نشریه تحقیقات سیاسی و بین المللی
پیاپی 43 (تابستان 1399)

This study seeks to investigate the origin of terrorist groups and organizations. Al-Qaeda and ISIL were selected as the largest study groups in the Middle East as the largest terrorist groups. Since the phenomena studied in the modern world cannot be thought of as sudden and exotic phenomena, this study therefore considers the evolutionary process of these groups and organizations in the context of history. With this attitude, in response to the main research question, what are the root causes of the formation of terrorist groups and organizations in the Middle East? The main hypothesis of this study is that terrorist groups and organizations present in the modern world have a historical and intellectual background that can be studied from the perspective of genealogy. This research has attempted to add credible and diverse sources to the existing literature in this field. This research is a descriptive and analytical one and the method of data collection is documentary and library.

After a nuclear deal, that so called as jcpoa, two paradigm (like& dislike) emerged in the public opinion. With U.S withdrawal from this international and formal agreement, second paradigm was developed. The question of this article is: with the withdrawal of the U.S from JCPOA, Iran what to do and what s the basis for a step - by – step Irans Duty Reduction of this Agreement? What did the other partners face when they signed the agreement that had many critics on both sides? Two results of the research are: at first Iran and 5+1 faced with many limites when they sigend this document.they do this act based on Herbert Alexander Simon bounded rationality Theory despite their wishes and disagreement of some part of their people. Second, with U.S withdrawal, if the Islamic Republic of Iran considers the reduction of obligation to deal, oppose to its national interests, according to the trigger mechanism, the legal and political capability is to reduce the obligations or return to the conditions of pre deal. This research based on analytical & descriptive method. With the emphasis on documentary decision analysis on the theories of Herbert Simon and Jack Snyder.

As an anti-security behavior, bioterrorism is a by-product of globalization threatening the human-being societies, governmental structures and international security. prioritizing the death politics and the discourse of hatred and fear as foundation of bioterrorist behavior led to transition from information to terrorism era in the 21st century. So, the nexus between power- knowledge thanks to the development of biological literatures and technologies turned to bidimensional issue functioning both for medical and political affairs. Such a dialectical professions waxing with the growth of techno-financial, logistic-organizational resources. Thus, the main question of the current paper is to analyze the relation between bioterrorism and security. By focusing on the negative relation between security and bioterrorism, the tentative hypothesis perceives the increasing of one is tantamount to decreasing of the other. So, thoroughly totalizing the institutional chain of medical politics and understanding politics as medicalization is the main suggestion of the current research in which securitization of healthy and medicalization of security will not only increase the societal security but also leading to proliferation of healthy social forces in the international politics. Finally, by employing the analytical method and functioning the conflict management and responsibility to protect, this paper will test the proposed hypothesis.

Latin America as a geopolitical region has recently found a special place in Turkish and Iranian foreign policy. Given their proximity and competition in the Middle East, their presence in the region of Latin America and their strategy for this region is crucial and significant. So the main question in this article is, what are the patterns of Turkish and Iranian foreign policy in Latin America? In this regard, the main hypothesis of the paper is that Turkey's foreign policy model in the region of Latin America is based on economy motivations, while Iran's model in that region is identity-based and ideological one. In addition, the research findings show that due to the political changes especially the relocation of the ruling parties that the Latin American region is constantly experiencing, the economy-based model will be more effective in maintaining long-term relationships than the identity-based and ideological approach. Meanwhile, The research method in this paper is descriptive-analytical with a comparative approach.

Authors of this research have tried to understand the role of security dilemma in the context of Iran-Saudi Arabia Rivalry. The main question is that how security dilemma has impacted the rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The main hypothesis is that the severity of security dilemma has exacerbated the rivalry and tension between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It is tried to define an explanatory status of security dilemma and its level of impact on this rivalry in the pre- and post-Islamic Revolution era. The research method of this paper is descriptive-analytical with emphasis on theoretical analysis. This research, based on rational theory of international relations, finds that security dilemma between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the post-Islamic Revolution era is much more severe than pre-Islamic Revolution but the moderate level of security dilemma between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the pre-Islamic Revolution had a determining impact on lack of deep and serious cooperation between the two countries. The severe level of security dilemma between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the post-Islamic Revolution era has had a facilitating impact on rivalry between the two countries.

The international arena has always been the site of competition for state actors. After World War II, the will of the international community to internationalize and legalize internationally formed bodies such as the United Nations was to peacefully resolve its crises and issues through collective action. To be solved by the international community. Due to the growing need for human rights, civil laws were developed in the field, one of which was the principle of responsibility for responding to human rights abuses in Rwanda, Kosovo and Bosnia. This principle was defined as a timely and decisive response to acts of violence by the Security Council on behalf of the international community. The question here is: Why does the Security Council doctrine of responsibility for support in Libya but not Syria? In response to this question, it is suggested that the consensus of the great powers in the application of the doctrine of responsibility for protection in Libya and the lack of consensus of the great powers in the absence of this principle in Syria overpower Has led to the law.