فصلنامه روابط خارجی
پیاپی 41 (بهار 1398)

The Middle East region due to its strategic position in the international equations has always been considered in the strategic documents of the United States in accordance with the current developments. In the Cold War era, the Middle East's position in US doctrines and strategic documents affected by the atmosphere of this era was defined on maintaining the America's favorable balance of power, with emphasizing on the role of regional actors and their supportive role. In the post-Cold War era, the strategy of liberal hegemony was first considered. But the failure of this strategy to achieve its predetermined goals, has caused America's reassessment of interests and international threats, avoided focusing on one region or threat within the framework of offshore balancing strategy and making balancing strategic areas such as the Middle East. Accordingly, in the context of balancing strategic areas, the United States has sought to shift east Asia, reduce direct military presence in the Middle East, and manage it through regional actors. Given the complex US strategies in the Middle East to create a new regional order, this main question is arisen that" Shifting Middle East Position in US National Security Strategy Documents since Obama period, what impact will it have on Iran's national security as a regional power? In answer to the main question, the main hypothesis is: "the offshore balancing strategy adoption from US, simultaneity with reduction US direct military presence in middle east region, causes increasing competition between Iran and its other regional allied".

The volume of bilateral trade relations of the Islamic republic of Iran and the UAE show two countries have agreeable and favorable collaborations in economic dimension, but they have political conflicts. The present study uses a descriptive- explanatory method to answer this question: what are the reasons for the continuation of economic cooperation between Iran and the UAE in spite of the components of political divergence? The Hypothesis of this investigation is that the reason for the continuity of economic cooperation despite political conflicts is the interdependence of the two countries in the economic dimension in the Persian Gulf. The findings of this study show that the most important reasons of economic cooperation between two countries are: the UAE as confederacy, economic gate and as re-export station for Iran, Iranian commercial presentation and registration of economic companies in the UAE, investment of Iran and Iran’s economic need for the UAE and vice versa and the UAE’s revenues from Iran’s sanctions. The aim is to emphasize the important of economic interdependence between countries in reducing political tensions and continuing political cooperation and important of Dubai position in the strategy of Iran’s political economy.

One of the important effective zones on Iran’s national and regional security from the beginning of the new anno domini millennium, has been the increasing relations between China and Saudi Arabia. The aim of present article besides description of procedures that led to development the China and Saudi Arabia’s relation, is answering to this question that what is the safety outcomes of expansion relation between china (as a one near superpowers to Iran) and Saudi Arabia (as an important regional rival of Iran) from the beginning of the new anno domini millennium on Iran? This article besides mentioning to the incremental relations of the two countries in different fields and by reliance on explanatory-descriptive method believes that the development of china and Saudi Arabia’s relationship can accompany with Iran’s isolation and safety outcomes in national, regional and international arenas. The consequences of this research show that this increasing relation in national area especially in economic zone, makes a context for harming Iran in transferring energy and absorption of foreign capital and in political zone, causes to debilitating the defensive capacity and confirms the menace basement attitude of Iran. This relation in regional level causes to changing the balance of regional power against Iran and passivity of china in regional crisis and eventually in international area, makes china more normative in present international order and increases the America and its regional alliances’ capacity in making consensus against Iran, especially in crisis situation.

This paper aims to understand the key variables influencing changes and continuities of Turkish foreign policy in the post- Arab revolutions, in a systematic way. The Arab revolutions, as an exogenous shock by transforming the structure of regional power and identity, providing uncertain opportunities and threats, has severely changed Turkish assertive and soft power-based foreign policy vision. Over the past decade, regional developments have provided space for Turkey to seek a more active and assertive role in the region, though Turkey’s own limitations, policy choices, and regional dynamics have somewhat restricted its ability to do so. This shift has gradually Middle Easternized Turkey’s foreign policy directions. Through the prism of the Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA), this paper seeks to formulate; what drivers (structural-internal) and how to shape Turkey's assertive and security-based foreign policy behavior in the post- Arab revolutions? To do so, the paper by analyzing the structural and internal determinants in changing Turkey's foreign policy approaches, highlights the role of mediating variables; especially the AKP leaders’ misperception to seize regional leadership, overestimation of their material and discursive capacities, and miscalculations of the shifting Middle East geopolitics and regional rival’s capabilities.

After the end of World War II and the end of the West-East bloc's cooperation in defeating the Allies, the rivalry between the two poles took a new form. Destroyed Europe came under American protection, and the Communist Soviet Union consolidated its influence to the gates of Berlin. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed to protect the Western alliance against the advance of communism, although it played a fundamentally deterrent role and did not actually enter military operation until the end of the Cold War. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO faced serious substantive questions. Does its existence have anything to do with the revival of European allies after World War II, as well as the elimination of its communist rival? However, the founders stressed the need to maintain this security and defense institution, and since then, ie for three decades, NATO's geographical and thematic scope has increased and, of course, it has actually entered into several operations. But what is clear is that NATO's transition period is still going on, and there are debates and analyzes among politicians and strategists. Meanwhile, the formation and development of the European Union and the establishment of its institutions have made the issue of European defense and security a central issue for the pioneers of the idea of a united Europe, and this perspective is vital for a regional power like Iran. In these circumstances, the recent developments (Brexit, election of Donald Trump, terrorism and Middle East immigrants, cyber security, Russian movements and the emergence of extremism) necessitate effective action to shape the European Defense Organization and determine the scope of NATO's mission and performance. More than ever. In this study, using library and documentary sources and explanatory-analytical methods to study the existing trends and opinions, the perspective of this relationship is defined in the framework of institutional security cooperation approach and relevant scenarios and related challenges are presented. Since dependence on the United States is defined in the form of NATO, the dominant European view in this institution is essentially to maintain the scope of action within the borders of the North Atlantic Ocean, while the US approach is to expand the geographical area and subject matter of NATO missions.

The world has witnessed Singapore's transition from a third world country to a developed industrialized nation within three decades. This article focuses on explaining this transition, the findings of this article illustrate the role of elites and the dominant political coalition in the emergence of the developmentist state in Singapore, the dominant elites and coalitions have had enough Developmentalist mental content and preferences and development goals. The mental content that has made political elites more inclined towards development goals than any other. Singapore is a prime example where an interventionist state has directed an industrialization policy and strategy through various institutions to create conducive environment with supporting hard and soft infrastructure. Despite the dominant role of its state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in industrial restructuring, the role of industrial policy in Singapore has been obscured because there is an equally heavy reliance on direct foreign investment (DFI)by multinational corporations (MNCs) for capital, expertise, technology and markets. The state creates the environment through incentives and market-supporting facilities, leaving the MNCs and DFI to invest. Fora highly export-oriented (EO), internationally competitive, small, open economy, Singapore has neither the resources nor the market base for a more ambitious industrial policy.