فصلنامه سیاست جهانی
سال هشتم شماره 3 (پیاپی 29، پاییز 1398)

Systemic change is the most critical development in the current international politics. China can be regarded as a key player in this ongoing change. The authors aim to investigate the Chinese approach to international orders. The authers assume that there are three overlapping international orders including hegemonic, constitutional and balance of power. The main question is that how China sees these international orders and how it reacts strategically. The article hypothesizes that Chinese opposition to hegemonic order, increasing role in the balance of power and revisionist approach and parallel institution-building in constitutional order are three inter-related elements of Chinese global strategy. The finding of the article shows that rather than sticking to some clichés such as challenger or revisionist, it is more beneficial to view China as an actor simultaneously challenging the hegemonic order, seeking security in the balance of power and making order in constitutional order. The article can open a new pathway for viewing rising international players with alternative approach.

Abstract Radicalism or extremism is one of the growing, decisive and determinant of the present age. Undoubtedly, this phenomenon is one of the most important political and social developments in the Middle East over the past few decades. The proponents of radicalism have become one of the most important political actors in the region over the last few decades and are increasingly influencing national, regional and global developments. Laid down. The interpretation and analysis of political, social, and security events, regardless of the phenomenon and considering its various dimensions is incomplete and incomplete. Radicalism in Pakistan has appeared in the late 1970s and has grown in the 1980s and has continued in the coming decades. . Understanding the causes and factors behind the growth and development of radicalism in Pakistan is crucial in determining the extent of its peaceful deterrence. While many studies have attempted to place Pakistani radicalism under the influence of modernity theory, this phenomenon is the result of the consequences of modernity, this article, based on crisis theory, examines the causes and factors of the growth and development of radicalism in Pakistan. . Combining the two levels of the national and regional crisis, it examines the impact of major developments on these two levels. After presenting the definition of radicalism, the crisis of secrecy or sectarianism addresses the impact of the national and regional crises of radicalism in Pakistan

By the start of the Arabic changes in 2011 known as the Arabic Spring, the fear of people's voice spreading to the Arabic countries, made their political governing systems frightened. Among the reactions, the Saudi regime had the steadiest yet sturdiest reaction to such changes within the region. That reaction included a change of strategy in Saudi's foreign policy. As they witnessed the end of Mubarak and Bin Ali, in Egypt & Tunisia, they realized their solely strategic alliance with the USA is no longer sufficient enough to insure their survival. Hence they decided to make changes to their foreign policy at regional and international levels. Those changes are the title of this article. Therfore we ask this question that: What changes was made by the Saudi government to its foreign policy reflecting the Arabic Spring? In response to the hypothesis we say: at regional level, the Saudi government changed its foreign policy strategy from defensive conservative to defensive revisionism in order to reduce its security reliance on the USA, and at international level, it changed its strategy from positive coalition with the USA to diversification with the great powers following the movements of 2011, known as the Arabic Spring. The method of this article is elucidation-commentary and its approach is analogical benefitting from conceptual framework of Stephen Walt's Threat Balance Theory. In order to organize the material accordingly, we will start with theoretical elucidation first using defensive realism theory.

The narratives that have been accepted over time form the collective and historical memory of a nation or ethnic group gradually. This collective memory will gradually become inflexible in dealing with other nations or groups. This will become more complicated if two rival groups in one country or region find their entity in gaining a general acceptance of their narrative from common historical realities. In general, myths, historical narratives, and collective memory are used as tools for shaping ethnic and national identity in different societies. In fact, this is the positive function of existing narratives from historical events. But in many areas, and among many ethnic groups, these tools have also been used as a tool for changing the balance of conflicts, especially historical conflicts. In this way, the present study focuses on the dual function of historical narratives that have been used in important ethnic clashes in the South Caucasus region. These narratives will be importance in understanding the formation, intensification, and continuity of ethnic-territorial conflicts in this region. Therefore, in this study, to find the answer to this question that: what have been the effect of historical narratives and collective memory on the process of ethnic conflicts in the South Caucasus? in addition to examining the role that myths, historical narratives, and collective memory have played in shaping ethnic identity in the South Caucasus region, the impact of these factors on intensifying and deepening the most important ethnic conflicts in the region has been studied.

Iran and the US are experiencing turbulent times in their relations. The tension is so intense that some are concerned about the possibility of an unwanted war in the region. Trump administration with purpose to return Iran to negotiation table and signing comprehensive agreement with Iran imposes economic and political sanctions in what it calls "maximum pressure policy". This concept most closely resembles the economic pressures of sanctions, nevertheless, pondering the Trump administration's policy against Iran, shows the fact that America, It has a strategy for dealing with Iran that is not limited to economic dimensions. US strategy against Iran is a combination of economic, political, military pressure, cyber-attacks, and fog of war in Iranian areas of influence. The ultimate goal is to change the political system or disintegrate the Iranian political system. The various determinations of Trump's strategy against the Iran are explained more precisely, not in the context of the policy of maximum pressure, but in the context of the concept of "Hybrid War". For gaining this purpose, with application of the concept of Hybrid War, this article seeks to explain the Trump administration's practical policy against Iran.

Given the increasing importance of the role of new social movements in the field of global governance, this article seeks to answer the fundamental question of how environmental movements, as one of the most important new social movements, can play a role in Iran's global politics. Given the fundamental impact of the approaches of the Islamic Revolution on world politics in Iran, this article focuses on how environmental movements are related to the approaches of the Islamic Revolution in the world. Therefore, according to Alain Touraine’s theoretical basics about new social movements and using a qualitative method, this paper comparatively studied three components of identity, purpose, and competitor in the Islamic Revolution and the Environmental movement as one of the new social movements in the world arena. It also extracted, compared, and examined the relations between these movement-stimulant components using categorization and encoding techniques. According to the findings of this study, Islamic Revolution has an identity, a goal and a opponent beyond environmental movement. However, there is no contradiction between their components and therefore there is an overlap between the Islamic Revolution and environmental movement in the field of global governance.

Establishing a balance between the two norms of humanitarian intervention and sovereignty (non-intervention) is the most serious challenge the responsibility to protect faces. Although the United Nations Security Council is the main promoter of the responsibility to protect, numerous goals and interests of the permanent members of the council prevents a comprehensive understanding of the concept of sponsored responsibility. The question of the current research is: “how the recent statuses and actions of the permanent members of the UN Security Council have affected the normative power of the responsibility to protect and transforming it into a global comprehensive regime?” The primary response is that, despite of the initial consensus in the Security Council on the responsibility to protect, different priorities of the permanent western (United States, England and France) and eastern (Russia and China) members of the Security Council in favor of sovereignty or humanitarian intervention not only has deviated responsibility to protect from its main route toward turning into a global inclusive regime, but it also shows that this concept remains as a common public debate in the international community and has not turned to be a behavioral pattern of states. Therefore the norm of responsibility to protect has not even reached to the internalization level. The research methodology utilized in this paper is descriptive-analytic descriptive-analytical based on objective-historical data.

The 2016 U.S presidential election has been a contest between Hillary Clinton's liberal hegemony approach and opposition with it based on nationalist approach by Donald Trump. Donald Trump's foreign policy prioritized U.S interests.The purpose of this article is to answer this main question in a descriptive-analytical method that why Donald Trump's U.S priority approach based on the internal tendencies of Jackson's tradition was adopted by part of the American people؟ And this subsidiary question be proposed that, what has this approach affected on the tensions between Iran and the U.S? In response to the main question in this article, This hypothesis on the basis of nationalist approach has proposed that for decades citizens in conflict with their leaders, more have realistic than liberal foreign policy orientation, which have led them to demand self-centered foreign policy.They insisted on the president that to put U.S interests in the first priority. In response to the subsidiary question this hypothesis proposed, Trump on the basis of nationalist approach believed the joint comprehensive plan of action failed to serve US interests. With withdrawal of U.S from JCPOA tension between U.S and Iran returned to the former enemy. The result showed even after nuclear deal relations between Iran and U.S not changed so much .It seems in the Trump era, relations between Iran and the United States neither to be a direct confrontation nor a normalization of relations, but will be a continuation of past political tension, unless unpredictable evolution take place.

Geopolitical imagination is a very broad concept of countries' representations of national missions, territorial delimitation, and geopolitical codes, with the levels of territorial threat and world identity, this concept is more prominent in the foreign policy of countries. In this regard, the national identity and myths of the United States drawn on the basis of "other", Geopolitical imagination has created this country in different parts of the world. Following the 9/11 and related events, such as the crisis in Iraq and the collapse of terrorist groups in the Middle East, the presence of Americans in the region increased and conflicted. Withdrawal from Syria's northeast and northeast regions and inaction against operations such as the Olive Branch and Peace Fountain in October 2019 by turkey against Syrian Kurds is a reflection of the geopolitical imagination of the United States in non-strategic areas. This research answers the question of whether geopolitical imagination has shaped US foreign policy in recent years in the Middle East and specifically the Syrian crisis. an historical analysis of the discourse and geopolitical structure of the country illustrates the discourse of the discourse of this depiction in northern Syria and the sterility of its historical discourse. Geopolitical imagination and discourse and research methods are also analytical / descriptive.