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

The purpose of the current research was to explain the structural and geopolitical reasons for the presence of Iran's advisers in the Syrian crisis. The Islamic Republic of Iran, based on the dangerous situation of Syria in connecting the scattered circles of the axis of resistance including Iran, Lebanon's Hezbollah, Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, as well as considering the strategic backyard of this country in the vicinity of the borders of the Israeli regime, as its strategic enemy, to the Syrian crisis. entered. This, that is, the entry of an adviser to the Syrian crisis, can not only be considered as part of Iran's identity structure in the region, which considers countries and groups as friends or enemies, but also structurally, the survival of the Assad government in Syria favors the balance of power in the region. Iran and its trans-regional allies Russia and to some extent China, to the detriment of the regional powers of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Israeli regime and their western trans-regional allies i.e. America and Europe. Thus, another component of Iran's foreign policy, i.e. anti-arrogance, continues in the structure of the balance of power in the Middle East. Therefore, although Syria has suffered and continues to suffer from many and serious problems in the political and social spheres, the unrest in this country, at least in Iran's view, is not of the Arab Spring popular uprising or Islamic awakening intended by Iran, but rather the complexity and escalation of the crisis in this country. The country is a function of regional strategic and geopolitical competitions and is also affected by international equations. And of course, the geopolitics of this country also had an effect on the occurrence of civil war in it.

Identifying, estimating and evaluating the elements of national power (constant/variable geopolitical elements) and analyzing and formulating power-oriented strategies and tactics in foreign policy (based on the geopolitical codes and combining with the needs/priorities of each period), requires the design of Comparable model for estimates have been reached and it seems that the first step in this direction is the quantification of qualitative concepts that constitute the effective factors in creating the national power of a country. In this article, in response to the question of "the most appropriate model of utilizing the capacities of the regional policies of the I.R of Iran based on national power" and the implementation of national power leveling, the collected power components were weighted according to the needs and priorities and The use of structured statistical tools and methods and hierarchical analysis methods of processing and spatial analysis of the distribution pattern of national power indicators and spatial statistics tests have been evaluated and analyzed. The analyses show that based on the national power of Iran, Turkey, Iraq, and Azerbaijan are the most important countries in the geopolitical field and they can strengthen the power of Iran in the region by playing a role in the South Caucasus. The countries of Syria and Armenia have been given high priority, which can promise a strong cluster pattern in the west/northwest of the country, which should be taken into account due to their unique characteristics and should be stabilized and strengthened in terms of current conditions.

One of the important factors of tension and conflict between political units is geography and geopolitics. Due to its geographical and geopolitical location in the South West Asia region, Iran has always been the focus and greed of superpower countries, and the occurrence of the eight-year war also indicates this situation. Considering this position and position, political and international conflicts and the occurrence of military war will undoubtedly be imagined again. This research is aimed at identifying, explaining and prioritizing the most important geopolitical challenges of Iran during the holy defense era, in order to find the answer to the question; What are Iran's geopolitical challenges in the era of holy defense? have been. The type of research based on its nature is descriptive-analytical and it was done quantitatively and qualitatively (mixed). The ranking of the options was done with the multi-indicator decision-making method, and the hierarchical analysis method was used to weight the indicators. By examining the available records and documents, numerous geopolitical challenges of the country have been identified at three national, regional and international levels, and by interviewing experts, the effective challenges have been determined, and then a researcher-made questionnaire The purpose of prioritization and explanation of the most effective challenge factors was designed using the hierarchical analysis method of AHP and completed by asking the opinions of experts and technical experts. According to the findings, it was determined that Iran's geopolitical challenges in the war imposed on three national levels such as: (territorial and territorial factors, geoeconomics, geo culture, political, geostrategy and military), regional and international levels. International factors such as: (territorial, geo-economic, geo-cultural, political, geo-strategic and military factors) can be divided and investigated.

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.

Gopolitics, like any other science, has general rules and specific patterns and this issue has provided the feasibility of the school of geopolitics in the field of global thought. In Russian scientific circles, due to the country's role in the balance of international power in the last three centuries, thinking about Russian geopolitics has become a vital necessitybut the important issue in this field has been the dispersion of opinions and the instability of propositions over time and finding a common point of view for the formulation of the special Russian school in this field.

Research questions: 

The main question raised in this research is how to talk about the Russian geopolitical school and understand its central concepts?Research hypothesis: The author's hypothesis is that despite the dispersion of ideas, their common link and point of commonality can be expressed in the concepts such as maritime inaccessibility, territorial vulnerabilities, the problem of strategic depth, the buffer zone and expansionism as the Russian geopolitical school. Among these, two categories of geographical vulnerability and territorial expansion of the central sign are taken into consideration.

Methodology and theoretical framework: 

To examine the hypothesis of the article, I have used the method of qualitative and thematic content analysis of texts related to Russian geopolitical thought. In this regard, various texts have been written in the last three centuries. Although more distant texts are difficult to access, many new texts refer to the main themes of those writings. To review these texts, the author tried to select the most important ones and then by reviewing them, select the most important thinkers in the field of Russian geopolitical studies. The main basis for selecting indicators such as the age of scientist, the importance of thought, thematic coherence and the reputation of the school of thought was created. In the meantime, of course, some approaches such as Eurasian, Atlantic and Eastern approaches have been less difficultbut this issue regarding other approaches has not been an easy task due to existing differences of opinion.

The main factor that has caused the Russian school of geopolitics to remain limited is that geopolitical ideas in this country, unlike other great powers, are very diverse and controversial and this makes it very difficult to understand. The causes of this diversity can be found in important cases such as territorial expansion and the complexity of factors affecting geopolitics, the diversity and expansion of threats and their types, the issue of empire and the crisis of national identity, the instability of borders and the constant intellectual and identity conflict against the West. From the point of view of Russian geopolitical thinkers, this country is very vast and has many neighbors and has a common land border with fourteen countries and faces various threats in the western, southern and eastern directions. Russia has a territorial connection with the two continents of Europe and Asia and has a close maritime neighborhood with the American continent. Russia has a serious relationship with three global geostrategic regions including Euro-Atlantic, Middle East and East Asia, and therefore, from their point of view, this issue is considered very vital. From the point of view of many thinkers of Russian geopolitical knowledge, to overcome the problems and threats caused by the lack of maritime access and defense vulnerability, this country should put strategies such as strategic depth, buffer zone and territorial expansion on the agenda and this is a fact that has shaped its practical policy in post-Mongol Russia from the 15th century to the present day. The collection of these geopolitical propositions in recent centuries have led to two basic issues in Russia: on the one hand, the need for a powerful government and on the other hand, the creation of an imperial state. However, as a result of the powerful and autocratic government, it has faced the development crisisand the inevitable state of the empire, it has also suffered an identity crisis and both have caused instability in the directions of domestic and foreign policy.

Based on the findings of this article and despite some conflicts, we can talk about the Russian geopolitical school whose main concepts and components are common among different thinkers in this country from the 18th century to the present day. It seems that the reason for the lack of recognition is a kind of denial, neglect, cultural and ideological denial of Russia in the past two centuries by Western academic circles and the lack of translation of Russian texts in Iran, except for some articles on Eurasian approach. Therefore, despite the dispersion of views in the field of Russian geographical studies, concepts such as maritime inaccessibility, territorial inaccessibility, defense vulnerability, lack of strategic depth, the necessity of a buffer zone, and expansionist politics are the common variables of these views and geographical vulnerability, especially in the western regions, and territorial expansion in the surrounding environment are the focal points of this geopolitical school.The findings of the article showed that the realities of Russian geography and the concerns of the thinkers of geographical studies have provided important possibilities for the presentation of the Russian geopolitical school along with its other western counterparts and without it, a deep understanding of the country's foreign policy becomes difficult. With its help, important progress can be made for the countries around Russia and especially Iran, which has been one of its victims in a wide area from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean.

Middle Asia or Central Asia is a vast land with a long history in the heart of the Asian continent. Due to the vast resources available in Central Asia, this region has become a place for global and regional powers to compete. Türkiye is no exception to this rule. This country has made many efforts to expand its presence in the region in the last three decades. In recent years, especially after 2016, this presence was not without a plan and out of excitement, but in a clear frame of mind and with necessary credits, Türkiye has tried to create a stable and effective presence in the region. The presence of regional powers in Central Asia is not limited to Türkiye. Due to many common cultural features with the countries of the region and its special geographical location, Iran has always made a continuous effort to be present in Central Asia. Considering the complex relations and historical rivalry of the two countries, the efforts of each cannot be without influencing the other.

Research question:

 The main question that we intend to answer in this research is what are the consequences of Türkiye’s presence in Central Asia on Iran and what is the mechanism of these consequences?Research hypothesis: Based on this new reading of geopolitics, it is possible to hypothesize that the presence of Türkiye in Central Asia will lead to the removal of Iran from the transit and energy corridors of the region, as well as the threat to the territorial integrity of Iran due to the expansion of Pan-Turkism.

Methodology and theoretical framework: 

The analysis of this article is based on the trend impact analysis method. The process is called regular and continuous transformations of data over time. In this method, the process is affected by a sequence of events, and by events we mean significant events that may play an important role in shaping the future. The theoretical framework of this article is based on the three-level reading of the international system along with geopolitical factors. This new reading of geopolitics is taken from the opinion of Mohiuddin Mesbahi in the article "free and restricted: Iran and the international system". Our question can also be put in this new format and reading.

In this research, we have looked for the consequences of Türkiye's presence in Central Asia on Iran. After raising our question, we reviewed previous research to find an answer. Despite addressing the presence of these countries in the region in some articles, no specific research has been done regarding the consequences of Türkiye's presence in Central Asia on Iran. Therefore, we turned to theories to find our answer, and for this purpose. Then we tried to find the answer to our question by using the "trend research" method. For this purpose, we examined Türkiye's presence in the region in the last three decades.Türkiye's emotional presence in the nineties failed and the efforts of Erdogan's government centered on the opinions of Ahmet Davutoglu's were not very successful, but after the 2016 coup and internal and external changes, a new era emerged in the relations between Turkey and the region.  In the following, we examined Iran's presence in the region and finally addressed our main issue, which is the consequences of Türkiye's presence in the region on Iran. Türkiye's presence in Central Asia at all three domestic, regional and international levels has consequences for Iran in the region in cultural, economic and political-military fields. In the economic field, Türkiye will strengthen its infrastructure by joining “the Belt and Road Initiative” and by bypassing Iran, in addition to using the advantages of the right of transit and by attracting Chinese capital, the country will strengthen its infrastructure, and the capital will flow to Turkish projects instead of Iran. In addition, in the geopolitical or political-military field, bypassing Iran in two directions, east-west and north-south, both in the field of transit and in the field of energy, weakens Iran's strategic position and erodes its geopolitics. On the other hand, with the expansion of annexationist and pan-Turkish ideas in the direction of greater convergence with the region, in addition to threatening Iran's territorial integrity with Turkification of the space, it leaves no room for Iran's presence in the region.

Türkiye's presence in Central Asia at domestic, regional and international levels has consequences for Iran in the region in all three cultural, economic and political-military fields. In the economic field, Türkiye will strengthen its infrastructure by joining the Belt and Road Initiative and by bypassing Iran, in addition to using the advantages of the right of transit and by attracting Chinese capital, the country will strengthen its infrastructure, and the capital will flow to Turkish projects instead of Iran. In addition, in the geopolitical or political-military field, bypassing Iran in two directions, east-west and north-south, both in the field of transit and in the field of energy, weakens Iran's strategic position and erodes its geopolitics. On the other hand, with the expansion of annexationist and pan-Turkish ideas in the direction of greater convergence with the region, in addition to threatening Iran's territorial integrity with Turkification of the space, it leaves no room for Iran's presence in the region.

The political behavior of a country in the cross-border and global arena is derived from geopolitics and knowing the geopolitical nature of a country will help to understand and analyze the type of geopolitical behavior and actions of that country towards other countries. The countries in their foreign relations are trying to adopt appropriate strategies in line with their national interests by taking advantage of geopolitical factors. The purpose of the research is to explain the relations between the Iran and the Persian Gulf countries from a geopolitical perspective.

In terms of practical and a descriptive qualitative approach, which was carried out with the help of tools such as interviews documents. The statistical population of experts and all expert professors in this field and purposeful sampling using theoretical saturation and content analysis method was used to find the research results.

that despite the fact that the relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the countries of the Persian Gulf have been based on tension and misunderstanding at some points in time; But factors such as Islam, common geopolitics, oil, and tribal ethnic structures have caused closeness and some similarities.

In its behavior, the Islamic Republic of Iran has shown that in its relations with these countries, it has always sought convergence and promotion of relations and prevention of tension in the region, and these countries can take into account geopolitical interests and benefits. Appropriate opportunities and tension reduction, to provide more grounds for strengthening relations.

The present study aims to examine the impact of the Islamic Republic of Iran's strategy of exporting the revolution on the geopolitics of the Middle East and the onset of the Iran-Iraq War. The research method is descriptive-analytical, and the results indicate that considering the internal fragility of Arab countries and the nature of the authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, which suffer from crises of identity and legitimacy, as well as the positions of Imam Khomeini, whose intent behind exporting the revolution was never to interfere in Iraq's internal affairs or to send terrorist equipment to this country, and the statements of the Ba'athist regime of Iraq, it can be concluded that the theory suggesting the Islamic Republic of Iran's strategy of exporting the revolution was the cause of the Iraq-Iran War is generally invalid and lacks scientific and definitive evidence. The primary reason for the fears and concerns of the Ba'athist regime in Iraq was the crisis-ridden nature of its system.

In different historical periods, one of the important geopolitical regions for Iran's security has been the South Caucasus region. China is trying to revive the historical Silk Road with a new one-belt-one-way plan, which used to start from China and lead to Europe through Iran and the Caucasus. Iran has a fundamental position in the plan of this corridor; the kind that reaches the Black Sea from Chabahar through the North-South corridor and passes through Armenia, Georgia, and Russia. After the ceasefire in the second Karabakh War, an agreement was reached between Azerbaijan and Armenia, one of the provisions of which is the plan to reopen the old roads. Still, Azerbaijan has an idea beyond the old one-way under the supervision of Armenia and wants to create a west-east corridor in the Zangezor region, directly under the supervision of Baku. This action violates the territorial integrity of Armenia, and also, causes the destruction of Iran's border with Armenia. On the way to creating the western-eastern corridor of Zangezzor, not only the Republic of  Azerbaijan but also many countries support the creation of this corridor. Now, the main question of this research is, what effect does Azerbaijan's plans to create a new corridor have on Iran's security? These countries are pursuing goals such as the creation of NATO's Turani Corridor, a permanent source of energy, and ultimately this extravagance will lead to the blockade of Iran in the northwest and the loss of one of the old crossings and highways.

In order for Iran to have a greater impact on the concepts, views, regional systems, processes, decisions, collective actions of other countries and the way regional and global power is formed, it must have a superior geopolitical weight among other countries in the region. . The main goal of this research is to "examine the existing capacities in order to promote the geopolitical power of the Republic of Iran in the West Asian region (strengths and opportunities)". In this research, the research method is descriptive-analytical with a mixed approach and the type of research is applied-developmental. The statistical population is 50 people and the sample size corresponds to the statistical population and all the numbers have been determined. In addition to sampling library studies and conducting expert interviews, non-parametric descriptive and inferential statistical methods have also been used. From the results of the research, it appears that the existing capacities in the form of 7 major geopolitical components (political-military-science and technology-environmental-social and cultural-geographical-economic) were counted with 40 indicators; 7 of the indicators were removed due to less importance, 22 indicators for strength and 12 indicators for opportunity were obtained in order to promote the geopolitical power of Iran in the West Asian region.

The purpose of this article is to examine the components of the strategic partnership between Iran and Russia in Syria. Strategic partnership is considered as an important aspect of diplomatic engagement to strengthen close ties with strategic allies. Strategic partnerships are formed based on bilateral relations in the international system and allow actors to rebuild common identities and norms in achieving foreign policy goals through strategic cooperation. The strategic cooperation between Iran and Russia after the developments in Syria represents an important development in the foreign relations of the two countries. The two countries, realizing the threat of a common enemy such as America and Western sanctions, are seeking to form strategic cooperation and bring their positions closer to each other. This research, using a descriptive and analytical approach, tries to analyze the opportunities and limitations of the strategic cooperation between Iran and Russia after the developments in Syria. The results showed that these cooperations were in important aspects such as dealing with extremist terrorist groups and reducing the influence of Western institutions in this region and maintaining the territorial integrity of Syria, which can have a great impact on regional and international issues and crises

The international system in transition and the uncertainty in it, has caused the dynamism of most regions in the world. The South Caucasus region is not exempt from this situation. The 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war and its subsequent develpements, especially the 2023 Karabakh war, marked a path of no return for the South Caucasus region, so these developments had a significant impact on the actors of the South Caucasus.

Research question: 

What effect did the second and third Karabakh war in the South Caucasus region between Armenia and Azerbaijan have on the regional interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran?

Research Hypothesis: 

It is hypothesized that Nagorno-Karabakh war in 2020 and 2023 respectively, has increased the dynamics of competition, threat and escalation of tension against Iran, while there are not many opportunities for it.

In this article, a comparative research approach has been used, which is realistic using a study model and the geopolitical approach in the framework of regional studies. Using geopolitical components such as politics, power, geography, economy (geoeconomics), culture (geoculture), geopolitical relations and balance of power. Data analysis is done in a descriptive-analytical way. The method of collecting information in this research is done by the library method.

Since the early 2000s, Russia’s policy towards the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis has changed. Therefore, Russia's attitude toward the South Caucasus has changed from a sphere of exclusive Russian influence to a space in which it must both cooperate and compete with other regional powers. Moscow prefers to cooperate with Iran and mostly Turkey to respond to the growing challenges. In this situation and due to the fact that Azerbaijan is close to Russia and Armenia is far from Russia, the second Karabakh war started. But the third Karabakh war took place in a situation where Russia's power vacuum was evident in the South Caucasus after Moscow's involvement in the Ukraine war. The Karabakh war of 2020 and 2023 in the national dimension between Azerbaijan and Armenia caused the position of the victorious and defeated actors of the first Karabakh war to be reversed. In the regional dimension, new geopolitical relations and balance of power emerged in the South Caucasus.

The findings of the research proved the hypothesis raised in the article. The 2020 and 2023 Karabakh war once again showed the geopolitical dynamics of the South Caucasus. These wars have significantly changed the geopolitical relations of regional players and led to the formation of a new balance of power in the region. Azerbaijan has strengthened and Armenia has become very weak. However, with the cease-fire of the Second Karabakh War, Russia was able to marginalize the western axis, which further weakened the role of the West, the United States, the European Union and especially the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (Minsk Group). But by entering the war with Ukraine and creating a power vacuum in the South Caucasus region, Russia saw its power in this region challenged by Turkey. In this way, the second and third Karabakh war marked Turkey's return to the region and pushed Iran to the sidelines of regional developments.Therefore, the 2020 and 2023 Karabakh war destroyed the fragile state of neither war nor peace that Iran was in favor of maintaining in the South Caucasus. In these wars, Iran could not play a role in regional developments to expand its influence and presence; Therefore, it led to the escalation of tension with the Republic of Azerbaijan, the intensification of competition with Turkey, and the seriousness of the threat of Israel's presence along Iran's borders. In the new balance of power that has been formed in the South Caucasus region, the Islamic Republic of Iran has a low role and position in the South Caucasus. It seems that Iran has been marginalized by Russia on the one hand, on the other hand, due to the role of western sanctions in preventing Iran’s action in the region; Iran has not been able to play a serious role and pursue its historical-civilizational interests in the South Caucasus. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran has tried to maintain its territorial integrity, prevent geopolitical changes in the region and its geo-economic interests in the South Caucasus. It has also tried not to get involved in ethnic movements and internal instability based on geocultural provocations.

Russia's attack has military consequences not only for Europe and the world but also for the exit door. The political-security relations between Iran and Russia have also been affected by this war. Iran is important against war in two ways. First, Iran's direction in this war affects the relations between the two countries. Second, this issue affects Iran's position in the international system. The main question of this article is "How has Iran's behavior been regarding the war and what effect has it had on its relations with Russia?" The authors assume that "Iran has been cautious about the dangerous war, that is, on the one hand, it has not condemned Russia's involvement in the government, but it has also not supported it." This policy is followed to maintain the relations between the two countries. The people who in this article, the theoretical commentator of neoclassical realism, examine the Islamic Republic of Iran against the war and its impact on Iran's relations with Russia. This research shows that Tehran has found war as a factor in improving and developing relations with Moscow. However, the nature of these relationships does not change fundamentally. From Iran's point of view, the drivers and pillars of relations with Russia are stable. Russia's relations are one of Iran's most important geopolitical partners and it has followed one of its strategies. The method of this research is qualitative with descriptive-analytical.

Peace has always been one of the most important concerns of mankind and was considered a high value throughout history. Any ruler who established peace in a certain territory was known as a powerful ruler. With the formation of the concept of geopolitics in international literature, war was recognized as a tool for gaining the power, and the rulers believed that they could establish peace after the war. From the classical point of view, the concept of geopolitics is associated with competition, conflict, and war, and peace is considered an abnormal phenomenon. But from the point of view of modern geopolitics, peace is considered a phenomenon that does not create a conflict of interests to create the power and security of countries. Geopolitics of peace is a new concept that does not have a comprehensive definition, and this research aims to find a proper definition of this term by examining the ontology and epistemology of the geopolitics of peace.The main research question is that: “What is the geopolitics of peace”. It has been assuming that the geopolitics of peace is a type of positive peace that has geopolitical characteristics that are implemented at different levels of a country and include transnational and international dimensions. This research has been carried out in terms of the integrated nature of the descriptive-analytical method using library data and observing the humanistic geopolitical approach. The research method is of a qualitative type with a descriptive-analytical approach in terms of the fundamental goal. Also, the data analysis strategy is inductive. The method of data collection is library-documentary and reading books, scientific articles and also internet resources.In accordance with the findings of the research, it can be claimed that the Geopolitics of peace means international policies adopted by governments, agencies, actors, organizations and international institutions that are used at local, national, regional and global levels. In accordance with the geopolitical conceptualization of peace study that was carried out in this research, peace refers to the following meanings and phenomena; Existence and preservation of territorial integrity and absence of threats. War and attack from other countries, absence of any kind of structural, organized, governmental, individual and social violence. Preservation of people's lives and the existence of justice and equality among all types of people without discrimination. Survival and continuation of the social system at sub-national, national and transnational levels. Maintaining and improving the vital resources of the country, these resources can include natural or human resources. Absence of foreign threats to the goals, national and vital interests of the country. Absence of any feeling of personal and social threat from any side towards the citizens. Maintaining citizenship rights and dignity of people regardless of occupational, economic, racial differences and the like. Providing the basic needs of the nation. Absence of any kind of racism, the humiliation of ethnicities, and races, and conflict over such issues at the sub-national and national level. Absence of organized corruption at sub-national and national level. Maintaining the human dignity of citizens at the local, international and national levels. Respecting the basic rights of citizens, social, political, economic, and religious freedom of every citizen as long as it does not harm the freedom of others and is within the framework of human ethics and customs and without insulting another person or society. The existence of democracy and the right of free elections of citizens for the fate of their political future. Feeling the need and dependence of the government and the government on the people in all political, economic, social, cultural and similar matters. The existence of free media.

The Middle East is one of the sensitive and strategic regions of the world. Huge reserves of energy, seas and communication routes, as well as its large size and large population, have turned this region into a focal region in political and geopolitical equations. Ethnic and religious differences, historical tensions left over from the colonial era, environmental problems and the desire of regional and extra-regional powers to exploit the capacity of the identity forces in order to strengthen their position in geopolitical conflicts, lead to the intensification of this crises. In response to the question: "What is the most important security crisis in the Middle East and where will these crises go until the horizon of 2035?"; the article presents the following hypothesis: "The intersection and entanglement of crises currently in the Middle East, the rise of sub-national and transnational identity forces, economic issues, the structural weakness of the nation-state and finally the geopolitical competition of regional and extra-regional powers, as well as environmental problems, are the main geopolitical crisis of the Middle East, which some of they will be intensified in the next 15 years." The method of this research is quantitative-qualitative.

The Horn of Africa is one of the important regions in the international arena. In recent years, geopolitical, geoeconomics, geostrategic, etc. values of the Horn of Africa have attracted the attention of regional and trans-regional actors, and are active in this region. One of the regional actors in the Horn of Africa is Israel, which is active in the political, military, security, intelligence, economic and commercial dimensions in this region. There are various reasons for Israel's presence in the Horn of Africa, which can be analyzed in the framework of geopolitical thought. The main research question is, what are the most important reasons for Israel's presence and activity in the Horn of Africa? what is the geopolitical analysis of these causes? (question) The current research is not hypothesis oriented due to its exploratory nature. This research with the descriptive-analytical method and inferential approach and content analysis (method), and the use of library resources, seeks to identify and geopolitically analyze the reasons for Israel's presence in the coastal and maritime areas of the Horn of Africa. The results show that the most important reasons for Israel's presence in the Horn of Africa are: dominating the strategic position of the Horn of Africa, preventing the Arab countries from dominating the region, influencing Egypt, countering Iran's influence in the Horn of Africa, and cooperating with the United States in implementing its plans and policies in this region (findings). Each of the causes is geopolitical in nature.

The Mediterranean Sea has a very important geopolitical position, which has made it enjoy a special place in the structure of the international system. The Mediterranean Sea is called the Mediterranean because it is located between Europe, Africa and Asia and has a very special and unique position. The Mediterranean is connected to the Atlantic Ocean from the west through Gibraltar, between two European and African countries, Spain and Morocco. On the northeast side, it is connected to Marmara and the Black Sea through Turkey and the Dardanelles, and at the bottom, that is, in the southeast, it passes through Egypt and connects to the Red Sea with the 192-kilometer Suez Canal, which is an important part of Egypt's foreign exchange income. Be related to the Mediterranean.Overall, the Mediterranean Sea is a densely populated region with a complex political history that includes many different ethnic groups. This has led to the creation of a complex and fragmented political map. Today, 21 countries with an area of 2 to 2.4 million square kilometers have coastlines in the Mediterranean Sea, including Albania, Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Lebanon, Libya, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Slovenia, Spain, Syria, Tunisia and Turkey. This sea has large energy reserves, which has caused regional and extra-regional powers to seek to increase their sphere of influence in the Mediterranean (El Rhazi, et.al, 2020: 1). This importance has doubled in the last few years.Since the early 2000s, a new big game has been formed among regional and extra-regional actors over access to fossil energy fields in the Mediterranean. Along with this capacity, discussions about exploration, production processes and resource transfer options have continued. Although the current situation in the region started 20 years ago, the historical process of offshore drilling in the Eastern Mediterranean dates back to the 1960s. During this time, Egypt and Israel have carried out various drilling operations. Also, each of the Mediterranean coastal governments have declared an exclusive and economic zone, 200 miles long, for the exploitation of energy resources in the seabed. Israel, Egypt, South Cyprus, Lebanon, Syria and Palestine are countries that have potential energy resources and natural gas discoveries are being made in the eastern Mediterranean. The most well-known discoveries in the eastern Mediterranean are the Tamar and Leviathan regions, which were discovered in 2009 and 2010; In total, there are 900 billion cubic meters of gas in these two regions. It is worth noting that 35 trillion cubic meters of natural gas have been discovered in the waters of Israel and Cyprus, and there is a possibility of finding another 85 trillion cubic meters of natural gas reservoirs on the coasts of Syria, Lebanon and Palestine (Demir, Tekir, 2017: 4). These two fields were the biggest deep gas discoveries in the world at that time. Later, the discovery of the Aphrodite field in 2011 and the Zohr gas field in 2015 changed the position of the Mediterranean Sea from regional to global. The proven reserves of hydrocarbons and new discoveries in the Eastern Mediterranean may not be comparable to the reserves of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar, Russia and the UAE, which will turn the entire region or any of the countries that own it into a global energy player, but it can play an important role in the global market. especially in Europe; It can also be an important energy transfer pathway. According to the latest estimates, the oil and gas capacity of the Mediterranean region is approximately 5 billion barrels and more than 13.5 trillion cubic meters, respectively (Kavaz, 2021: 4). The discovery of a significant amount of extensive energy resources in the Eastern Mediterranean has turned this region into a multidimensional competitive environment. Europe plans to turn the Mediterranean into one of its main energy supply points, and so far it has taken great steps in this direction.In this research, considering the vastness of the Mediterranean Sea and the variety of commercial activities in it, we want to study the importance of the Mediterranean Sea for regional and extra-regional powers by emphasizing the energy field, and we are looking for an answer to the question that the importance of the Mediterranean Sea for regional powers and What is a metaregion from the perspective of energy? And what is the importance of the Mediterranean Sea in the evolution of the world energy market? And what role does the Mediterranean Sea play in transferring energy to other parts of the world? In this article, we are looking for answers to these questions by using documentary sources and analytical descriptive method. This research is important from the point of view that solving many current disputes or reaching future agreements in the Mediterranean is possible by understanding the importance of energy in the region, and it is possible to draw various regional models in this field, which can ultimately lead to regional cooperation and increasing peace and lead to stability. The necessity of the present research is that almost among scientific researches, the gap of comprehensive study of this issue is felt, which has caused many developments in the Mediterranean to remain unknown to the audience.The Mediterranean is always very important as a strategic area for regional countries and great powers. The Mediterranean is one of the main energy supply areas of Europe, which can reduce Europe's dependence on Russian gas. As a result, both Mediterranean basin countries are looking for European markets and West Asian countries are looking to transfer their gas to Europe through the Mediterranean. According to what has been said, in the past few years, the Mediterranean has become more important and many regional and extra-regional powers are seeking to increase their presence and influence in this area. Reducing dependence on Russian energy, guaranteeing investment contracts for American oil companies and ensuring European energy security are among the most important reasons for the importance of the Mediterranean Sea for extra-regional powers in the energy debate.  Also, for regional powers, becoming an energy hub, participating in energy corridors, concluding multilateral contracts in the field of energy and transferring liquefied natural gas are among the most important reasons for the importance of energy discoveries in the Mediterranean for the countries of the region. With the calming of the internal conditions and the establishment of political stability in Syria and Lebanon, these two countries can also play the role of transit and bring oil and gas from the Middle East to Europe. In the meantime, the Islamic Republic of Iran can play a prominent role in supplying energy to Europe, especially in the current war between Russia and Ukraine.

In order to understand the feasibility and economic viability of Iranian gas export projects, the neighboring exporters and their policies and strategies need to be taken into account. These are Russia, Iran, Qatar, Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States. While Iran understands its own tremendous resource potential and sees itself as a major emerging natural gas power, While Iran understands its own tremendous resource potential and sees itself as a major emerging natural gas power its market integration could be hampered by vested interests from incumbent market suppliers and their main political,While Iran understands its own tremendous resource potential and sees itself as a major emerging natural gas power economic and geopolitical stakeholders. Assuming that Iran overcomes its various internal problems and could realize its vast natural gas potential without limitations and constraints, it still faces competition from other suppliers. Iran’s main competitors in the regional gas market would be Russia, Qatar, Turkmenistan and the US.

The main purpose of the article is to examine the reasons of change and continuity in Russia-U.S. Relations during Putin's fourth term, 2018-2024. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, these relations have been characterized by various fluctuations, including enthusiasm about promoting mutual understanding and collaboration during the dominance of the Euro-Atlantic discourse in the early 1990s, and the heightened tension during the realist discourse led by Putin. The U.S.-Russia relations have been deteriorating as a consequence of the uncertainties and insecurity which have increased due to the international order transition. The 2022 Russo-Ukrainian War, as the greatest challenge in the relations between the United States and Russia in the post-Soviet period, is a clear manifestation of the gloomy situation. Russia considers this conflict to be a proxy war which is only part of the broader U.S. grand strategy to limit Russia’s geopolitical influence by lessening its strategic depth. The West’s support for Ukraine is viewed as a continuation of Washington’s previous attempts—including inciting the color revolutions in the post-Soviet space, gradually infiltrating the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), interfering in Russia's internal affairs, supporting the war in Yugoslavia, NATO's Eastward Expansion, and the establishment of an anti-missile shield — aimed at containing Russia without resorting to direct confrontation. On the other hand, American policymakers who seek to maintain U.S. supremacy in the international system, view Putin's Russia as a challenging and destructive actor that has improved its international position and has been trying to change the regional and global balance of power to the detrimentof Washington by acting as a revisionist force, individually or collectively in collaboration with other members of the international revisionist front.  In  this  context,  the U.S. has adopted the strategy of ‘broad offensive deterrence’ (BOD) against Russia. Out of an abundance of caution, Moscow is pursuing the strategy of ‘active offensive defense’ (AOD) in the hope of reviving and strengthening its great power position. The adoption of these two competing strategies has intensified tension in the bilateral Russia-U.S. relations, and have had repercussions for other states.
The author tries to answer the following research questions: 1. What are the causes of the persistence of  conflict and tension in the U.S.-Russia relations? 2. How has the confrontation between the two strategies of ‘broad offensive deterrence’ (BOD) of the United States and ‘active offensive defense’ (AOD) of Russia led to the escalation of tension in their bilateral relations? Using the theoretical framework of neoclassical realism, the analysis is focused on three inexorable variables (i.e., geopolitical power competition, security, and political culture) in order to find conclusive answers to the two questions. In the research hypothesis, it is argued that the persistence of tension in the U.S.-Russian relations is caused by three tension-generating variables of geopolitical power competition, security, and political culture. The method of qualitative textual analysis of the official documents and previous works on the subject revealed the impact of these variables on the nature of the relations between the two rival powers. The findings show that transformative variables (e.g., the circulation of the elites) had a positive effect on the bilateral relations between the United States and Russia in the short term, but the three above-mentioned factors have caused tension to prevail.
However, Russia and the U.S. will probably continue their cooperation in three issue-areas:  1. Maintaining security and strategic stability in the international system as manifested in their support for the nuclear non-proliferation regime; 2. Confronting certain destabilizing regional challenges, particularly in the Middle East and the CIS; and 3. Dealing with asymmetric security threats such as international terrorism and cyber security. Nevertheless, the failure of the conciliatory approach and the perceived NATO-U.S. belligerent approach to Russia (including the "Reset" project), as well as the continual U.S. aggressive actions against Russian national interest have deepened their mutual mistrust. This perception of the U.S. intentions has been strengthened in Putin's third and fourth terms; and the Kremlin continue to believe inactions, restraint, and disengagement in response to the U.S. actions will not lead to a mutually-advantageous balanced relations. Russian leaders are concerned that a flexible and appeasing attitude towards the U.S. might result in  increasing use of coercive and aggressive foreign policy instruments by Washington. This perception has forced Russia to adopt a posture of resistance and the strategy of ‘extensive aggressive defense’ against the U.S. It is expected to see the continuation of the tense bilateral relations and the situation of mutual mistrust between the two great powers in the medium term.