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

Regarding the encounter between American political and strategic institutions and Iran over the nuclear issues and capabilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, a wide range of actors and influential political forces are involved, all aiming to reduce Iran’s nuclear capabilities. These include the US Congress, advocacy groups, Israel-affiliated lobbyists, and research centers, each working to diminish Iran’s nuclear position and capabilities. American security and strategic institutions seek to present Iran’s nuclear power as a threat to the United States, using this perception to justify increasing pressures. This study examines the social politics and institutional patterns of the United States in restricting Iran’s nuclear power. To explain the issue, we utilize James Rosenau’s pre-theoretical approach known as structural and social affiliation theory. Using a descriptive-analytical method, this research argues that American political and strategic institutions act as security overseers for the US, employing complementary mechanisms to identify and restrict Iran’s nuclear capabilities. We conclude that US strategic institutions are influenced by Zionist lobbyists, which aim to affect Iran’s political structure and public institutions, thereby minimizing Iran’s influence in its surrounding regions.

The concept of nuclear Iran is repeatedly used by theorists and strategic planners of great powers to contain and limit and control Iran's nuclear capability. The main axis of Iran's action in the nuclear process has been aimed at optimizing strategic and tactical capabilities. Some theorists of international politics point to the fact that in 1991 onwards, Iran has improved its nuclear capabilities endlessly.The model of Iran's strategic action in the field of nuclear capability indicates that power building to deal with threats has been a part of Iran's strategic goals in the regional environment. The actors of international politics always tried to place Iran in a space of geopolitical limitation. The reality of regional Iran is dangerous for many actors of the surrounding environment and great powers, and for this reason, the ground has been created to limit Iran's power in the regional environment.The main question of the article is, "In what sense has nuclear Iran been used by the media, strategic study centers, and diplomats of international politics, and what ideas have been placed on the agenda of great powers and international institutions to confront Iran?" The hypothesis of the article refers to the fact that "the concept of nuclear Iran is considered a part of the strategic literature for limiting the power and technical and tactical capabilities of the Islamic Republic, and this has created the basis for limiting Iran's power." Stephen Walt's threat balance approach is used in the organization of the article.

This article seeks to explain the most important factors of Britain's dual approach to the issue of Iran's nuclear program before and after the Islamic Revolution, using Springs' theory of crisis. It seems that Britain, due to the problems of political, economic and geographical structure, has long sought to maintain its life and superior position in the world, to dominate and seize the resources of rich countries in order to repair its domestic crisis and formulate a long-term colonial strategy. In the target countries, prevent the formation of popular and legitimate governments, their independence and the development of their indigenous economy. The findings of this article show that the disintegration and creation of island states, the exploitation of religion, the creation and abuse of socio-political divisions, and the creation of a crisis-ridden and weak society were among the major tools for dominating, maintaining, and developing British colonial goals. It has been analyzed using Springs theory of crisis and historical sociological method

In this paper Allon Ben Mier want to answer this question that what options Israel have in order to control the nuclear Iran. His analysis of internal Israeli attitudes toward Iran’s nuclear developments and also with explanation of global policies in the case of Iran, reaches to this conclusion that firstly, Israel has always sought to move along with the U.S. against Iran, and secondly, emergence of Tehran as a nuclear power is the red line for Israel.