy production. Is. Britain's withdrawal from this region and its replacement by the United States in 1970 has caused many ups and downs in this region of the Middle East. This year, the United States used the two countries of Iran and Saudi Arabia as two pillars of regional security to reduce the tension between the two countries and a barrier against communism in a plan called the Nixon-Kessinger doctrine (two-pillar security).

Kurdistan region of Iraq has been one of the most disputed regions in the western neighborhood of Iran, which is also adjacent to Iranian Kurdistan from the east. This issue has caused tensions between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kurdistan Region every few years. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to understand the situation of the Kurdistan region of Iraq in terms of opportunities and threats it has for the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is clear understanding the above issue is important and necessary to strengthen and understand the type of confrontation of the Islamic Republic with the Kurdistan Region in order to obtain more and better national interests. Therefore, the main question of this article has been raised as follows: What are the opportunities and threats of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq? The findings indicate that at 4 cultural, economic, geopolitical and security levels, relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kurdistan Region of Iraq have created opportunities and challenges that, according to the foreign policy apparatus of both sides, these opportunities They can become a threat or vice versa. However, it seems that in the form of threats, most of them are summarized in the relationship between the Kurdistan Region and Israel and the Iraqi Kurdistan's struggle for independence. In both cases, the active diplomacy of the Islamic Republic can turn these threats into opportunities with proper management. The research method in this article is descriptive-analytical.

The Kurdistan region of the Republic of Iraq (KRI), which borders Iranian Kurdistan to the east, has long been a disputed area on the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI)'s western borders. This issue fuels tensions between KRI and IRI every few years. This study aims to identify and discuss the opportunities and threats that KRI offers and poses to IRI. Therefore, the study findings help us understand how IRI treats KRI to ensure more and better IRI's national interests. The main research question is as follows: What are the opportunities and threats that IRI finds and faces in KRI?

Countries traditionally take two different approaches to foreign policy in international relations: realism and idealism. A “realist" foreign policy prioritizes national security and national interests over ideology and morality. Realists view foreign policy from the perspective of interests rather than values. This implies that they focus more on a country’s foreign policy and less on its domestic policy. In practice, realists prioritize their primary interests, such as security and prosperity, in their relations with foreign countries, and place less emphasis on what these governments do within their borders. By contrast, an idealist approach to foreign policy holds that the foreign policy of a country should primarily reflect its moral and philosophical values. If a government endeavors to combat poverty, protect human rights, and promote religious liberty domestically, because it believes that these are just or moral stands, it must also attempt to accomplish these goals overseas. Idealists believe that this will eventually lead to a more peaceful world. They believe that they should actively engage in international affairs to share the values they cherish throughout the world and shape other nations so that they also reflect these values.

This study employed a descriptive-analytical method to achieve its objectives.

The study findings indicate that there are opportunities and challenges related to the relations between IRI and KRI on cultural, economic, geopolitical, and security levels. The foreign policy attitudes of both parties can convert these opportunities into threats or these threats into opportunities. In any case, it seems that most of the threats have their roots in the relations between KRI and Israel and in the attempt by KRI to achieve independence. In both cases, proper management of IRI's active diplomacy can transform these threats into opportunities.

In addition to its common borders with Iran and its location inside Iraq, KRI is one of the areas that have historical and cultural ties to IRI. After the fall of the Baathist regime in Iraq, IRI recognized the high economic and trade potential KRI and started economic relations with it. These relations are still continuing. Geopolitics has been one of the main opportunities for IRI to establish relations with KRI. However, as mentioned above, it can also be considered a threat due to KRI's appeasement of IRI's opposition groups and its interactions with Israel. Israel is constantly creating security and political threats throughout the region to weaken IRI's power and expand its own power all the more with the idea of a Greater Israel and the slogan of "From the Nile to the Euphrates."  Therefore, KRI's interactions and relations with this regime are considered a threat to IRI. Another threat is the efforts made by KRI to gain independence from Iraq. Given KRI's possible objectives of establishing an independent Kurdish state, not only will Israel not cause KRI to form an independent state, but it may serve as the main obstacle to the realization of KRI's independence from Iraq. The reason for this is that if Israel supports KRI's independence from Iraq, it will heighten the sensitivity of Iraq's internal factions and will probably cause them to take action against the establishment of an independent Kurdistan state on the former Iraqi territory and also against the other countries in the region. Under no conditions can it be economically viable for KRI to ally itself with a regional power other than Iran. Therefore, clarification is required to identify the opportunities and threats. This will allow IRI, by taking into consideration the strategic infrastructure in northern Iraq, to prepare the ground for improving and upgrading its relations with KRI in order to achieve its national interests and improve its national security

The purpose of the present research is to study Turkey’s foreign policy in front of Iraq and its impact on national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In this regard, the theory of neorealism along with a descriptive-analytic method was used. The results showed that Turkey’s foreign policy in Iraq is based on increasing penetration, acquiring better position, and maintaining power balance with Iran which, on the one hand, has common interests for both countries, and on the other hand, involves contradictory interests. At for positive points and collaboration, this subject is rooted in the geography of 3 countries and is a function of regional environment, terrorism, and Kurds’ issue while with respect to competition, it is due to the expansion of the penetration of 2 countries in Iraq. Iran supports the policy of sustaining the status quo whereas Turkey seeks changing the current situation. Iran considers itself as an ally of Iraq while Turkey pursues hegemony and regional leadership. On the other hand, in the economic field, Turkey aims to acquire the highest share of trade and take control of energy transmission from Iraq to Europe. Therefore, it can be said that Turkey mostly uses means of soft power for its hard purposes while Iran uses components of hard power for its soft purposes.

After the victory of the Islamic Revolution, Israel was recognized as the occupying regime of the Palestinian land. Therefore, Iran followed the policy and strategy of supporting the Palestinian movements in the fight against Israel. Israel felt threatened and tried to balance through the alliance with America against Iran. This article uses Stephen Walt's threat balance theory to answer that question why does Israel feel threatened by Iran and ally with the US? The hypothesis is that Iran's support for Palestinian resistance movements, efforts to achieve nuclear capability, Holocaust denial, and recognition Israel as the occupation regime are the reasons that Israel is closer to the US. Based on the theory of balance of threat, this is the main reason for Israel's hostility to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It is crucial to examine how states pursue their national interests since this can be a tricky matter. Some states may take extreme measures to safeguard their interests not allowing any external interference. Meanwhile, others may use their national interests as a pretext for interventionist actions, which goes against their supposed objectives. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a thorough and unbiased research work to understand how changes in national interests affect the principle of non-intervention. This descriptive-analytical study aims to to address the question of how recent developments have affected national interests and the principle of non-intervention. Specifically, the focus is on identifying the types of challenges national interests have faced and how these challenges have influenced the strengths and weaknesses of the principle of non-intervention. Results reveal that in recent times, the focus of national interests has shifted towards the protection of fundamental human rights and the betterment of the global community. This has led to a decrease in government control based solely on national interests to justify the use of the principle of non-intervention.

According to Joseph Nye, as the creator of the theory and concept of soft power, measuring and evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of power is a necessary thing for its practitioners. This is despite the fact that soft power is a relatively fluid concept and therefore there are different frameworks to measure it. Despite the importance of soft power in international relations, how to measure it is difficult because its indicators are variable and due to the subjective nature of some indicators, it is difficult to measure them. Therefore, considering the problems that exist regarding how to measure the soft power of countries, this article seeks to answer the question, what are the most important methods and indicators for measuring soft power? To answer this question, qualitative methodology and content analysis of existing texts and sources regarding soft power have been used.
The results showed that in a general summary, soft power measurement indicators can be classified into three main groups including feelings/emotions, impressions/opinions and behaviors, and for each of these three groups and according to the available data, different methods can be used.

With the collapse of the bipolar system and the intensification of America's hostility against Iran, the orientation towards the East in foreign policy became Iran's strategic priority. In the meantime, facing threats from the West and wishing to form a multipolar world, Iran has abandoned its historical rivalry with Russia and has recently expressed positions beyond the "Looking East" approach in the Ukraine war.This article tries to answer these questions: Under the influence of what components has Iran's foreign policy been formed in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine? To what extent is it in line with Iran's national goals and long-term interests?In response, it can be said that Iran interprets Russia's invasion as the beginning of a transformation in the international system with the emergence of new blocs and alliances, which gives Tehran the opportunity to get out of isolation and become an actor in the world arena. For the Islamic Republic, the all-out support of Moscow in the Ukraine war is part of a single strategy for participation and use of the emerging international order. By measuring the opportunities and threats of the Ukraine crisis, this article recommends that Iran, by adopting a cautious approach in supporting Russia, avoids provoking Western governments and keeps the country away from being exposed to wider sanctions and pressures. The article examines Iran's foreign policy in the Ukraine war with a qualitative approach and within the framework of neoclassical realism theory.

The collapse of the Soviet Union caused geopolitical changes and the succession of four separate and independent states along the Caspian Sea.The article tries to explain Iran's security-economic and legal strategy in the Caspian Sea border area with a descriptive-analytical method. By concluding bilateral and multilateral agreements and dividing the benefits of the sea among themselves, the countries on the shores of the Caspian Sea have violated the rights of the Muslims of the Islamic Republic of Iran by ignoring international laws. The non-agreement of the coastal countries of the Caspian Sea in the field of legal regime has led to political and security competitions in the region in favor of the great powers that intervene in the Caspian region. From the perspective of realism in the Caspian region, Iran's share in this platform is very small, and on the other hand, the pressure of the West, especially the United States, does not allow Iran to pass through the pipelines. And Russia is a serious competitor for Iran. In addition, with the presence and intervention of trans-regional powers in the Caspian Sea, Iran has had less opportunity for economic and military activity in this area.

Success in the rapid advancement of development along with economic pragmatism has caused India to become one of the most dynamic countries in the world economy and secondly to be considered as an emerging center of wealth and power in the world. On the one hand, the economic development requirement of this country and extensive transformations in the international system have imposed a new direction on the foreign policy of this country in the Middle East and towards Israel and Iran. In this article, we focus on the reasons for changing India's Middle East policy from a policy that was defined in the light of the principle of non-alignment in the Cold War era to a policy that was redefined based on the new needs of India's national interests. Therefore, according to the above premises, the main question of the article is raised as follows: What changes have been made in India's foreign policy towards Israel and Iran, considering the options facing India? The hypothesis of the article, using the theory of balance of interests, is that the foreign policy of India in the Middle East has changed from an ideological and third-world policy based on the principles of non-commitment to a policy of multiple and multilateral commitments based on the necessity of access to oil and energy resources. And gas, markets, and military weapons.  This article is written based on the descriptive-analytical method and uses virtual sources, specialized publications, and in terms of the subject area of this article, it examines India's policy towards the countries of Iran and Israel until 2023

The recent Turkish elections have concluded with President Erdogan being re-elected on the 100th anniversary of the Turkish Republic's establishment. Given Turkey's strategic and geopolitical importance, there is a question as to what changes will be made in the country's foreign policy strategy. Turkey has always prioritized its national interests in its foreign policy and focused on two dimensions: politics and economics. In the new presidential term, Turkey has moved towards a strategy of "balanced and equitable omnidirectionalism" after implementing a zero-tension policy with its neighbors and intervening in some neighboring countries' internal affairs. Based on past experiences, Turkey aims to systematize its foreign policy strategy by emphasizing realism and avoiding tension. This research utilizes a descriptive-analytical method within the theoretical framework of Neorealism to answer the question: What is Turkey's foreign policy strategy following the 2023 elections? The findings suggest that Erdogan, after regaining power, is adopting a comprehensive approach to balancing foreign policy and executing his long-term goals of securing national interests and improving Turkey's regional and international position. In his new term, Erdogan will pursue populist policies, expand relations with neighboring countries, mend relationships with the European Union, the United States, and Israel, and maintain his neutral gesture in the war between Russia and Ukraine.

In a strategic shock, the Taliban in Afghanistan entered Kabul on August 15, following a crisis caused by the Western military withdrawal, the reluctance of the Afghan government and national security forces to fight, and the Taliban's will for power. The early withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan and the fall of Kabul to the Taliban will have important consequences for the region and international politics more broadly. The developments in Afghanistan with the influence of the Taliban on Afghanistan and the formation of a government by this group have become a matter of concern for the neighboring countries of this country. Iran, as one of Afghanistan's neighboring countries, adopted policies against the Taliban's control over Afghanistan and the formation of a government by this group. Afghanistan, as one of the eastern neighbors of Iran, which has a water and land border with Iran, is naturally a part of the Iranian plateau and has many similarities with Iran in terms of history and culture. The eastern borders of Iran are one of the most important two-way crossings of human, economic and cultural exchanges for the two countries. In terms of geopolitics, in the eastern borders of Iran, respectable Baloch people live, whose relatives are also present in the two countries of Afghanistan and Pakistan, who are always provoked by elements related to foreign intelligence and espionage services for various ethnic and religious reasons. Also, over the years, these borders have been one of the most important security challenges regarding human and drug trafficking. More than millions of Afghans have tasted the problems of these borders in the last four decades; The recent one-year developments in Afghanistan and the re-emergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan's chess scene have also caused many Afghans to flock to Iran's borders, which continues.
The Taliban regained power in Afghanistan with the withdrawal of American forces following the capture of Kabul, the capital of this country, and caused the Islamic Republic of Iran to face some contradictions in facing its eastern neighbors. Iran is not clear-cut, it looks at what is happening as a threat and doubts and does not consider the existence of conspiracy in all developments far from mind. This article collected data using qualitative method and in the framework of aggressive realism, and thematic analysis technique was used to extract the content. This article was formed with the aim of identifying the approach of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the Taliban's re-establishment of power and seeks to answer the question, what approach has the Islamic Republic of Iran adopted towards the Afghan Taliban? Also, the authors will examine this hypothesis by stating that the early withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan and the fall of Kabul to the Taliban has once again changed the turbulent conditions of the Middle East and its geopolitical equations and led to an impact on Iran's interests. and on the other hand, the Taliban, as an extremist Sunni group, is still considered a threat to Iran's national security from the ideological point of view. The results of the research show that based on Iran's position and sensitive role in the region, Iran's positions will be different with regard to the Taliban's approach.
According to the nature of the subject and in order to answer the question in this research, the descriptive-analytical method has been used. In the descriptive-analytical method, the researcher, in addition to revealing what is, describes and explains the whys and hows of the problem and its forms. The method and tool of collecting information and data is in the form of documents in which the researcher has collected the required information using reliable sources or interviews with experts and experts in this field.    
The findings of the article show that Iran's positions will be different according to the Taliban's approach. If the Taliban moves towards the distribution of power and includes other ethnic groups, especially the Shiites and Turkic-speaking people, in the structure of the government, considering that Iran ideologically has a lot in common with the Shiites and Hazaras of Afghanistan, and all these issues are in favor of Iran. is, the goal of the Taliban can be aligned with the interest of the Islamic Republic of Iran. But if the Taliban's approach is based on the monopoly of power, considering that the ideology of this group is different from Iran and they are closer to Saudi Arabia, it seems that the relations between Iran and the Taliban will not be friendly.
The Taliban is an ultra-conservative political and religious faction that emerged with the withdrawal of Soviet forces and the collapse of the communist regime in Afghanistan. This group, which was founded by Mullah Muhammad Omar in the southern part of Afghanistan, centered on the Pashtun people. The Taliban, with their religious and extremist ideology, took drastic measures. In August 2021, the Taliban was able to start a massive advance with the withdrawal of American forces, and it was a good opportunity for the Taliban in Afghanistan to dominate the whole of Afghanistan in a short time. On the one hand, the unfavorable political-security situation, economic crisis, social issues, extreme ideology as internal factors, and on the other hand, the decisions and actions of international powers, including the United States, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, as external factors in the formation of the phenomenon of Talibanism. Afghanistan has been effective and has enabled the Taliban to quickly advance inside Afghanistan and take control of the capital and force the previous government to flee and become the undisputed ruler of Afghanistan. Considering that the situation in Afghanistan has been messed up for many years. These disturbances can be a threat to the countries of the region, especially the Islamic Republic of Iran. With this consideration, the dimensions and security issues that have arisen against the Islamic Republic of Iran have caused Iran to deal with Afghanistan with a tactical approach with the aim of managing and repelling threats in its foreign policy.

The purpose of this research is to achieve a correct understanding of the defensive realism approach of the Islamic Republic of Iran in line with the national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Syria. What is 2010-2022 AD? To answer this question, this hypothesis is presented that: the national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Syria are to support, protect and strengthen the axis of resistance, and help the security and stability of Syria. Due to Syria being in the first line of resistance against the Zionist regime and the presence of Iran's line of support for Lebanon's Hezbollah in Syria, it enjoys Iran's support. The research method is descriptive-analytical method and it was done using library and documentary sources (method) research findings show. that J.A. Iran considers himself the leader of the resistance front against America and the Zionist Army. Is. The national interests of the Republic of Iran in Syria are defined in the framework of ideological, strategic, economic and geopolitical interests. The Republic of Iran is trying to gain more influence in the region and take advantage of the policy of alliance with Syria, first of all, its national security. and after that, secure his national interests. (Findings).