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

One of the most Important issues that has attracted the attention of international system analysts from the perspective of strategic studies,This is the question of whether the United States of America, especially in the last decade, is an active liberal internationalist.He has said goodbye to the mentality that he is supposed to play the role of a hegemon in the international system and has moved towards another approach.It seems that in the third decade of the 21st century and even in the decades to come, the United States has abandoned the classic view and the implementation of hard power to secure its interests in the strategic area of West Asia to a large extent and is trying to use a proxy (balancing) ) and use it through aligned and united actors to advance their goals and strategy.The above research is of a fundamental type and with a qualitative-interpretive method and a descriptive-analytical approach and through the available data (library), the US military strategy in West Asia and the consequences that this strategy has for Iran as a regional power and an unbalanced actor. According to the Americans, it has been analyzed and investigated.

Political decisions and actions at the international level are formed by complex psychological mechanisms, perceptions, and misconceptions. It makes difficult to predict the outcome of political and social interactions. In International Relations (IR) and political psychology, the security dilemma, or the spiral model, which was first seriously presented by Robert Jervis, states government's actions to increase its security can lead to the adoption of security measures by creating a misperception as a threat in another government. Such an action-reaction cycle can cause tensions, escalation, and the emergence of numerous conflicts between the parties. The role of energy as one of the main drivers of socio-economic affairs, its interrelationships with countries' national security and geopolitical issues push governments pay special attention to energy security as one of their various forms of security. This research seeks to investigate the relationship between the area of energy security and the security dilemma, especially with regard to the regulators of the security dilemma from Jervis' perspective (physical-material factors and psychological-perceptual factors). In line with the physical-material factors of the security dilemma, we examine the role of energy and energy systems where they are exposed to security threats or are themselves the cause of insecurity. Also, in psychological-perceptual factors, the potential of energy security to generate misperceptions and their diverse origins is explored. A brief case study of the Russo-Ukraine war has also been examined in this regard. Finally, by conceptualizing the "Spiral Energy Security Dilemma", the domains of cooperation in the shadow of the security dilemma and the challenges of energy security are analyzed.

With the beginning of the new century, East Asia witnessed a redistribution of power and wealth by the structure of the international system; which changed the balance of power to the advantage of China and to the detriment of the region's traditional power, Japan. Accordingly, this study intends to survey the Japanese government's efforts to preserve its regional political and economic position, with the help of descriptive-analytical approach and qualitative method, and with emphasis on the new realism theory. The results of this study shows that Japan, as a declining regional power and with a rational standpoint, by calculating the costs and benefits of the available options, pursues a set of measures to further its national interests, achieving welfare and security goals. Thus, a review of the simultaneous economic, political, and security plans and actions proposed by Japan in response to China's expansionist plans can show the utilitarian foreign policy of the world's superpowers in the face of the threats of emerging powers.

The security dilemma,as one of the main concerns of countries in the international arena, that as one country's security increases, other countries will go through a process of insecurity.It is the duty of states to provide political goods such as security, economic facilities, legal order and infrastructure.When a state fails to provide these features, it is considered as a fragile state.The concept in the last decade, is one of the characteristics of some Middle Eastern countries.Iraq has been included in the group of fragile states since 2003 and has always had an unsatisfactory level of security since then.Accordingly,the main question is “what effect does the fragile state of Iraq have on the security dilemma in the Persian Gulf?”.Using a descriptive -analytical method, the purpose of this paper tries to examine the security dilemma in post-2003 Iraq as a state in the Persian Gulf region.Findings show that the fragile state of Iraq has intensified the security dilemma in the Persian Gulf by disrupting the regional Arab order, paving the way for increased military intervention,influencing the balance of power between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and paving the way for the spread of terrorist activities and oil smuggling in the Persian Gulf region.

US-China relations are the most important and at the same time the most complicated relations in Asia. Given China's rapid growth and US efforts to maintain its power in the region, the two countries are in an increasing struggle to gain more power and influence in Asia, and are experiencing different levels of interaction and competition against each other. The question is, considering the importance of Asia in the macro strategies of the United States, what strategy does Washington follow against the rise of Beijing in the region? The hypothesis of the research, which has been investigated in a descriptive-analytical way, is that Washington is worried about the unpredictable consequences of competition with China, which may lead to a military conflict between the two countries; It has tried to put a range of hedging strategies (positive to negative) in accordance with this country's assessment of the impact of China's rise on American hegemony, in order to restrain China and avoid direct confrontation with this country. Findings show that the United States has used a variety of strategies in dealing with competitors intelligently in accordance with the geopolitical conditions of the region and the international public space.

On March 2021, Iran and China signed an agreement as part of the Chinese Grand strategy, best known as Belt and Road Initiatives (BRI), which is a long-term plan to enable the Chinese government to project its power in the three continents of Asia, Africa and Europe by the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China, and its revolution in 2049. A qualitative content analysis of the unofficially published agreement shows that it goes beyond the perceived position of Iran in the BRI and echoes Iran’s national development plans.  If it means that China would become an engine of growth for Iran, there might be strategic reasons for the Chinese side to accept such a commitment. Thereupon, the main research question is as follows: Given the unequal power position of the two countries in the international system, what would be the primary challenges facing Iran as they relate to the Iran-China 25-year Comprehensive Cooperation Plan? It is widely argued that the main challenge of alliance is its security dilemma which include the two dimensions of autonomy/security and entrapment/abandonment paradoxes. In the research hypothشesis, it is postulated that the creation of a balance of power and strengthening common interest is likely to lead to a kind of interdependence between the two superior and weaker countries, and will prevent the emergence of the  security dilemmas of alliances. The method used in the paper is the qualitative content analysis by which the researcher is able to objectively and systematically explain the content of any document such as the Sino-Iran Agreement. This method of analysis will be used to reveal the potential challenges facing the Iranian side as a result of signing the agreement. In general, states’ primary interest inherent in their objectives to form an alliance might be classified as follows: a) to restore the balance of power, from a realist perspective; and b) to counterbalance against a perceived balance of threat. There are two issues  that are associate with the alliance security dilemma; the first one is that in the absence of power parity, maintaining the security of the inferior state by the superior one would be at the expense of the autonomy of the inferior partner, particularly in its security decision-making process. The second one is that if the superior state strives to provide a security umbrella for the inferior state, it might be entrapped into an unwanted conflict with other Great Powers. Of course, if the powerful state fails to protect its ally against other influential states, the inferior partner consequently may decide not to stay in the alliance, and choose the abandonment as its best option. The issues that threaten all alliances are security dilemmas or predicament situation for the states which are in the alliance. These are daunting challenges for the main decision-makers who must decide when, in what situations, how, and with what outcomes to enter an alliance or withdraw from it. In general, three factors should be considered: what are the needs for the formation of an alliance, to what extent the alliance partners would meet those needs, and what are the actual terms and conditions of the contract forming the alliance. In the conclusion, it is argued that since one of the guiding principles of IRI’s foreign policy is the rejection of all forms of domination, it is of paramount importance not to rely on the East (e.g., China) in an attempt to avoid impressive pressures of the West.  By considering the costs and benefits of the challenges posed by the agreement, Iran can avoid the alliance security dilemma, lower the likelihood of one-sided dependency by emphasizing dual deterrence from the West and East in accordance with the principles of Iran’s foreign policy. Accordingly, Iran urgently needs to re-evaluate all factors involved in the alliance-formation process, particularly  the alliance needs, and the expected outcomes of the terms specified in the text of the bilateral agreement.

Over the past two decades, the Russian military has upgraded certain categories of its military equipment (e.g., nuclear warheads). As part of this military modernization strategy, some of the old types of missiles are replaced with the new ones  including new submarine-launched and ground-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Additionally, the Russian military has begun new weapon research and development that had previously little place in the country's defense structure. The new program which started in the mid-2000s, include the production of cruise missiles, hypersonic missiles, and unmanned submarines. The evidence now shows that this program will be continued in the coming years.
The main research question is as follows: Why has Russia decided to modernize its nuclear warheads in recent years? In the hypothesis, it is asserted that among all factors which have prompted Russia to upgrade its nuclear warheads, the United States and NATO policy of deploying missile defense shields has had the greatest impact on Russia’s military modernization program. Since Russian leaders consider the establishment of missile defense systems by the NATO allies as an existential threat to their country, it comes as no surprise that they have been investing in a program with the aim of acquiring new nuclear capability for deterrence as well as for defense. The new weapon systems are developed to enhance Russia’s ability to retaliate in response to any aggressive actions including a nuclear attack by the US and NATO.
In order to find suitable answers to the research question, the authors, with a descriptive-explanatory approach, rely on qualitative conceptual content analysis of government documents (such as national security strategy document) and the  statements made by the high-ranking Russian officials. Furthermore, the views of international relations scholars, security specialists, and experts on Russian military affairs are explored for the purpose of descriptive data collection and analysis.
Two factors have contributed more than any other variables to the strategic culture of the Russian politicians and people: 1. The peoples’ experiences of the recent decades; 2. The leaders’ belief system which is influenced and shaped by geostrategic factors, military technology, and military organizations. Hostile and rival pawers’ d
eployment of the defense shields throughout Europe deprives Russia of the advantage of nuclear retaliation, thus giving the West the advantage of a first strike. This situation might shift the geopolitical balance to the disadvantage of Russia. Given the past history of Russia as a great power, it is basically inconceivable for the Russiansto accept the role of a minor power or a subordinate partner in the international system. Despite all itsshortcomings (e.g., a relatively low economic and technological development in the Global North), USSR(and later Russia as its leadingsuccessor state) has been regarded as amilitarily dominantstate in the post-WWII  international system.
From the point of view of the Russian leaders, the West's claims about the need for the missile defense shield to counter Iran's missile threats are exaggerated. Russia has hundreds of nuclear warheads that enable its leaders to deal a fatal blow to any enemy in any part of the world. The missile defense shield deprives Russia of this advantage. Even if the US and NATO missile defense shield poses no direct threat to the Russians, Moscow considers its deployment in Europe psychologically a negative, detrimental, and debilitating political move by Russia’s adversaries.
In response to the missile defense shield, Russian leaders initially sought security guarantees from the West, but Western leaders refused to accommodate Moscow’s request. They did not even accept Russia's offer to cooperate in NATO's missile defense shield plan in Europe, or even to grant Moscow access to the Qibla radar station in Azerbaijan. In response, Russia first suspended its membership in the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty, and subsequently developed new delivery systems including the following ICBMS: a) the Sarmat  ICBM with a speed of 25,000 km per hour, a range of 10,000 km, and carrying 10 to 25 warheads; b) Yars ICBM, with a range of 11,000 km which can carry 6 to 30 nuclear warheads; c) Avangard rockets, reportedly with a record speed of 20 times the speed of sound, which means that no missile defense shield can destroy it; d) Burustenik cruise missile, which can be hidden from missile defense shield radars due to its low altitude flight; e) Alexander nuclear missile, with a speed of up to 2600 meters per second, which can  neutralize missile defense shield; f) advanced Borya-2 submarines capable of carrying sea-based Bulava ballistic missiles, which have a range of 8,000 km; g) Poseidon nuclear unmanned submarine, which was designed to destroy coastal areas. With these initiatives, Russian leaders modernized their nuclear warheads and were able to maintain their nuclear balance with the West and maintain their position as one of the world's two leading nuclear powers. Russia's military innovation includes the production of missiles that the missile defense shields of the US and its western allies cannot intercept and destroy. The deployment of these offensive systems has increased Russia's ability to deter and defend against the West.

As Russia's only navigable port in the Baltic Sea, Kaliningrad has a prominent geostrategic position. Kaliningrad Oblast as an exclave region is miles away from Russian mainland, and is actually situated closer to some European member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Kaliningrad's militarization and Russia's policy of defending itself against NATO's Eastward Expansion have heightened the tensions among regional countries. Since 2008, Russia has activated the so-called ‘Iskander diplomacy’, redesigned its weapons of mass destruction, and launched large-scale military maneuvers. The 2014 Ukraine crisis showed that Russia has no intention to leave Eastern Europe. Moreover, Kremlin withdrew from the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe in 2015. The combination of these measures led to the revival of militarism in the Kaliningrad region, and created a security dilemma in the Baltic Sea, when NATO member countries in the region reacted by emphasizing deterrence. In this paper, to make sense of the new developments in the region, the author attempts to answer two key questions:  1. What had been the most significant effects of the geostrategic position of Kaliningrad as Russia's external guardhouse in the Baltic Sea on the Russia-NATO security integral in the region?; and 2. What will be the most likely defense models of the Baltic countries given Russia's power preponderance in the region? In the hypothesis, it is asserted that the geographical location, resources, and re-militarization of Kaliningrad have led to the formation of a security dilemma in the Baltic region in the form of an arms race, which has in turn fueled the rival states' fear of each other and  has increased the probability of a threatening confrontation between military forces of Russia and NATO allies.The research hypothesis will be tested within the framework of defensive realism theory, since the security dilemma is perhaps the theoretical cornerstone of defensive realism. The security dilemma theory and the broader spiral model constitute a persuasive theory of war between states, and explain the outbreak of war and the maintenance of peace. The advocates of the security dilemma theory argue that an increase in security of one state might make other states less secure, not because of misperceptions or imagined hostility, but because of the anarchic situation of international relations. The method of research is conceptual analysis, which is useful for examining concepts for their semantic structure. The main uses of conceptual analysis include refining and clarifying concepts in theory, practice, and research as well as arriving at precise theoretical and operational definitions for research. Conceptual analysis evaluates concepts, terms, variables, constructs, definitions, assertions, hypotheses and theories, by examining them for clarity and coherence, and critically scrutinizing their logical relations in order to identify assumptions and implications. Conceptual analysis, which is occasionally called theoretical research and closely related to critical thinking, is not merely a matter of language or language use. The conceptual analysis exposes (typically unconsciously) practical inconsistency, such as when someone rejects logic by employing a valid deductive argument or adopts a realist approach in their research while explicitly claiming allegiance to antirealist perspectives.According to the conceptual analysis method derived from the rational positivism approach, the relationship between NATO and Russia is considered an integral game with the typical function of fear. The findings show that the current security spiral between Russia and NATO lies at the top of the defensive-offensive approach. However, this international game of power is one in which direct conflict is unlikely, at least in the short-run. The reliance on NATO’s nuclear weapon capabilities to provide a tangible assurance of the success of the Alliance’s credible deterrence has not been an ultimately reliable guarantee against Russia's regional ambitions. This failure is due to both morality and rationality because of the arguments made on the basis of practical and rational reasons, such as the territorial proximity of Russia and the Baltic counties, the difference in opinions and priorities within NATO, and potential for the escalation of conflict. Russia is justifiably considered to have conventional power preponderance in the Baltic region. The creation of a conventional balance of power in the Baltic region is not feasible for the Baltic countries either individually or collectively even with the provision of additional forward-positioned allied battalions. The defense models of the Baltic countries are by necessity fully nonaggressive, because there is no room for them to use pre-emptive initiatives, extraterritoriality, or hybrid instruments of defense policy.

Technical and military cooperation is a unique way of securing the national interests of countries. The arms trade may change the international condition by intensifying the motivations of states and disrupting regional stability. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has sought to return to the military arms market in West Asia and the world to compete with the United States' advanced weapons. Russia is the second-largest arms exporter in the world after the United States. The West Asian region has emerged as Moscow's second most important arms market in recent years. With the start of the Arab Spring in 2011 and especially Russia's intervention in the Syrian crisis since 2015, sales of advanced Russian weapons in the region have increased significantly. West Asia is one of the most dangerous regions in the world, with many conflicts that have affected many countries in the region. Israeli officials have expressed concern about the Iranian threat, stressing the ongoing need to maintain a large, technologically advanced army in the environment, which is facing conflict and instability in areas such as Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Libya. Foreign powers intend to sell high-tech weapons to their local partners. West Asian countries are interested in buying advanced military equipment from major powers, including Russia, to strengthen their defense capabilities, as well as gain international prestige and increase their national strength. Although the United States has imposed an arms embargo on Russia, there is evidence that some West Asian countries are determined to buy military equipment from Russia, such as the S-300, S-400, Sukhoi-35, and Sukhoi-57 systems.

What are the security implications of Russian arms exports to West Asian countries?Research Hypothesis: According to this hypothesis, Russia's arms exports to Iran, Egypt, Syria, and Iraq in recent years have exacerbated the security crisis between Iran and Israel. According to the hypothesis, Russian arms export to Iran, Egypt, Syria, and Iraq in recent years, on one hand, lead to intensification of security dilemma between Iran and Israel and some extent lessen the security dilemma between Syria and Israel, and creating a stable security condition in Iraq. In addition, the arms deal between Egypt and Russia has not changed the balance of power between them and therefore has not created a security problem.Methodology (and theoretical framework if available): The authors have used the security dilemma theory and qualitative research method to answer the main research question according to the available reliable sources.

The findings show that geopolitical considerations, as well as relative benefits of arms sales revenue, are Russia's motivations for entering this large market and despite strong rivals such as the United States and sanctions against Moscow, the arms export market in West Asia are very complex. In this regard, Russia is seeking to increase its political influence in the countries that purchase Russian weapons. Under such circumstances, US allies in the region are increasing their arms purchases from the United States leading to a complex and multifaceted security dilemma in the region. The authors aim to study and analyze military-technical cooperation between Russia and West Asian countries. To better understand the issue, this article first tries to provide an analysis of the world arms condition and Russia's share in this market. The turbulent West Asian market and the presence of Russian weapons in the region are then examined, and finally, the obstacles to Russian military cooperation with the countries of the region are examined.

Until recently, Russia was cautious in using arms exports as political leverage. Now the situation has changed, and the growth of Russia's share of the arms market in West Asia will make the Kremlin’s arms policies even more crucial. Instability in West Asia suggests that the region will remain a major arms market for years to come, helping Russian arms suppliers challenge US dominance. Russian federal law states that strengthening military and political positions abroad is the main goal of Russian military and industrial corporations and that Moscow will undoubtedly use its arms export industry to influence the balance of power in the region. Russia plays a significant role in Syria as a game-changer and has already used its weapons industry strategically. Based on the theory of the security dilemma, the authors of this article conclude that rising defense spending in West Asia raises concerns about the possibility of a regional arms race that would increase tensions in an unstable region. This has a serious impact on the prospects for peace in the region as arms purchases can provoke more fear among countries and ultimately make it harder for them to sit at the negotiating table. Russia's goal in exporting arms to the region is to increase its military and political influence as well as to compete with the United States.

A constructive interaction with the world was introduced by Rouhani’s administration as the main focus, for its foreign policy. This policy was adopted in response to the diplomacy of the ninth and tenth administrations. The constructive policy of the new administration has some principles and constituents. In this study, much effort is consumed to both address the features of a constructive interaction and introduce the 11th and 12th administrations’ foreign policy and to analyze the repercussions of these administrations’ foreign policy for Iran’s international relations.Concerning the topic under study, in this argument the following question is answered: what repercussions will be brought for Iran’s international relations by Rouhani’s approach to constructive interaction in his foreign policy? The findings suggest that the outcomes of Rouhani’s constructive interaction model of foreign policy have been averse to its international relations.Donald Trump’s move into the white House, his definition of a hostile policy toward Iran and launching a maximum pressure campaign on Iran, the US’s unilateral departure from the JCPOA ( the joint comprehensive Plan of Action or “ Iran nuclear deai “ ), regional favoritistic policies of Tramp’s administration were all disadvantageous to Iran. These disadvantages include Hebro – Arabic trends, imposition of sanction regimes as secondary sanctions, the European pendulous treatment of its obligations toward the JCPOA and no comprehensive policy on the part of Russia and China as the non-European signatories to the Iran nuclear deal. In this study, a constructivist approach is a dopted as it’s theoretical framework.

Understanding Israel's security policies from a realist point of view has almost become a fundamental principle. It seems that this regional actor has adjusted all its relations with regional countries based on the policy of zero sum, and therefore security concerns have overshadowed other aspects of the actor's policies. Accordingly, Israel's foreign policy is almost equivalent to its national security policy, and without understanding the nature of security threats and challenges, understanding Israel's foreign policy process cannot be understood and evaluated. In the long run, it seems that Israel's security problems have not changed much, and this small actor still faces the same challenges both at the peripheral and regional levels. Given that Israel views regional security relations vertically, that is exclusively state-to-state and confined to superior military power, not horizontally and strategically or multilaterally and under comprehensive security, effective deterrence remains at the core of Israel's strategic thinking. Existing trends are likely to turn into turmoil sooner or later, forcing Israel to play a role in mitigating the challenges. From Israel's point of view, the emergence of this emerging Middle East has created a new multi-faceted and uncertain scenario in which a strategic doctrine adapted to these changing and unexpected conditions is essential for survival. Today's complex and challenging operating conditions, which have led to geostrategic changes in borders and the environment, are the result of regional developments and related events that have led to fundamental changes in the level of Israel's strategic decisions. At the core of Israel's strategic assessment is the challenge between its apparent power and success in various fields and the likelihood that this situation will continue, albeit temporarily and fragilely. This challenge stems from a number of factors that could in the future lead to the expansion of threats and conflicts with the escalation of the security dilemma, and includes Israel's approach to a series of key national security challenges. Overall, in the view of Israeli security analysts, the window of strategic opportunity does not appear to have been sufficiently exploited, and growing threats require a rethinking of Israel's security strategy, defense policy, resource allocation, and more up-to-date strategies. These analysts suggest two possible approaches to Israel's strategy: one is a cautious and stabilizing solution, emphasizing diplomacy and controlling existing threats so that they do not become malignant. Second, it is a preventive and possibly aggressive solution to eliminate emerging threats, but it can lead to full-scale war in various fields. According to these analysts, the main prerequisite for choosing the right approach is to strengthen the foundation of the internal cohesion of Israeli society, and by emphasizing social solidarity, they seek to first heal social gaps and then restore confidence in governing institutions. In addition, the issue of Palestine continues to mean that the real problem that some actors are trying to ignore, or at least pretend to not exist, has significant implications for regional actors' relations. The issue of Palestine remains a regional issue with historical, religious and cultural dimensions, and Israel and its allies cannot ignore it. It is true that Israel's relations with some Arab countries have taken on a new form, but strong alliances with Israel are not expected to be formed before the Palestinian issue is resolved. Analysis and strategic assessment of regional trends show that Israel does not face immediate and immediate threats at this time and in the short term. However, there are signs of internal, peripheral, and regional trends that could lead to malignancies in the future and increase the likelihood that these existential threats will become a reality. The timing of these threats, which are largely foreign sources, varies: while rocket and missile strikes can occur in the short term, other external threats, such as the formation of a regional coalition of hostile actors, the nuclearization of the Middle East, and international isolation, can occur in the interim. Long-term occur. At the same time, the internal threat of social incoherence to Israeli Jewish identity under certain conditions could also develop in the medium term. Regardless of the ideological point of view, in the end it should be emphasized that Israel is not a passive actor according to the existing assessments, but an actor that tries to change the existing threatening realities and keep the threats it faces away.

Although one of the components of Iran’s foreign policy conduct is making efforts to strengthen regional convergence, it is faced with many challenges due to the security constraints in the region. This research uses a descriptive-analytical method to answer the question of whether it is possible to realize the idea of regionalism in the Persian Gulf region. The hypothesis of the research indicates that as a result of such factors as the existence of sustained patterns of hostility, structural dependence of the Arab states of the Persian Gulf on trans-regional powers especially the United States, the undemocratic nature of the Arab state of the Persian Gulf, the way in which religion and politics interacts, the existence of ideological, strategic and geopolitical rivalries between the regional countries, there is no prospect of achieving a pattern of sustainable cooperation and integration. The continuation of this process will deepen the existing divergence in the region and will lead to an escalation of the security bottleneck and, as a result, to further militarization of the Persian Gulf region.

Authors of this research have tried to understand the role of security dilemma in the context of Iran-Saudi Arabia Rivalry. The main question is that how security dilemma has impacted the rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The main hypothesis is that the severity of security dilemma has exacerbated the rivalry and tension between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It is tried to define an explanatory status of security dilemma and its level of impact on this rivalry in the pre- and post-Islamic Revolution era. The research method of this paper is descriptive-analytical with emphasis on theoretical analysis. This research, based on rational theory of international relations, finds that security dilemma between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the post-Islamic Revolution era is much more severe than pre-Islamic Revolution but the moderate level of security dilemma between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the pre-Islamic Revolution had a determining impact on lack of deep and serious cooperation between the two countries. The severe level of security dilemma between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the post-Islamic Revolution era has had a facilitating impact on rivalry between the two countries.

Abstract At the first sight, Russia and Israel have always enjoyed relations in different fields, based on international and regional circumstances. With the beginning of crisis and the civil war in the Syria and Russia military intervention, relations between two countries entered a new phase that has been along with very sensitivity for both sides. Syrian war has been the place of competition between different groups and countries that either pursuing their own interests. This essay seeks to survey Russia and Israel relations in the Syrian crisis. According that, the main question this essay is, what have effected Syrian developments on Russia and Israel relations? To answer this question, we have to test follow hypothesis: Israel’s security considerations base on security dilemma concept have strengthened Russia- Israel relations. Research method in this essay is analytical- descriptive, the tool data gathering is library method. Key words: Russia, Israel, Syrian war, security dilemma.

Iran's nuclear program has become one of the major international and regional issues and agendas over the past two decades. Considering that Iran's nuclear agreement with the 5 + 1 group has international and regional dimensions and also with regard to the distinction between the semantic structures of the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the international system and regional actors, This agreement focuses attention and concentration of actors and countries on the international and regional levels and they have reactions from them, among these activists can be pointed Saudi Arabia and Israel. Which has always pursued the particular sensitivities to Iran's nuclear program. So, the present article seeks to answer the question that iran-west nuclear deal how has affected on the relations and interactions between Saudi Arabia and Israel. The authors in responded to this question and by using security dilemma theory, this hypothesis experienced that iran-west nuclear deal has been the basis for strengthening Saudi-Israeli relations and political-security interactions. Method of research in this article is kind of descriptive-analytic and method of data collection is library and internet.

The main claim of the present paper is that after overthrow of Saddam in 2003, politico-social facts of the Iraqi society appeared facts which didn’t find an opportunity for appearance and expression since the establishment of Iraq in the onset of 20th century until overthrow of Saddam. In this long period and under the shadow of dictatorships as well as political and social relations of this country, tribal, racial and religious structure of Iraq – which is the fixed component of such type of fragmented societies – not only had no position in power, but also encountered organized aggression and refusal. Outcome of Saddam overthrow was coming of the structural realities of Iraq into the field and this matter puts this country in a security dilemma condition. Authors believe that this situation is fundamentally, the result of ignorance of the social structure and a type of historical identity refusal and humiliation that after overthrow of someone, an endless competition for proving oneself and overcoming such unsuitable historical sense has begun. In this work, various angles of this issue are explored.

Globalization is a prevalent concept in the field of international relations which has taken on a more salient aspect since 1990. The concept of “globalization” which first emerged to explain developments occurred in economic activities is mostly abstract. With the passage of time, it gained much more importance and entered into other branches of international relations like national security. In fact, the importance of this concept and its relation to security led to different attitudes to this phenomenon adopted by actors and units in the international system.The Islamic Republic of Iran is no exception to this rule. The question posed by this article is that how relationship between globalization and security is defined and what is the impact of globalization on the security dilemma of the Islamic Republic of Iran? The hypothesis advanced in this article is that globalization despite creating necessary conditions and opportunities for establishing relations with other units in the international system, may face the security dilemma of the Islamic Republic of Iran with challenges such as blurring borders, undermining national sovereignty and media vulnerabilities

Iran and the GCC members has not succeeded to achieve a collective security mechanism in the Persian Gulf yet. With regard to the security dilemma of the region¡ the main question of the present research is how the contradictory state’s identities of Iran and the GCC members play a preventing role in materialization of the security community in the Persian Gulf region? This research in the framework of the constructivism approach and security community paradigm¡ hypothesizes that one of the main obstacle in forming of the security community in Persian Gulf region is contradictory identities of Iran and the neighboring Arab countries. In fact¡ the contradictory identities of Iran and the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf has led them to follow different action and behavior in foreign policy arena; this has created an obstacle in the process of security integration in the region and eventually these countries have not achieve a stable security arrangement based on their collective wills and participation.

Security schools as explanatory approaches and theories of security،on the bases of different ontological،epistemological and anthropological theoretical foundations، represent different caractreistics and meaning of security…. of theories on the security policies and policy making،Security schools as explanatory approaches and theories of security،on the bases of different ontological،epistemological and anthropological theoretical foundations، represent different caractreistics and meaning of security…. of theories on the security policies and policy making.