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

One of the most important strategic issues in the field of international relations of countries and in the field of international security is the issue of arms control and disarmament. This article aims to examine the US approach to disarmament and arms control with a look at the events of September 11, 2001, which was done in a library manner. In response to the main research question: "What is the US approach to disarmament and arms control after 9/11?" Findings show that disarmament and arms control have always been one of the most important issues in the international system, especially in Russia-US relations. The proposal for disarmament and arms control in the post-Cold War era is very confusing and complex. . In the early 1990s, there was a strong tendency to conclude arms reduction agreements. Multilateral peaceful international cooperation did not end after 9/11. Rather, given the US government's moves, the rules of the game have become more militant in the first place, and this has led to a change in international discourse. Second, unilateralism was opposed to multilateralism. This development affected all countries.

The legal regime of military weapons  equipment control refers to the legal stands of states and international organizations on manufacturing, trading, and utilizing weapons. These legal stands can be realized by reviewing the relevant international documents. All of the international documents on the military weapons equipment control seek the common goal of maintaining international peace and security by setting certain regulations to control the production, trade, and use of weapons. However, since there are various theoretical foundations for the military weapons equipment control, international documents differ in the solutions that they offer for this international problem. This study aims to address the views of these theoretical foundations regarding the production, trade, and use of weapons in addition to determining the conflicts in the approaches adopted by the UN and the WTO to the conventional military weapons equipment trade. For this purpose, the authors used a descriptive-analytical method and they also employed a comparison method in some cases. The general research results explained and criticized the existing theoretical foundations for the military weaponry control. The results also emphasized the admirable activity of the UN and the condemnable stand of the WTO with regard to the conventional military weapons equipment trade.

The aim of this study was to explain the legal basis and consequences of the US withdrawal from arms control regimes in a descriptive-analytical manner. The results show that arms control and disarmament, both in terms of process and in terms of provisions and regulations, are important and effective tools in the security of countries, because on the one hand, it removes ambiguities in military behavior and foreign policy of the government. And increase stability, and on the other hand, membership in this type of treaty has certain security consequences, such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which limits the sovereignty of nations. And with the withdrawal of the United States from this treaty, a dark future will overshadow international peace; The abolition of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) could be seen as the death of a 30-year agreement between the United States and Russia. For example, in the structural, multilateral and bilateral dimensions, it affects the international and regional relations of the great powers.

Security is the most important goal and concern of any government, without which there will be no progress and development in a society. In fact, the mutation and evolution of society will not be possible without considering security. In this regard, the most basic dimension of security is military security, to ensure this type of security, the country has a proper and codified defense strategy is a key condition. Therefore, one of the main components of an effective defense strategy is for the country to benefit from advanced and deterrent military-weapons capabilities in order to ensure national security and interests. One of the issues that can be effective in the direction of international security is the issue of disarmament and arms control; However, since in the international arena, treaties relating to disarmament and arms control have been developed by world powers in the national interest, it is essential that these treaties be viewed from a critical perspective. To this end, the Islamic Republic of Iran, as an active regional and trans-regional actor, considering the importance of disarmament and arms control in order to ensure security and national interests, has tried to actively participate in international processes, not only from To prevent the unequal enactment of laws, but to provide the necessary and favorable environment for the realization of the countrychr('39')s interests. Findings of the article show that the Islamic Republic of Iran has adjusted its defense strategy based on conventional deterrence due to its values, scholastic principles and Islamic-Iranian beliefs, upstream sources and documents. Therefore, in this regard, the Islamic Republic of Iran has rejected any production and use of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical and microbial) and has based its military authority on upgrading conventional military capabilities with a defensive approach.

With Putin's reelection on March 2018, a new era of relations started between Russia and the West. During the period of Putin's presence in the Kremlin, relations between West and Russia have experienced some periods of tension and peaceful concords. In early 1990s, there were prospects about Russia’s becoming a democratic state and becoming part of the normative framework of the West. After the end of the Cold War, Russia sought an equal status in international system and it also was against Western values and normative imposition. The main question of the article is "how the areas of disagreement between the Russian Federation and the West can be assessed?" The author believes that there has been a divergence between Russia and the West’s attitude towards the international system after the end of the Cold War. Russia tries to stabilize its position as a global power ​​and the rejects the existence of its specific spheres of influence that is claimed by the West.

One of the ways to strengthen peace and security in national and international level is creation of agreements in disarmament and arms control. Arms control and disarmament both are important and effective instruments in security of the countries from the view point of process, content and regulations because on the one hand it removes the ambiguities in the military and foreign policy behavior of the governments and increases the stability and on the other hand membership in these treaties have particular security implications like the Non-Proliferation Treaty which relatively limits the sovereignty of the countries. The present article by a descriptive-analytical method wants to illustrate the security implications of the membership of Iran in disarmament and arms control treaties. Iran by joining the membership of Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968 has accepted specific security obligations. The present article by examining security implications of Iran’s membership of Non-Proliferation Treaty has arrived at this conclusion that the above treaty besides weakening and limiting the security of Iran undermines military, scientific and industrial power also.

After the end of the Cold War, a new situation came into existence from the viewpoint of proliferation of nuclear materials, equipment and technical know-how. Till that time the nuclear weapons were in the hands of limited powers. With the end of the Cold War the Soviet Union lost control and supervision on nuclear installations. As a result the possibility of access of governments and non-government actors to nuclear materials and technical know-how increased. The nuclear tests by India, Pakistan and North Korea created new condition from the viewpoint of proliferation in international relations. Meanwhile the countries who possessed nuclear weapons took several measures to fight nuclear proliferation but these activities were within their own interest and they want to prevent other countries to enter the iron club of nuclear powers. Within this framework of policy of limiting other countries access to nuclear weapons one can practically notice that countries like India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel could have access to nuclear weapon. The paper wants to examine that what consequences nuclear proliferation in Asia and Europe (Russia) will be having for this region.

Washington's continued aggressive approach to boost its geopolitical and geostrategic advantages over Russia through NATO's eastward expansion and European anti missile system was a clear proof to Moscow that the strategic balance is changing in favor of USA and at the same time its strategic vulnerability is increasing. Simultaneity of these developments with a positive perception in Moscow of possibility of realizing the idea of “great power” has encouraged Russia to try to balance more with United States. This situation with an increase in the feeling of decline in relative security in both sides has enhanced “uncertainly” then “security dilemma” between them. Disruption in the bilateral arms control is one of its consequences. In spite of the fact that START-3 treaty’s entry into force increased hope to solve "the security dilemma”, remaining the atmosphere of Mistrust indicates that the agreements are fragile.

The end of the Cold War brought new challenges in regard to nuclear proliferation. The stability which was the outcome of bipolar system declined and the Soviet Union’s control and supervision on nuclear installations also disappeared. As a result the possibility of access of government and non-government actors to nuclear material and technology for producing nuclear arms was strengthened. The nuclear countries and at] the head of them the United States believe that the international security atmosphere and the danger of weapons of mass destruction proliferation in world and regional dimension are among the main threats to international system which its repercussion affects all the countries. For this reason creation of a strong supervisory regime for limiting the expansion and proliferation of nuclear weapon is necessary. Besides creation of a supervisory regime on nuclear non-proliferation treaty, the nuclear countries in their meeting of IAEA board of governors on December 2010 agreed on the establishment of nuclear fuel bank for supervising the nuclear fuel supply. The initiatives and executive suggestions of some of the countries and related organizations are among the efforts by nuclear powers to limit nuclear proliferation.

After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, many scholars thought that the Russian-American confrontation had ended and it would be replaced with cooperation. However, after a short period this optimism gradually faded out and a new period of conflict emerged. Although the new confrontation was not as sever as the previous one, but it implied a new competition in Russian-American bilateral ties. The new conflict and competition could be seen in several areas such as Russian Neighbors (Central Asian Countries & Caucausus), Missile Defense System and Arms Control and Iran as well. In this article, we are going to explain the new competition based on the above mentioned issues.

Survival of a society hinges on existence and respect for Law and order (to regulate relations; among members of that society). International society also needs some order. However, that; order cannot be imposed under pressure from one or more members, but should be accepted; by the majority as a collective value. As long as international order has not become a norm, it; will be neither sustainable, nor able to take a single course due to differences in the interests; of the members of international society. Therefore, negating legal order will be tantamount to; negating social order and more than anything else, social order needs a legal order. Meanwhile,; some governments are trying to present non-collective definitions of international security,; peace and interests of international society in order to shape the norms that govern those issues; without taking on board the viewpoints of all members of international society. Proliferation; Security Initiative (PSI) is one such example.; The present paper will analyze this initiative in the light of international law and will; expound its consequences for international peace and security.