جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "united kingdom" در نشریات گروه "علوم سیاسی"

War weariness and destruction caused by the intensity of the two World Wars persuaded the Europeans to search for an immediate and lasting solution to bring together the allies and adversaries among the countries of Europe in a regional security arrangement. The European Union (EU) as a symbol of regional unity, cooperation and integration has faced uncertainties and instability over the years. Indeed, Brexit can be seen as the culmination of a wave of secessionist and nationalist tendencies that have challenged European integration now more than ever. The result of the referendum of 23 June of the United Kingdom (UK) sent a great shockwave across the territory covered by the EU. It was predicted that the proposal of Britain''''s withdrawal from the EU would be dismissed by an agreement based on David Cameron''''s four-point plan to renegotiate the terms of Great Britain''''s EU membership, but 52 percent of British voters agreed to the Brexit, and thus ended their country''''s 42-year membership of the European Union.The assumption is that political culture as a part of a shared national identity of a state shape its views on national interest which in turn guide its policy preferences, policymaking, and policy implementation in the various foreign policy issue areas. In this context, our research questions are: How has British political culture influenced its orientations and policies towards the European Union? 2. To what extent will the Brexit affect the UK foreign policy towards the EU in the future? In the research hypothesis, the authors claim that British political culture with its peculiar conservative attribute has adversely affected its European foreign policy, culminating in its withdrawal from the EU. Using the theoretical framework of constructivism, they rely on the method of conceptual content analysis to examine official statements ade by the British leadership and discuss the findings of referendum and public opinion surveys related to Brexit to find answers to the research questions.Britain is one of the victorious countries in the Second World War, has an imperial background and is an island-state located on the periphery of the European continent— all these factors have influenced British politics to this day. The perception of being a powerful country with a rich history has had a significant impact on the foreign policy behaviors of the UK, and consequently has contributed to the unwillingness of British policymakers to commit their country to the ideas and actions which might diminish its role and standing in the international system. Today, as an island nation cut off from the continental Europe, England together with its much smaller overseas territories around the world, represents only a small fragment of a former empire that disintegrated a long time ago, but most British people evidently are unwilling to forget the glory of its past. Accordingly, the UK has not yet completed its process of full decline and has aspiration of somehow regaining its hold on its vast former colonies and dependent territories. It is a contradiction that needs to be examined closely. Its national identity is muddled because of how the British political elites and ordinary citizens view their country’s standing in the world today. They perceive the UK as a greater power than it really is.The results of Brexit referendum indicated that most British public and political elites believed that their country would be in a more favorable position if it were to be less involved in the mainland Europe. As a result, they accepted the Brexit which reflected some kind of self-interested isolationism and a desire to leave Europe''''s problems to the rest of the EU members. Here, selective isolationism refers to a preference to disassociate the UK from the EU crises which might require coordinated policies to deal with unusual situations. Interestingly, this type of isolationism does not include issues related to the Britain’s interests in the Middle East and similar non-European issues which do not impose disproportionate financial burden on the country. Therefore, the UK continues to increase its political power by walking alongside the powerful European players if the collective security arrangement does not limit its freedom of action to pursue its own foreign policy objectives and priorities. British political culture has had a significant impact on the formulation of this country''''s foreign policy towards the EU. However, Brexit does not mean that this former imperial power has abandoned its efforts to reach the position of a great power with the ability to influence world politics.

The results of the United Kingdom referendum to leave the European Union on Thursday June 23, 2016 was a big shock not for the UK but for the Europe and the rest of the world. In the plebiscite, 52 percent of the eligible voters chose leave, better known as Brexiteers, to take the rest of the 48 percent out of the Union. Due to type, form and the nature of the UK relations with the countries, the effects of the vote is quite understandable. Moreover, the leave vote put a huge question mark on the on-going efforts of European integrations.Changing world conditions, emerging China as an effective power, along with Russian moves especially after annexation of Crimea, jeopardizes EU’s firm stance against international developments. On the other side of the Atlantic, occurring Trump phenomenon in 2016 in the United States changed deep-rooted “Special Relations” with the two Anglo-Saxon countries and the Europe, as well. In the aftermath of the Brexit, “Global Britain” strategy focuses more than ever on Britain’s role in the world. In this strategy, Britain away from EU can be an active player in the world arena.This paper based on integration theory will quest the answer to the question of do we face close UK-US relations in the post-Brexit? The findings show that the two countries will be closer and the UK needs the US to gain its goals in the Global Britain policy.

The principle of sovereignty of the will as a fundamental principle dating back to Western law and especially industrial capitalism in English law in the 17th and 18th centuries, as a general principle governing a variety of contracts, including marriage. On the other hand, the principles and conditions of the principle of the rule of will in the financial rights of couples in Iranian law, jurisprudence and English law make significant differences with each other. Apart from the fact that, within the framework of the rules of fair trade, the rules of jurisprudence and the rules of morality, the principle of the rule of will can be affected in English law. Which includes marriage and financial rights of the couple, in other cases such as disproportion - meaning the financial rights of one spouse over another - can not be considered a restriction of the sovereignty of the couple. On the other hand, the principles of the rule of will in English law are based on principles such as the principle of good faith, fair trade and non-violation of the rules of jurisprudence. However, in Iranian law, which originates from Shiite jurisprudential standards, the principle of the rule of will in the financial rights of couples is severely limited compared to British law; In such a way that the legislator, despite recognizing the right of the couple, including in determining the amount of dowry, has limited its receipt to a certain capability

The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparative assessment of drug and psychotropic crimes in Iran and the United Kingdom. In Iranian law, the criminal policy governing drug crimes is based primarily on government, official, and repressive responses. In English law, a relatively more flexible procedure has been adopted, and except in a few cases, the legislature has not resorted to punitive penalties, such as the death penalty, in response to drug offenses. Medium-term imprisonment is the main punishment for most drug offenses in the UK. However, in both legal systems, there are minimal similarities, including the widespread use of the power of imprisonment to respond to drug offenses. So the question is, what is the difference between punishing drug and psychotropic crimes in Iran and the United Kingdom?

Independent lawyers play an important role in defending human rights and fundamental freedoms at all times, so examining the independence of lawyers and its standards in different legal systems can be effective in achieving justice and human rights. This research has investigated the conflicts and legislative challenges, the principle of lawyer independence in the constitutions of Iran and the United Kingdom, with a descriptive-analytical approach and a comparative approach. The results of this study indicate that despite the obvious differences in the nature of the advocacy system in the legal systems of Iran and the United Kingdom, but these two legal systems have common views on the criteria of lawyer independence and the challenges it faces and their obvious differences in personality. He mentioned having a public and governmental bar association in the United Kingdom and having a private aspect in some areas (financial, managerial) in Iran. Also, the most important challenge and conflict that exists in the legislation regarding the independence of lawyers in Iran; The involvement of the judiciary is in the issuance of bylaws and laws that are contrary to the principle of the independence of the lawyer and will have international consequences.

Independent lawyers play an important role in defending human rights and fundamental freedoms at all times, so examining the independence of lawyers and its standards in different legal systems can be effective in achieving justice and human rights. This research has investigated the conflicts and legislative challenges, the principle of lawyer independence in the constitutions of Iran and the United Kingdom, with a descriptive-analytical approach and a comparative approach. The results of this study indicate that despite the obvious differences in the nature of the advocacy system in the legal systems of Iran and the United Kingdom, but these two legal systems have common views on the criteria of lawyer independence and the challenges it faces and their obvious differences in personality. He mentioned having a public and governmental bar association in the United Kingdom and having a private aspect in some areas (financial, managerial) in Iran. Also, the most important challenge and conflict that exists in the legislation regarding the independence of lawyers in Iran; The involvement of the judiciary is in the issuance of bylaws and laws that are contrary to the principle of the independence of the lawyer and will have international consequences.

All signatories of commercial documents who act as issuers, guarantors or endorsers and holders in the commercial document during the life of the commercial document, ie from the time of issuance of the commercial document until its payment, are liable to the holder of the commercial document. The word direction in Iranian civil law has been adapted from the expressions of jurisprudential interests and Islamic law. , Have used an end or motive and have applied it in a way that is compatible with English law.In this study, the illegitimate direction of commercial documents in Iranian law and jurisprudence and the United Kingdom has been investigated. It will invalidate the commercial document in English law. However, despite the tremendous impact of moral concepts derived from religion, in British law, the concept of illegitimate direction has a wider meaning than its meaning in Islamic and Iranian law and often guarantees the invalidation of invalid contracts. This type of contract is inconsistent with public order. It is written using a descriptive-analytical method and using books and Internet resources.

one of the aspects of relationships between Iran and United Kingdom is the cultural communications that makes a base for other aspects of relationships between two countries. In fact; the field of culture especially political culture can be effective on political; economic and social relationships between two countries. Therefor cultural communications is an issue of much importance to relationships. This research tries to answer to this question that "how can we analyze the cultural relationships between Iran and UK based on cost-benefit approach and cutting off or maintaining cultural relationships with UK results in what kind of costs or benefits for Islamic republic of Iran. In accordance with this research's approach that is not based on hypothesis testing strategy; in Current Conditions we cannot make a hypothesis but the final conclusion of this research is that in current conditions the costs and disadvantages of maintaining cultural relationships with UK is far more than its benefits and advantages. Therefor maintaining cultural relationships of London-Tehran not only doesnt obtain national interests of Islamic republic of Iran but also it is a serious threat and obvious cultural invasion against Iran.