نشریه مطالعات سیاست خارجی تهران
پیاپی 7 (زمستان 1396)

Russia's avoidance in cooperating with Western policies in global and regional equations during Vladimir Putin's presidency is the result of Kremlin's strategic approaches against the US. The complications in US-Russia relations is not accidental or the result of a spontaneous decision; it has been a difficult, long-term and totally intentional decision for Russia. This isn't merely Putin's will as the leader of the country. Knowing that unusual closeness to the West has been one of the reasons of the historical disaster for Russia late twentieth century, the majority of Russian people wanted to distance the country from the West. The way out of this conundrum is based on equal dialogues and efficient cooperation and also refraining from concession with the West.

The typical reading of the theory of convergence, peace and cooperation among countries requires the states to gradually let go of some parts of their power and sovereignty. Such theories, along with the Eurocentric theories mentioned in the previous data, maintain that such a process starts with non-security technical and specialized fields (of which the states are not so concerned about) and then spreads to more sensitive areas through branching and transmission. Though these arguments have been fairly proved in the case of Europe, the truth is that no such thing has been repeated in any region of the non-Western world. Therefore, what this article is trying to find is that is convergence in other parts of the world based on a pattern other that the Eurocentric one? And if so, what is the alternative? This research attempts at investigating the abovementioned theory in non-European parts of the third world. Therefore, the question of the present paper is that "what is the convergence pattern/ model in the third world as a series of developing countries?" It seems that the cooperation in this process should start from the security issues in order to lay the grounds for mutual trust and understanding among the states and gradually the people; along these lines, we might be able to reach a significant and meaningful state of convergence.

Mikhail Bogdanov is currently Putin's Special Representative of the Russian Federation in Islamic and Arab countries, and also the President's Representative for Africa and West Asia in the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Due to his vast experiences, the abovenamed person attempts to solve complicated issues and multilayered transformations of the West Asia regions. He became a diplomat as early as 1973 and has been working in most Arabic and Islamic countries ever since. He is fully aware of the current and fundamental changes in regional countries and expresses his analysis of the current state of these countries both calmly and confidently. He considers the troubles the West Asia is struggling with unending. He believes that West Asian politicians are only busy solving day to day problems instead of finding a well-planned solution to the chronic issues of this region of the world. He is worried that these crises will be transferred to the next generations. He thinks that scrutinizing and finding the root cause of the current crises in the region requires a better understanding of history, civilization and society. Bogdanov reiterates that if the political actors were willing, we could solve the aforementioned challenges through negotiations. According to his assessment, the Western countries' invasion of some parts of the region is a step towards expansion and imposition of their political hegemony and thinks that recurrence of similar historical experiences in this regard is a possibility. He doesn't consider terrorism an exclusive phenomenon of Arabic and Islamic countries; terroristic actions usually follow political goals and active terrorist groups in the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan and … have been activated by superpowers whose main goal is to topple the regimes which do not pay tribute to them or follow their orders; however, this strategy has always led to reverse results. The Russian President's Special Representative describes his country's cooperation with Iran in fighting terrorist groups in Syria as fruitful and also believes that a series of economic and political initiatives are necessary to enhance and support field victories. To his reckoning, adopting "active politics" in Russia is the main factor in regional victories and relying on US regional policies is the main cause of his country's failure. His view is that the war that Western countries waged against Iraq was a crime. He thinks that Iran and Russia can neutralize America's pressures by taking advantage of their history and making use of the potential of their economy and people and as a result have their own way in the region. The Tehran Foreign Policy Studies Quarterly discussed different central points of the current transformations in West Asia and the world with Bogdanov in a friendly meeting with him in his office in Moscow which presents to you in the following section.

Israel's strategy in Africa is defined based on security and defense aspects. According to this strategy, the Zionist regime is strategically super sensitive about the Red Sea region. As stated by some strategic and military theorists, the Red Sea is the artery of Arabs' security; therefore, the Zionists have always tried to prevent this sea to become an Arabic sea through political and non-political methods. The Zionist regime has found its way into the African continent by founding companies in industry, farming, livestock and poultry farming, farming training, shipment, airline industry and so on and so forth. Tel Aviv has put fighting Islam at the head of its macro-strategic agenda in Africa and is supporting Jewish minorities in African countries in order to help them reach the power pyramid. To sum up, the Zionist regime's plans in the Green Continent are mainly of military and strategic nature, and Israeli experts sent to these countries supposedly as economic and cultural experts are in fact spies trying to collect information.

The new chapter of crisis in the Korean Peninsula started about the beginning of the American new government and North Korea's ballistic missile test in February 2017. The test was immediately met with the American President Donald Trump's indignant reaction and the tensions reached worrying levels which also engaged different political actors such as China, Russia, South Korea and Japan. The important point we should keep in mind about the behavior of political units is that these behaviors are influenced by diverse factors inside the international system structure. One of these factors is the position and prestige of the political actors. The structure is composed of a series of behaviors or reciprocal actions of the political actors. What the reactor understands from the others' actions dictates its behavior. The behaviors are the signals that the political actors send in different situations and other actors interpret and perceive them differently. The pattern of recent US-North Korea reciprocal actions has been the subject of many questions including "what role has the international system played under these circumstances?" The researcher's hypothesis is that "North Korea's action is based on a wrong perception of the behavior or signals America is sending as the main actor of the international system". This hypothesis can perfectly explain North Korea's behavioral pattern in recent crisis. Is this claim well-grounded that North Korea has interpreted America's previous selfcontrol as weakness, or we should assume that North Korea interpreted Trump's own behavior as a signal of vulnerability and weakness? This article attempts at explaining America and North Korea's behavior and reciprocal actions based on this variable.

Extremism was formed as a reaction to the negative and hostile approaches of Western countries in Islamic lands. Facing with spreading power of the Eastern bloc, the Western bloc decided to take advantage of the sacred Jihad in order to provoke Muslim people of Afghanistan into taking action against the former Soviet Union occupation of this country and exploit Takfiri-terrorist groups to help it achieve its goals in the Cold War. The West played its negative role in helping to form and enhance extremist thoughts and terrorist groups; however, these groups later turned into many risks and security threats for Europe and America. Today, extremism and terrorism is the social and security issue of the western countries.

Syria's economic arena was not only transformed by global transformations and internal crisis; this field was already in need of serious change in order to design a framework for economic activities and operations and strengthen different methods of resistance and development based on sustainable foundations. In the light of these facts, the suggestion for Syria's reconstruction plan gains special importance. It's about time that negative and passive stand against the crisis turned into positive efficient position, which would be possible by support and networking among all the social forces. We don't intend to underestimate the successful, popular and important reconstruction plan as a resistance strategy; however, we first need to formulate a thought framework for the reconstruction plan and development axes from a macro viewpoint to the economic identity of Syria. In addition to that, we should also contemplate flexibility and stepby- step development in reaching macro and micro goals, along with their sectional, geographical and temporal connection in economic, social and ecological scales. The monopoly and development of economic activities should also be inside the supreme national principals and foundations framework.