Given the fact that convergence and divergence in transatlantic relations and the role of Britain in the European Union have always been two important and determining factors in the EU's relationship with Iran, this article asks what implications Brexit and the presidency of Donald Trump in the United States could have for transatlantic relations and Iran. This paper assumes that Brexit and Trump's presidency—which have led to an unprecedented gap in transatlantic relations and security deficit in Europe—have promoted the EU to move toward reducing its strategic dependence and defend its own values and interests. Past experience has shown that such developments offer unique opportunities for the expansion of the Islamic Republic of Iran's relations with Europe, particularly considering the fact that Iran is one of the main bones of contention that have driven a wedge between governments on the two sides of the Atlantic Ocean.

The United States of America and European Union are the two important actors in the international arena (world arena) whose roles are so effective in international interactions that the clash of their interests seems normal. But the conflicts between Brussels and Washington has been intensified by Donald Trump’s getting to power as the president of the United States of America. Now the Nuclear Agreement between Islamic Republic of Iran and 5+1 which is supported by Europe in one side and criticized by Trump in the other, has been faced with an ambiguous future. This article seeks to answer this question that what is the scenario which can be taken by European Union to deal with this matter? To come over (reply or answer) this question, four scenarios have been considered checking the American and European viewpoints to this matter: The United States and European Union moving away from each other and Divergence in Trans-Atlantic Relations, Convergence between EU and the US, Persuading Trump to maintain BARJAM having commitment to Convergence in Trans-Atlantic Relations and the US and Europe conservative politics in Trump era. The methodology in this article is scenario writing and based on games theory.

During Donald Trump’s presidency transatlantic relations faced with tensions and accompanied by many challenges. After becoming to power of Biden as US president in 2021, he took effective steps by his own initiatives and making new policy to restore transatlantic relations.A large part of the relations between two sides of Atlantic in this period also reflect efforts of Biden government which is welcomed by European countries. The main purpose of this article is to examine process of transatlantic convergence in Biden era, to explain its challenges and prospects. The theoretical framework used in this essay is neoclassical realism based on a qualitative study using descriptive-analytical approach. The findings show that in two first years of the Biden office, have been good progress in the fields of climate, defense and security, trade and technology, the issue of China and the JCPOA, transatlantic relations. In particular, Russia's aggression to Ukraine in February 2022 has created a strong convergence between two sides of the Atlantic, but despite of these improvement, there isn’t good prospects of relations between two sides of Atlantic based on series of systemic and internal factors such as: the 2024 US presidential election, challenge between US leadership and strategic independence, difference in way of dealing with China which is viewed with uncertainty and mistrust.

Typically, any reflection on transatlantic relations of the United States and European states provides clear indications of the "cooperation-competition" pattern. A very significant aspect of these ties can be characterized as ‘cooperation’, but the sole emphasis on this attribute may lead to an incomplete and one-sided analysis of the interstate relations on both side of the Atlantic Ocean. Consequently, it is necessary to look beyond the cooperative type of relations, and consider the factors which might have given rise to conflict and tension, particularly from the perspective of the European side. A major objective of this article is to delineate the evolution, definition and the measurement of the concept of anti-Americanism in Europe. Anti-Americanism has been defined as "operationalizing a set of negative attitudes toward the behavioral dimensions and identity, cultural, and value indicators of [a given] state and American society". It is seen as a psychological attitude which has been formed, and evolved in a historical process. In order to transform this abstract concept into more observable and measurable concepts, the researchers have introduced a  few variables and indicators of various dimensions of anti-Americanism.    Europe has been at the center of ‘pro-U.S.’ or ‘anti-U.S.’ currents typically on matters related to its foreign policy, economic and military power in different political contexts. It is argued that the more powerful and less dependent European states (i.e., France,  Germany, and the United Kingdom) have been generally at the center of the opposition to the U.S., while the weaker states (e.g., Poland and Hungary)  have been among its newer European partners and stauncher supporters. The history of anti-Americanism dates back to the formation of the American Republic and has had its ups and downs in the context of transatlantic relations. The post-WWII European anti-Americanism, particularly after the Cold War has been influenced by various factors at tactical and strategic levels, which include the pattern of behavior and thought dominating the US foreign decision- at   making structure, international security environment, European identity demands, the pattern of power distribution in the international system, and the scope of the protectionist current of European integration process. Contrary to anti-American sentiment in European public opinion, the dominance of the ideological consideration of the East-West divide in the Cold War period had caused the official anti-Americanism to be mainly  based on the U.S. foreign policy, and revolve around soft criticism and opposition or politically-based resistance to Washington’s foreign policy behavior, influence and role in Europe and elsewhere. The situation underwent a profound transformation in the post-Cold War era which provided a new opportunity for the European Union to revive its identity demands in order to play an influential and independent role in the international system. This in turn became the most important basis for fostering stronger sentiments of anti-Americanism, particularly as it had been linked to challenging the non-European (American) identity and culture. The author is trying to answer the  primary research question, which asks: How and to what extent did European anti-Americanism changed during the time period starting in the aftermath of the events of  11 September 2001 to the end of the presidency of Donald Trump? In the hypothesis, it is asserted that “European anti-Americanism has a long history dating back to the formation of the Republic of America, and has been influenced by a score of factors over the years including the nature of international security environment, the dominant orientation in the U.S. foreign policy decision-making, European international identity, and European protectionism in the post-September 11 period.”  It is argued that  European anti-Americanism influenced by the European protectionist current has been subjected to four notable changes: Liberal European anti-Americanism (anti-Unilateralism), Modified European anti-Americanism (as influenced by Multilateralism in Transatlantic Relations), anti-Americanism resulting from European skepticism, and European anti-Trumpism. The main finding of the present study is that European anti-Americanism in the post-September era, particularly during the Trump administration, was accompanied by a new challenge called the "geopolitical necessity of rebuilding European emotions." In this regard,  the United States should accept the fact that rebuilding transatlantic relations requires more than just the existence of a "shared understanding" between the two sides of the Atlantic. It needs to concentrate on the efforts to design and implement more effective confidence-building measures to deal with European assertiveness.

9/11 (September) is one of the influential events in the international politics. In fact this event opens a new chapter of transaction in international relation and has been affected great powers policy and international institution in different aspects. NATO as the most important security institution in West also affected by these events. These events have been changed NATO strategy in deal with of threaten to West security. Among this 9/11 has been changed NATO enlargement process. This article examines survival and continue of NATO after the cold war trough Neorealist and Neoliberal Institutional theory، and the changes that 9/11 have in relations of transatlantic countries and Five Provision of NATO and also affects of this changes on NATO enlargement process.

Economics is one of the most Important Factors in the Transatlantic Relations.The Economics of Europe & America is the Original Core of the World Economic. In This Field, two sides of the Atlantic are the most Combined Regions of the World.Therefore Cooperation for Continuing this System has Benefits for them.Both sides are the Main Trade Partners for each other.Economic Relations after the End of the Cold War Specially post September 11th Until Now has Experienced Both Cooperation & Conflict.This Paper has tried to Show the Need of Transatlantic Cooperation in spite of existing Conflict,on the basis of Theory analysis and Referring to the Recent Economic Crisis.

The present study seeks to answer the question why the European Union, despite its political will to expand relations with Iran and in particular its efforts to maintain BRICS within the framework of the designed mechanisms, failed to exercise its strategic independence and fulfill its obligations within BRICS. The findings show that the EU's lack of strategic independence is due to the EU's transatlantic dependence on three levels of institutional security deficit, asymmetric interdependence in the economic sphere, and the preferences of EU transnational corporations in relation to US markets. At the level of the institutional security deficit; Given the United States' security umbrella and lack of military-defense independence, the European Union is forced to adjust its approaches to US interests and goals. At the economic level; The interdependence of economic, trade, and investment interactions on both sides of the Atlantic and the asymmetry of this relationship (US strategic economic superiority) have severely limited the possibility of EU economic action independence. The third level concerns the preferences of the market and the private and transnational corporations of the European Union and the rational and risk-taking pattern of companies under secondary US sanctions, which has been a major obstacle to the independence of the EU approach to Iran. The research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library. In this regard, books, articles, documents, Internet resources and comments of relevant officials have been used to collect data.

This paper intends to answer the question that what the election of President Obama and the new multilateral policy have resulted inAfghanistan. The answer is that this policy has brought the transatlantic views more closely to each other and led them to more joint actions and cooperation. On the other hand, the effective multilateralism will get success only if the Europeans invest more on hard power and theUSto be committed to pay more attention on soft power.