جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "syria" در نشریات گروه "جغرافیا"

Syria has been involved in a full-scale war since the beginning of 2013. Researchers and experts in political, social and military sciences have examined the different angles of this war. The current research has investigated the relationship between drought and the start of war in Syria using the theory of relative deprivation. The droughts between 2003 and 2009, which were rare in the history of Syria, severely affected the farmers and herdsmen in the provinces of Hasakah, Deir Ezzor and Raqqa, and unemployed people migrated to other provinces, especially Damascus, Daraa and Homs. and this issue increased livelihood problems such as high housing prices, increase in food prices and unemployment in different regions of Syria and provided grounds for dissatisfaction and unrest. The method used in this article is descriptive and analytical, and reliable internal and external library sources and internet databases have been used. The findings of this research indicate that the occurrence of successive droughts in Syria and Turkey's water policy in building dams on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and the failure to properly manage this crisis by the Syrian government as a factor in the dissatisfaction of the Syrian people. It has been influential.

The evolution of the geopolitical environment of the Southwest Asian security environment since the September 11, 2001, events has forced regional and trans-regional powers to take different approaches to the crises in the region. Since Syria has been a gateway for Iran's entry into the Arab world for many years, the axis of Iran's resistance to the Mediterranean and so on has been central. Therefore, weakening Syria, in addition to weakening the axis of resistance, will result in a reduction of Iran's regional influence and power. The present study is a descriptive-analytical one and the main purpose of this paper is to analyze the regional power of Iran in the light of Syrian geopolitical conflicts. The results show that the geopolitical conflicts of the regional and trans-regional powers of Syria will have major effects on the regional power of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

As an emerging phenomenon, ISIL was able to influence the region countries and the world in a short period of time, and as a very destructive actor, was able to occupy a large part of the territory of Iraq and Syria and to form a government based on the Islamic Caliphate. The actions of this Salafi-Takfiri group, while threatening the security and territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria, are a direct threat to the security of the Middle Eastern countries, especially the resistance axis countries in the region. Since Iran is one of the Middle East countries and the leader of the resistance axis in the region, the existence of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, in addition to the effects and consequences on the internal structure and security of these countries, is undoubtedly an objective threat to Iran's national security and territorial integrity. Therefore, Iran in alliance with the governments of Iraq and Syria, as well as with the effective help of Hezbollah in Lebanon and Russia, sought to strike and destroy ISIS.

Given the theoretical nature of this study, it employs a qualitative-descriptive-analytic approach. In qualitative research design, data from historical, descriptive and empirical research are used. The data needed in this study are collected through library references, documents, and various internet websites and resources.

Iraq was an occupied country that did not have an army to provide security, and more importantly, the process of power transfer in this country was slow, and with the intervention of regional and international actors, there was no consensus on government formation and the lack of security in a war-torn country provided a justification for the presence of foreign forces in a country (Cloud & Shanker, 2007: 26). Edward Snowden, a former US National Security Agency contractor, said: "The US, British and Israeli intelligence agencies were instrumental in the formation of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Syria (ISIS) group and in an operation called 'Bee's Nest' formed ISIS group.”(Khoramshad & ashna, 2018: 77). With the start of the Syrian crisis in the beginning of 2011 and the change in the nature of the protests from political and civil to terrorist and sectarian under the influence of media propaganda and psychological operations, several Salafi-Takfiri groups went to Syria to fight to Alawites. During the Syrian crisis, heavy and extensive psychological propaganda was carried out in order to induce the religious and sectarian nature of the Syrian war, and this propaganda and psychological operations caused a large number of Salafi of Sunnis to go to Syria to fight with the Alawites (Zarean, 2014: 27). The ISIS terrorist group was once present in Iraq and Syria and had occupied large parts of northern Syria and Iraq. This terrorist group is currently active in parts of Libya and Nigeria, Afghanistan and Southeast Asia. Many areas under ISIL control have now been liberated and possessed to the Iraqi and Syrian governments. The activities of the Takfiris do not endanger the borders of the Islamic Republic of Iran; But Iran's security should not be sought within its borders. The front line of the fight against ISIS and its supporters is not limited to the borders of Iran, and today Iran, as the most powerful country in the region, has expanded its strategic depth to the southern borders of Lebanon with the Zionist regime. ISIL's view of the Shiites, shows that this group is targeting Iran as the core of the Shiites and believes that their group should move toward the core. Considering that the presence and activity of the ISIS terrorist group in Iraq and Syria became a threat to Iran's national security; therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran seeks to eliminate security threats caused by the crisis in its two necessary and unnecessary security circles, namely Iraq and Syria, and by adopting a defensive approach, it takes steps to achieve its goals and interests, especially its security interests and resistance members. In fact, Iran has played the most important and effective role in destroying ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Undoubtedly; this role will intensify the hatred of the Americans and its regional allies, especially Saudi Arabia and the Zionist regime, towards Iran now and in the post-ISIS era, and consequently will design new strategies to confront Iran, which is the leader of the resistance axis in the region. The martyrdom of Sardar Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, the deputy commander of the Iraqi Hashad al-Shaabi forces, and their companions on January 3, 2020, near Baghdad International Airport by US drones on Trump's direct orders can be analyzed in this regard. Meanwhile, in response to these attacks, the Islamic Republic of Iran also fired a missile at the Ain al-Assad base in Iraq's Anbar province and a base in Erbil, where US forces were stationed, on January 8, 2020.

With anti-Shiite slogans and actions, the ISIS terrorist group is practically in line with the goals and interests of the actors opposed to the resistance axis and at the head of it, is the Islamic Republic of Iran, which wants to weaken the axis of resistance and reduce the regional influence of Iran. ISIL can be considered a threat to Iran's territorial integrity, because ISIL is thinking of creating a caliphate, and the establishment of a caliphate requires the integration of the countries of the region into one country. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran, by adopting military and diplomatic measures, defeated the goals of this terrorist group and announced the end of the self-proclaimed government of ISIL. The costs and consequences of the actions of the ISIS terrorist group in Iraq and Syria, which have also been very heavy, have disrupted the development process of these countries and added to the increasing complexity of the political crisis in Syria and Iraq.

Water has economic, social and environmental effects on spatial development, so this phenomenon is becoming more competitive, more political and more secure. One of the areas where water scarcity is most pronounced is Southwest Asia, and this situation is more pronounced in Iraq and Syria due to its downstream than the Tigris and Euphrates border rivers. Turkey is one of the water-rich countries due to the amount of rainfall and suitable climatic conditions from which the Tigris and Euphrates rivers originate, and most of the water resources of Iraq and Syria originate from Turkey, and these countries are highly agricultural, environmental and Drinking depends on water sources coming from Turkey. By establishing large water projects (Gap project) in southeastern Turkey, Turkey seeks to control the border waters in the Tigris and Euphrates tributaries and pursue its geopolitical goals based on hydro-hegemon and hydropower. Due to the dependence of Iraq and Syria on the border waters with Turkey, it seems that in the near future, the countries downstream of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers will face widespread water tensions. This descriptive- analytical study, using library and Internet resources, seeks to analyze the geopolitics of Turkey's water policies and their consequences in the downstream countries of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (Iraq and Syria). The results show that Turkey's strategic goals and water policies in the field of extraction and control of border waters, the use of this empowering geopolitical element in line with geo-economic goals (balanced domestic development and achievement of European standards, aligning Kurds with the core Central to this is the rise of bargaining power in energy transactions in the region (geostrategic) (weakening the PKK and its supporting neighbors, operationalizing the neo-Ottoman discourse in the Ottoman Empire).

Investigating and studying the political relations of countries in the international arena, especially the countries of a particular region, is of particular importance. Such studies investigate issues related to the interactions between states and factors affecting political relations between them from different perspectives. Geopolitical studies are among such studies which provide national interests and national security for countries to identify political and geographical factors and variables affecting the political relations of states and accordingly, to investigate the regional and global impacts of these relations. By looking at the political relations between Iran and Syria, as two important non-bordering Middle East countries with special geopolitical and geostrategic importance in the axis of Islamic Resistance, which plays an essential and decisive role in regional interactions and geopolitics which is significantly impacted by these relations, we can observe fluctuations due to the influence of geopolitical, political and economic factors in the interactions between them. The current study tries to examine the impact of major geopolitical factors between the two countries and finally answer the following question: What predictable prospect exists for Iran-Syria relations in the future"? In this regard, using a descriptive-analytical research method, we will test the hypothesis that "the future of Iran-Syria relations depends on the future of Syria and its future positioning." This research investigates other aspects of the future effect of the two countries' relations on the region and, like any other research studies, there were limitations and obstacles.

Three countries, turkey, Syria and Iraq that have the common spillway and basin of Tigris and Euphrates due to increasing dependence to these rivers they have had to establish a dam and control the water streams in their territories. In this regard turkey government which is located upper than its south neighbors based on eastern south Anatolia project or GAP for developing agriculture and industry in its eastern south territory need a huge amount of water of Tigris and Euphrates. Furthermore because of dam building in its territory has decreased the share of water for Iraq and Syria. The reduction of water of Tigris and Euphrates has had negative impacts on environmental security and inappropriate political, economic and social effects on Iraq and Syria. This problem and political goals of turkey in recent decades have made the conflicts and challenges among these three countries. This research based on descriptive and analytic method and resources try to answer this question that what is the effect of hydropolitic gab project on environmental security of Iraq and Syria and what are the turkey goals of this plan? Implementing the phases of gap project in recent decades has had negative environmental impacts such as water pollution, eliminating the rare species, increasing the desertification, destroying the swamps and basins and producing hazes in Iraq and Syria and it seems that turkey government is establishing the hydrohegemony in the region.

In the early 2010th, there was a tide of discontent first in North Africa and then in the Middle East. Syria led by Bashar Al-Assad did not stay away from the public tide of dissatisfaction. Although people initially expressed their unhappiness with the Syrian government, yet by the interference of regional and international actors starting in August 2011, it turned into an international crisis. Russia is among the most important international actors in Syria. Since the time of worsening of the Syrian crisis, Russia along with Iran made diplomatic and political efforts in order to prevent the direct military invasion of the West to Syria like what happened in Libya. Putin announced repeatedly in press conferences addressing his Western counterparts, that military actions of the West in Libya and earlier in Iraq and Afghanistan is doomed to fail and Moscow is trying to reach to a political solution in the framework Geneva peace initiative and based on a multilateral negotiation between the Assad government and its opponents.However, in September 2015, upon the official request of Bashar Al-Assad, Russia decided to intervene directly in Syria which as a result turned the balance of power in Assad’s favor. Therefore, the question raised here, is why the Putin-led Russia decided in 2015 to start a direct military presence in Syria? In other words, in 2011 through 2015, Russia was striving to find a peaceful solution to Syrian crisis; however, in 2015, it decided for a direct military involvement in Syria, and along with Iran and Hezbollah of Lebanon, support Assad against his opponents. This article`s main argument is that “Russia with its geopolitical influence in the Middle East including Syria, seeks to take control over the main energy transfer lines in the Middle East and become the global energy hegemon”. So, the independent variable is “the geopolitics of energy i.e., Russian policy of becoming the global energy hegemon” and the dependent variable is the “the direct military presence of Russia in Syria since 2015”.

In this line, the authors first mention the original desire in Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union to bring back the Russian Federation to its initial place in international system and turn it to a argue that it is first stated that after the collapse of Russia the leaders in Kremlin were after the return of Moscow to its initial place in the international system; however, the approach and view of the Russian leaders to how become an internationally recognized superpower were different. Yeltsin, the first Russian president, with his Atlantic aids hoped with a cordial relation with the West especially the United States, could achieve this goal. However, the result was nothing but the collapse of the Russian economy; in a way that in the late 1990s, observers suspected that the Russian economy is no more capable of recovering. But, since Putin became president and following his rule over Russia for several years, all political equations changed. Putin emphasizing on Russia’s comparative advantage, saw energy as an important factor in Russia’s power. Consequently, since 1999 when Putin came to power, he tried to make Russia take control over energy transfer routes and energy exporting countries in Central Asia and even the Middle East. To this end, during the 2000s, when projects such as Nabucco and Trans Anatolian pipeline came underway by the Western (mainly European) countries aimed at reducing their oil and gas dependence on Moscow, Russia, on the other hand, started the construction of alternative pipelines and also prevented countries such as Turkmenistan to join the Nabucco and Trans Caspian pipelines.

At the onset of a new crisis in Ukraine in 2014, Europe sought to break dependence on Russia; so, it seemed that the Middle East with its huge gas and oil resources, was a good alternative for Russia. Therefore, countries such as Turkey and Syria as energy transfer routes and Iran, Qatar and Iraq as those with energy (especially gas) resources, were considered potential rivals with Russia. In a view to Syrian crisis and Russian military intervention in Syria in 2015, it is understood that with his military intervention in Syria, Putin succeeded to control all his potential energy rivals. In other words, in 2015, while the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah-Iraq axis was in a relative weakness and anti-Syrian rebel fighters on the one hand and ISIS on the other hand, had seized a vast territory in Syria and Iraq, Russia involved militarily in Syria with the goal of fighting terrorism and preventing the collapse of Bashar Assad. This intervention which is said to be encouraged by Iran, succeeded to limit the Islamic Republic`s maneuvering power as the Russian rival in the field of energy policies. Further, Moscow`s support for Iraq against the ISIS kept this country in line of Russian geopolitical and geo-economics interests in the Middle East. Finally, the Russian military involvement in Syria could prevent Turkey, as one of the most important energy transfer routes, become the major player in the Syrian crisis and thus a serious rival for Russia. Further, Moscow succeeded to distance Turkey from its Western allies and bring it to its orbit.

The crises of Syria (in the Middle East region) and Ukraine (in Eastern Europe), which began with some internal, regional and global issues, have continued to threaten the interests of stakeholders such as the Russian Federation. There are many theoretical models for analyzing crises and how the reactions and reactions of stakeholder stakeholders and stakeholders are presented. The crisis model is one of the important theoretical models in this relation. The action and reaction of actors during the crisis stemmed from their perception of the severity of the defeat of the three elements. It should also be noted that actors often face three types of software, hardware, and intelligence management in crisis situations in order to control risky conditions and to deal with destabilizing elements. Russia is not averse to taking clever measures and avoiding a passive approach to manage the upheaval of Syria and Ukraine, as the length of the conflicts imposes more damages on Russia than anything else. It is worth noting that one of the important reasons that the author choose Russian Federation as a case study is its interest and influence in both crises, as well as many aspects of social-cultural contexts, political structure. The economic and geographic location of the two countries has been struck by the crisis, and there are some interesting and remarkable similarities about the bases and reasons for the onset and continuation of the crises. This paper is intended to find an answer this question that “How did the Russian Federation perceive the crises in Syria and Ukraine and how did it manage its transformation, according to the model of the crisis cube?
 

The research method is descriptive-analytic and it is a fundamental in terms of its nature. The method of data gathering is based upon library studies and the use of books, articles and online resources.

Considering the reasons for Syria's importance in political, security, military and economic areas and the occurrence of a crisis in Syria shows that perceptions of the Russian authorities are based on three indicators of the severity of the threat, the amount of time and the level of consciousness. Evidences suggest that in Syrian crisis, given that there was enough time available to the Kremlin decision makers which pave the way for engagement in bureaucratic and advisory actions, and because the threat is mild and with sufficient time to make decisions, bureaucratic actions have been turned up and many plans have been chosen to choose the best strategy, but due to the lack of detailed information about the plans and strategic options of the rivals of the time, the place and the type of possible actions of the enemies, the level of uncertainty Russian strategy has not been comprehensive.

The research findings shows that the perception of the authorities of the country was seriously threatened by the crisis as a result of the Ukrainian crisis in the strategic depth and the Russian Federation's secretion, hence the following high-risk crises or at the point A of the Cube on the other hand, the Russians face a lot of pressure for practical action, and the element of strategic surprise has put them under pressure. However, according to the Russian authorities, the Syrian crisis is in the midst of crises and stagnation, or at the C-point, and there is no direct threat to the vital values ​​of Russia, so there is little threat, and this is due to the presence of terrorist elements in the autonomous states of Chechnya and Dagestan, as well as fears from collapse of the balance of power in the Middle East. On the other hand, there is a great deal of opportunity for the Russian authorities and political authorities. Russia has placed a major emphasis on crisis intelligence management with the priority of leveraging hardware and software in crises such as Ukraine, so the scope of Russian actions is prioritized including using an invasive military force, an energy weapon, diplomatic political mechanisms (Geneva one and two, Minsk one and two, and Normandy four) and the media. On the other hand, in the Syrian crisis, due to the fact that there is no direct threat to the Russian land and is outside the country's security loop, it has made the crisis intelligent management model more effective, with a focus on the use of soft, optimal and less costly mechanisms. Hence, the line of Russia's actions in the Syrian crisis has been prioritized, with the urgency of aggressive behavior from diplomatic politicos, the ban on the Tunis Summit, the ban on the Paris Summit, the active participation in the Summit of Astana and Sochi, the alliance and coalition, financial and economic assistance, and information, military support Weapons and media are stretched.

Undoubtedly the life of terrorist groups in all regions of the world, financial support is found and hidden Sent by government and non-state sources. Beyond knowing the details and how to do this this is an issue that is of particular importance in the fight against terrorism International law is about financing terrorism. The purpose of this article is to analyze and investigate the crime of financing terrorism in international law focusing on the ISIS terrorist group in Iraq and Syria. The main question of this article is that how is international law financing terrorist groups such as ISIL in Syria and Iraq? The research hypothesis of the present research is that in international law the creation of the Convention against the Financing of Terrorism (1999) and the issuance of various resolutions, in particular Resolution (2001) of the United Nations Security Council it shows that the subject of this article has been the focus of attention of countries and international legal entities. The results of this paper also show that despite international legal restrictions on preventing the financing of terrorism but the activities of the ISIL terrorist group this is the truth that observe, control, and combat the financing phenomenon which undoubtedly plays a key role in expanding the actions of the terrorist groups we need to be more precise and broader by international institutions and to work closely with national governments.

The Syria crisis when it ended after seven years (from 2011 to 2018), While which has a lot of human casualties as more than half the population of 23 million (about 13.5 million (, in this country has. The UN United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees the Syrian crisis as the worst global crisis over the past 25 years. In terms of structure, the present study briefly examines the role of host countries in the conflict and the war in Syria. These countries are, respectively, the five countries of the region, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt, and internationally, to some extent, the countries of the European Union. Then, in the next step, to the situation of the refugees of the named countries is discussed and And as a result The Implications of This Immigration Mandatory on Will be paid to host countries and Finally, the consequences of this forced migration are analyzed in a variety of political, economic, cultural, security and social characteristics. Generally, the Syrian geopolitical crisis, in addition to its longterm effects on Syria's nationality, in Internal dimensions, in midterm And at least in short term It will also affect the host countries; This situation is far more acute for the Syrian neighbors.

This article seeks to examine the effects of the rise of ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) in Syria and Iraq on the political-security equations and power developments in the West Asia region. Regarding the neoclassical realism theory of international relations, the constant variable of this research is ISIS and its dependent variable is power developments in the Middle East region. The research method of this paper is "descriptive-analytical". The collected materials are presented quantitatively in tables using the library and documentary methods, and then analyzed based on the theoretical framework of the research. This article studies the various dimensions of the role of ISIS in Middle East dynamics. From the perspective of the paper, the first and most important consequence of the emergence of the ISIS terrorist group in West Asia is the "weakening of the resistance front" against the Zionist regime, which took place in two directions. First, by increase in the number of terrorist groups in the Middle East, the power of groups of the resistance axis are used to confront them. Second, the emergence of ISIS has created a rift between Sunni and Shiite, and resulted in internal differences in Islamic World that eventually is in the favor of Zionist regime. One more consequence of ISIS is the "Increase of “Islamophobia” in the world. On the other hand, the ISIS crisis has made "negative impact on economy and development" in the region. Accordingly, we see the decline of Western Asian countries financial resources and their retardation from the process of economic and industrial development. In all, ISIS has caused security-economic damage to all actors in the Middle East and by challenging existing relative order, has increased the roots of distrust in the region, and has faced serious challenges to the peace prospects among the region's actors.

West Asia has been the most crisis-torn region in global geopolitics since it has gone through a nation-state system following the collapse of Ottoman Empire, in which we have consistently witnessed most violent and unprecedented conflicts, either civil or regionalized as well as internationalized. In the meanwhile, the regional crises have increasingly been intensified in the turn of 3rd Millennium as a result of the expansive trans-regional interventions, internationally illegitimate occupation, increasingly regionalized civil wars; either directly or indirectly, regional states in West Asia as well as trans-regional actors, either great powers or international, security organizations, have been involved in the most violent and fatal military conflicts, to the extent which these intensified geopolitical crises seem to take a self-sustaining and self-reinforcing character, exemplified by Syrian crisis since 2010. In this framework, as an innovative endeavor, the paper seeks to explain the persistence of regional geopolitical crises, not least Syrian crisis in the West Asia, by drawing on explanatory- analytical method, using the day empirical evidence as well as historical data in order to provide a comprehensive multi-variable explanation and avoid reductionism inherent in current international analyses. In doing so, having presented a three-level analysis, it can be argued that an interacting synergizing set of some constituting and permitting factors has brought about the persistence of geopolitical crises in West Asia, especially Syrian crisis. On this basis, having combined sub-national, national, and international factors into a comprehensive theoretical model which can be applied to study on Syrian crisis, the paper finds that Geopolitical Crises in West Asia turn out to persist, and due to their increasingly accumulated challenges, spill over trans-regionally as well. A practical solution to deal with such undesirable situation is to normalize the state system based on removing the permitting and constituting obstacles, which can be involved some measures as effective sustainable states, regional conflict management, and lack of the expansive trans-regional interventionism.

West and Southwest Asia are the most turbulent geopolitical regions of the world. Over the past half century, this region has been the area of competition and the interests of major global and regional powers. Because of the special geopolitical situation in the western part of Syria, the country has become an area of rivalry of powers. The Syrian crisis is different from other crises in the region in terms of gender, causes and outcomes, and the geopolitical factor plays an important role. However, recognizing the geopolitical interests of each of the actors is a key interfere. Geopolitics is the study of the interactions between geography, power and politics, and the actions arising from the combination of these elements with each other. Geopolitics presents a large picture and proposes a method for linking local and regional developments with the system and the global system as a whole. One of the basic concepts in geopolitics is geopolitical interest, which is supposed geographical and supra-geographical supplements across borders, which are structurally and functionally homogeneous to meet the needs and shortcomings of a country. Geopolitical interest somehow forms the basis of national interests and profits of countries. In geopolitical crises, interventionist countries seek their own national interests, which can be analyzed in the framework of the theory of balance of power.  In other words, such countries in a critical geopolitical region are looking for their geopolitical interests based on their national interests; these variables can be analyzed in the framework of the theory of balance of power. The method used in this research is based on the descriptive-analytic approach and is a type of applied-development research. Regarding the nature and type of subject matter of the study, the collection of data and information has been carried out in a variety of ways and in general based on the library method and has been used from internal and external sources in this field. This research tries to explore the geopolitical interests of the most important actors in the above-mentioned levels in the form of a multi-level model with a descriptive-analytical method. The geopolitical interests of Iran as the most important regional actor are maintaining and expanding the circle of resistance and expanding its geopolitical area in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine, destroying the terrorist groups and cutting off their ties with the West-Arab-Turkish axis and defending the Shi'ite ideology. In contrast, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel, with the USA support, are also seeking to reduce the geopolitical and the geostrategic role of Iran and disassociate these resistance movements and their destruction. In addition, on the regional level, Turkey has a dynamic and complex position in its active presence in the West Asia and Syria. However, this instability in the regional policy of Turkey has made a confusion for its geopolitical interests. This has not made Turkey a success in pursuing its other geopolitical interests except for the hydrophilic Forat. Meanwhile, at a global level investigating this geopolitical crisis, Russia seeks to have a naval base and its hegemony overcome in West Asia, and on the other hand, the United States seeks to maintain its own interests in the Middle East and compensate for unsuccessful experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since each of them seeks to increase their global hegemony and expand their perspectives, their geopolitical interests are not close to the Syrian issue. In the Syrian geopolitical crisis, the most important foreign actors on the regional level are Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, and Russia and the United States on the global level. These countries, while having common interests, have their own geopolitical interests. Iran, as one of the most important foreign actors, in addition to its ideological goals in Syria, has sought to achieve such interests as placing the Zionist regime in a geostrategic bottleneck and expanding the area of power of the ring of resistance with the help of Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah in Lebanon. In the end, two points can be acknowledged: firstly, the main source of insecurity in the West and Southwest Asia is the Zionist regime, which, with its unshakable support, is trying to get rid of the geostrategic bottleneck and seeks to eliminate the flow of resistance with the support of the Western-Arab Front.  Second, the issue of the Syrian geopolitical crisis, more than any other period in the history of the relations between Iran and Russia, brings together the geopolitical interests of the two countries and directs the two countries from a tactical alliance to a strategic alliance.

While territorialization is a collective or an individual effort to apply an exclusive supervision on a clear part of a physical space, discourse of territorialization points out to make dominant discourse by people or group beyond a physical space. In fact, goal of making such discourse is to control space without applying a hard power. Occurred changes in the Middle East during recent decade have provided causes of power finding and consolidated and stabilized position of Shiites in the Middle East. This issue has affected and challenged interests of Arabian–western axis in this region severely. Since hard war has heavy effects and consequences, decision to produce discourses like Shia-phobia by Arabian-western axis seems more logical and reasonable. In short, goal of this paper is to state approach of anti–Shia discourse of Arabian-western axis in the Middle East in general and in particular to explain philosophy, causes and continuation of this discourse in frame of apposition with resistance axis in crisis of Syria.
The research is basic in terms of its goal, and casual and descriptive- analytic in terms of method and nature. Data gathering procedure is based on library findings.
Findings : Present power of Shiites in the Middle East is the most key reason to continue Shia-phobia in the Middle East. In fact, the opposition of power finding of Shiites (Arabian – western axis) try to highlight and conceptualize danger of hegemony of Shiites on the Middle East by conceptualization of Shia in frame of discourse of Shia-phobia. Their reasons for extending such discourse in the Middle East are changes of the Middle East during several recent decades in favor of Shiites. So, it is common that they use all their effort in frame of hard power and soft power (discourse extension) to prevent hegemony of Shiites (especially Iran) on Syria. Since, changes of the Middle East always have been affected by ideological conflicts (Shia – Sunni), these conflicts has formed two opponents groups in Arabian – western axis and Shia resistance axis. The first group includes Arab states, the US, Israel, Turkey, Qatar and opponents supported by them, and the second group includes Russia, Syrian government, Hezbollah, Iran and Iraq. Like most changes of the Middle East, war of Syria also became a bed to confront Arabian –western axis with resistance axis. Arabian –western fear from resistance axis can be understood by realistic point of view. The most important concern of the West is to secure energy resources in a region where about 70 % of its population is Shia and about 68 % of sources of energy are owned by Shiites. On one hand, the only strategic and trusted alliance of the West in the region Israel is sieged by resistance axis. This concern is understandable for Arabian axis, especially Saudi Arabia, because most of occurred revolutions in the Middle East has been supported by the public which on one hand brought changes caused more power – getting of Shiites and on the other hand, increased pressure on dictatorial regimes. Clearly, Arabian–western axis in a military action against Syria and resistance could not meet their desired goals. The most important reason of this failure is reliance of Syrian government on resistance axis. It is common that resorting to a flexible and soft way like producing a discourse (like Shia-phobia) is a desired and low–cost method than hard-war. Like many of conflicts of the Middle East Crisis of Syria can be explained in frame of discourse of Shia-phobia.
The Middle East has always been a bed of events. Events like collapse of Pahlavi Regime on Iranian, Iraq war against Iran, establishment of Persian Gulf Cooperation Council, Iraq attack to Kuwait, military presence of US in the region and Arabian countries, US attack to Iraq in 2003, discourse of large Middle East, plan of Shia crescent, magnification of nuclear activities of Iran, intensification of international sanctions against Iran, connection of problems of the region with problems of Palestine and Lebanon and Syria, crisis of Bahrain etc. all are evidences of several decades of conflict and complication in this region. In following complex changes of the Middle East, ideological problems have been and are most part of problems of this region, and religious (Shia – Sunni) confrontations have shaped a continuous form of enmity, competition and non –reconcilability between Muslim countries of the region with some of western governments and countries of the region. From this perspective, during 4 decades (especially after Iranian revolution) power–getting of Shiites noticed a type of clear and hidden competitions from the given governments for Shia countries and Shia resistance, gradually. So, conceptualizations like reviving Shia, rise of Shia, axis of Shia, pan–Shiism, Shia internationality, Shia renaissance, Shia bloc, Shia emperorship and Shia awakening, etc. indicate to highlight Shia-phobia.

Intrduction: Beginning of the Syrian crisis in the Middle East has led new kind of power formation in the reign. Syria crisis realities show that identity has an important and major role in the Middle East crisis. New wave of political change in the Middle East, especially Syria, is based on the identities and political radicalism. In fact, violence and religious radicalism are consequences of political change in the Middle East which has been called sings of Islamic awakening.
The research is basic in terms of its goal, and casual and descriptive- analytic in terms of method and nature. Data gathering procedure is based on library findings.
Findings : The research findings shows that:1. Arab Spring changes and its impact on security conflicts of Syria: in this context, the impacts of Arab spring, uncertainty of future and changes in the relationship of actors are discussed.
2. The role of Takfirist groups in the security crisis of Syria: in addition to ethnic and religious divisions as well as the intervention of the Great Powers, the role of Takfirist groups like ISIS and al-Nusra Front in Syria's security crisis is studied. In fact, Syrian crisis has been influenced by identity-oriented movement of Salafi groups.
3. The crisis of identity, legitimacy, authority and effectiveness and the formation of political unrest in Syria: the elite's mismanagement, along with other elements of legitimacy and cultural crisis have led to Syria's political crisis. Generally, the Syrian political system does not have structural flexibility.
4. Role of regional and trans-regional actors in the Syrian crisis: Syria is part of an axis of alliance driven by Russia, Iran and partly China. This axis of alliance is condemned by Turkey; west was Arab Union.
5. Syria crisis management based on the model of Cooperative Security: given the multiplicity of actors, the management of crisis is faced a kind of confrontation between involved actors in the Syrian crisis. The narrow security paradigm and limitation of regional actors do not lead to a desired result in the regional diplomacy and crisis management. The nature of cooperative security is plural which has led regional players to peruse different kind of objectives.
The realities of political, social, regional and international structure shows that Syria require to apply new mechanisms in order to control the cumulative threats. It is possible when the Syrian government realize its own inefficiencies and internal structural challenges. Different discourse conflict in Syria has created a kind of antagonism that has deepened divisions in the society. The depth of the divisions has threatened interests, cultures and identity of many countries. That is why achieving an agreement between these identities in the near future seems unlikely, because lack of understanding and self-interested political purposes has prevented the emergence of a peacefully situation.

Kurds are one of the ethnic groups in the Middle East and almost 35 million Kurds inhabit in the borders of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran. They are the fourth-largest ethnic group in the Middle East, but they have never obtained a permanent nation state. Kurdish question has involved some countries in the Middle East and their foreign policy, including Turkey, Syria and Iraq and to a lesser extent, Iran. During the Ottoman Empire, the Kurds were displaced and then under Young Turks, the Kurdish people were displaced into small groups in an attempt to eradicate Kurdish identity. After First World War and the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, the victor countries made provision for a Kurdish state in the 1920 Treaty of Sevres.
In this article by descriptive - analytic method, Kurdish question in region during 1991 to 2013 is studied and its impacts on relations of Iran and Turkey are analyzed. This study also discusses the impact of Iran's Islamic revolution, the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988) and the effects of these developments on its relations with Turkey and point out the two countrie's geopolitical rivalries in the Middle East, the Caucasus, the Caspian countries and the Central Asia and analyze Turkish-Iranian relations in this period (1991 and 2013), from a geopolitical and economic point of views. In general, we can say although Kurdish issue has been always an important element between Iran and Turkey considerations and interests, but it seems cannot have decisive effects on the geopolitical and geostrategic policies of two countries.
Findings : Today, Kurds are the largest ethnic minority in Turkey and Kurdish issue in Turkey has remained unresolved. The Kurdish–Turkish conflict is an armed conflict between the Republic of Turkey government and the Kurdish groups, and The Kurds’ issue in Turkey represents the most serious ethnic problem in contemporary Turkey; as in 2015, Turkey has renewed its campaign against Kurdish militants. This issue has had the obvious effects on the both domestic and regional scene and also on neighbor's interests, including Iran-Turkey relations. Since 1990s, geostrategic and geopolitical considerations of Iran and Turkey have been connected to their economic requirements. These make two countries pay more attention to geopolitical realities in domestic and regional levels. Iran and Turkey also have very close trade and economic ties. Turkish-Iranian relations are important to both countries, as bilateral economic relations between Turkey and Iran have grown at a rapid pace during the past decade. Since 2000, trade between Turkey and Iran has increased tenfold, from $1 billion in 2000 to $10 billion in 2008 and both economies now depend heavily on these relations, for example in 2013, the Iran-Turkey bilateral trade volume was $14.6 billion. According to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, over the last decade Turkey has been the second country, after China, in terms of increase in natural gas and electricity demand. Between 2002 and 2013, direct investments of the Iranians in Turkey amounted to $101 million”. In 2014, an estimated 174 Turkish companies invested more than $1.3 billion in Iran. As a result, both economies have become deeply dependent on these economic relations.
Although Turkish foreign policy is constrained by the unresolved Kurdish issue, but none of the two countries have threatened authority and also political regime of each other by using Kurdish issue. It is possible that two countries rivalries in Iraqi Kurdistan and their interest to influence in these spaces, occupation of some regions in Syria by Kurdish groups and also ISIS invasion to Ayn al-Arab (Kobani) may take their relations to serious tension. In recent years, with the emergence of Syria crisis, Kurds demands for autonomy and independence are the strategic elements affecting Iran-Turkey Economic Relations. Kurdish issue and Kurdish nationalism especially in Iraqi Kurdistan can make divergence in Iran –Turkey relations. Tensions between Turkey and Islamic Republic have increased in the 1980s and 1990s because Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) terrorist group has used the Turkish-Iran border region to launch attacks into Turkey.
Turkish-Iranian relations have gotten complicated by regional geopolitical competition. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Iran and Turkey have competed for gaining political and ideological influence in the Muslim Caucasus and Central Asia states (includes Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan). A majority of these Muslim states have shared ideological, cultural, linguistic, and ethnic affinities with the Turks but are geographically neighbored with Iran. In the other words, while Turkey had ethnic ties with a majority of these new countries, Iran had geographical proximity as its advantage and served as the most direct route for these states to transport goods to the Persian Gulf.

Geopolitics and its diverse realms continuously impact on different aspects of political and social life, internally, locally and globally. Therefore, geopolitical reaction and decisive factors in foreign relation of nations and complicated international dealings of the global system. The geopolitical and geostrategic region of Middle East has always been one of most important regions of the world. So that, any change in it greatly impacts on relationships all over the region . changes in the Syria have made that country a new arena for strategic competitions. For this reason, in the present research, reading historical relationships and strategically unity between Iran and Syria specially after our Islamic revolution. The crisis in the Syria and its geopolitical outcomes on our national security were studied. This study conducted employing descriptive – analytical method trying to answer the question of the impacts of Syrian crisis on Islamic Republic of Iran's national security. Theoretical bases and research finding indicate that with the continuation of crisis in Syria, threats such as disturbance of power structure and weakening of regional influence of Iran, disappearance of connectional chain and geopolitical link of resistance main, and consequently spatial discontinuity within that main, the downfall of our strategic ally, disappearance of Iran's strategic depth in the region, and finally, strengthening of competitors and enemies of the resistance main in Middle East will be inevitable. Therefore the present crisis may, like a domino contribute to the downfall of Assad as well as downfall of other allies, and as a result create a threat to the security and survival of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

While duration of rise and victory in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt was short and these governments that relied on military and bureaucratic class quickly surrendered to willing of the majority of citizens, this process in Syria shows that the Syrian regime is resisting to changes. What backgrounds underlies this warfare in Syria that makes it so long? In this study by using reliable documents and academic information in a descriptive-analytic way, it has been attempted to trace, review and evaluate the role and perspective of complex alignments in different geographical parts of Syria. In this regard, in logic reasoning and conclusions stages it has been attempted to depict the alignment of these forces according to their external tendency, and describe their impacts on the long pulling of warfare in this Arab country. It seems that because of the support of the Alawite, Christians, Druze, and Yazidi populations, controlling strategic points of the border and support from the governments of Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Russia and China, the Syrian government has the power to control the protests in short and medium terms.