Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs
Volume:12 Issue: 2, Summer-Autumn 2021

This paper tries to examine the role and position of parliamentary diplomacy in today's international relations with a brief review of the history of diplomacy, its evolution in the span of time, and the formation of new types of diplomacy. The paper also seeks to answer questions about the role of parliaments in today's international relations as well as the position of parliamentary diplomacy within the framework of regional and international cooperation. However, it is generally opined that parliamentary diplomacy is not competing with traditional state-oriented diplomacy as parallel diplomacy. Rather, by emphasizing the continuation of the Westphalian model of nation-states in today's international system, it serves as a complementary tool to state diplomacy in favor of securing the national interests of countries.

In most target countries unilateral sanctions act as obstacles that deprive nationals of human rights, particularly economic rights. This descriptive-analytical study to assess the legitimacy of US sanctions from a human rights perspective, especially in relation to ICESCR, seeks to answer the following question: On what basis can the US government be committed to respecting the human rights of Iranians in imposing unilateral sanctions? It is necessary to prove the existence of such an obligation since a State is considered internationally responsible if it violates a proven obligation. As it assumes that all states have the commitment to cooperate for the fulfillment of human rights for all human beings, the findings of this study according to CESCR comments, show that obligations that are related to economic human rights including the obligation to respect and cooperate can be considered extraterritorial, as well. Regarding Iranians residing in America, the US government must respect and uphold these economic human rights in its territory and regarding the Iranians who are within a third country, a blend of (Extra)territorial obligations are raised for America and the countries in which Iranians reside.

Soft power is one of the main concepts in international politics. Decision-makers and policymakers in this field seek to be able to achieve their foreign policy goals. Therefore, gaining international prestige and influence in public opinion are among the important and at the same time unspecified goals of countries' diplomacy in the field of international politics. Since the 1950s, the issue of soft power has entered the political literature of Saudi Arabia. This issue, which has long been the focus of Saudi officials, has originated from a variety of sources. An attempt is made, on the one hand, to describe the potential resources that have made it possible for the foreign policy apparatus of this country to be used, and on the other hand, to show the position of soft power in the country's foreign policy in the Middle East and the Islamic world, Also, what effect will this Saudi action have on the foreign policy of the countries in the region, especially the Islamic Republic of Iran. The question is, what are the main sources of Saudi soft power? And what are the consequences for the regional position of the Islamic Republic of Iran? The main sources of Saudi Arabia's soft power production include Cultural, economic, and international resources. In case of successful use of these resources by Saudi Arabia, it will have consequences for Iran such as reducing Iran's influence in the region, promoting anti-Shiism in the region, and weakening Iran's leadership position in the region.

Saudi Arabia expresses fears from Iran that are in some cases genuine and in other cases insincere. To see whether or not Saudis are sincere in their fear expressions from Iran, an analytical tool is developed in this paper linking securitization theory to theories of truth-verification. Analyzing Mohammad bin Salman’s interview about Iran with Jeffrey Goldberg from the Atlantic using the indicators extracted from context-oriented theories of deception-detection, this paper demonstrated that the assertions the Saudi Crown Prince made about Iran reflect both true apprehensions and unfounded misrepresentations, with the balance in favor of the latter. This study demonstrated that context-oriented truth verification theories of social sciences are useful in foreign policy studies to distinguish states’ securitizing moves from their sincere fear expressions. The methodology of this article is based on a descriptive-explanatory approach that seeks to shed light on how Saudi leaders try to securitize Iran's identity in the region.

The recent geopolitical transformations that have seen a strengthening of India-U.S. bilateral relations along with strained U.S.-Iran and U.S.-China ties have pushed India into a difficult strategic position with Iran.  Along with the heightened India-China tensions, the proposed China-Iran deal gives China more leverage with Iran, impacting India’s long-term strategic economic relations with the latter. The recent agreements and partnership between Iran and China reflected in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the draft 25- year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) will pave the way for long-term strategic cooperation between the two countries. The agreement per se and the growing closer ties between Beijing and Tehran can have challenges for India's relations with Iran and interests in the Persian Gulf region. Nonetheless, it is unlikely to affect India-Iran bilateral ties that remain robust seriously and has withstood challenges earlier, and the comprehensive strategic partnership shall not be an exception. India’s stake in the situation hinges on its interest in Iranian natural gas reserves and its desire for continued participation in the Chabahar port project with Iran. With the deal now inked and considering India’s changing geopolitical and security environment vis-a-vis China, what are the key implications of the China-Iran pact for India? How can New Delhi respond to Beijing’s major drive to support Tehran?

China's foreign policy has undergone a real change since World War II. Since the economic recovery, Beijing has adopted a coherent and clear strategy for all regions, including the Eurasian macro-region. The research question is “what model can be used to analyze China's foreign policy strategy in Eurasia and what is Iran's position in this strategy?’’ In response, China's foreign policy strategy in Eurasia can be analyzed from the Western point of view according to the Hobbesian realist model, from the Russian point of view according to Locke’s competitive opportunity-threat model, and finally from the Chinese point of view according to the Kantian model of cooperation. The results also show that Iran is increasingly important in China's foreign policy strategy in Eurasia, but Chinese pragmatism under the influence of international sanctions has made Turkey and Pakistan the main priorities in the country's strategy in Eurasia. The purpose of this research is to examine the patterns of analysis of China's foreign policy strategy in Eurasia with an emphasis on Iran's position. The method of this research is case adaptation to the theory.

Russia's involvement in the Syrian crisis has changed from a limited action to a fundamental strategy. Russia, which was ousted from the club of great powers after the collapse of the Soviet Union, was looking for an opportunity to return. Restoring the position of "great power" is Putin's main idea based on the identity and historical foundations of the Russians. In this regard, the Syrian crisis has been a turning point in the process of reviving the position of Russia's great power. Accordingly, the main question of the article is: "What role has Iran played in restoring Russia's great power position, especially in the Syrian crisis?" The hypothesis is formulated as follows: "During the Syrian crisis, Russia has used a hedging strategy in the Middle East. Russia's special relationship with Iran in the Syrian crisis has been Russia's relative advantage, which has played a significant role in restoring Russia's status as a great power. Russia implemented a hedging strategy with a holistic alliance". The data of this article are collected from new and comprehensive sources and processed in a descriptive-analytical method.

The war in Ukraine and the prospect of continuing and even intensifying tensions in Russia's relations with the West have strongly affected its foreign policy priorities. The "Look East" Strategy, which has historical roots in Russian foreign policy and has been more seriously pursued by the Kremlin since the second half of the 1990s and especially in the last decade, has become the dominant approach in Moscow's foreign policy. In fact, after the war in Ukraine, Russia has no choice but to go east. In this situation, the question is how the war in Ukraine will affect Russian policy toward the Middle East and Iran. What changes will happen in Russia's foreign policy regarding this region? It seems that parallel to the dominance of the "Look East" approach in Russia's foreign policy, the Middle East will also find a more strategic position in the country's foreign policy priorities. After the war in Ukraine, Russia will need to maintain and strengthen relations with the Middle East countries especially Iran much more than before in order to reduce the consequences of the political and economic pressures of the West. The methodology of this research is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is the library. In this regard, books, articles, documents, and Internet resources have been used to collect data.

The present study seeks to answer the question, of why the EU despite its political will to expand relations with Iran and its efforts, in particular, to maintain the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) within the framework of the designed mechanisms, failed to exercise its strategic independence and fulfill its obligations within JCPOA? The findings show that the lack of European strategic independence is due to its transatlantic dependence on three levels: Institutional security deficit, Asymmetric interdependence in the economic sphere, and the preferences of European transnational corporations concerning US markets. At the level of the institutional security deficit, Given the United States security umbrella and the 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 highly intertwined transatlantic investment interactions and the asymmetry of this relationship (US strategic economic superiority) has severely limited the possibility of EU economic action independence. The methodology of this research is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection in the library. In this regard, books, articles, documents, Internet resources, and comments of relevant officials have been used to collect data.

Iraqi Kurdistan has adopted an independent foreign policy from the Iraqi central government in the past two decades; This foreign policy is based on a different model and strategy that aims at independence. In this regard, considering the importance and determinant nature</span> </span>of Iran’s regional policy in the face of regional developments such as the disintegration of neighboring countries along with Tehran’s position on the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan, Erbil is leveraging a strategic model of balance of threat towards the confrontation between Tehran and Tel Aviv. Accordingly, the present study seeks to explain why and how this strategy is adopted by the Iraqi Kurdistan toward the confrontation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Zionist regime. Therefore, the main question is "what is the rationale for Iraqi Kurdistan to understand the Iranian threat?" The hypothesis is that due to its historical components, different organizational and social identities, differences in power levels, and personal factors (mindsets of the leaders), Iraqi Kurdistan sees the Islamic Republic of Iran as an obstacle to the way of realization of its independence. Therefore, Iraqi Kurdistan in the Zionism-Iranian confrontation pursues a unique strategy based on the balance of threat. This essay is an analytical-explanatory study that has been done using a combination of theoretical frameworks of the balance of threat and constructivism. Furthermore, the research method in this essay is based on trend analysis.

Social groups and movements are considered a fundamental socio-political force in all countries that intend to get back on the public demands especially when the authorities are not able or eager to do so. Anti-war groups are among the most pivotal social groups that focus on the establishment of sustainable peace in communities so, since the second half of the twentieth century, their efforts have been regarded as the determinant factor in world politics. This paper aims to study the origins and functions of those American anti-war organizations that oppose US war policies mainly against Iran after the September 11th</sup> Attacks. Archival research and historical analysis of the role of these groups and organizations demonstrate that they came into existence in response to the ever-growing global conflicts and created social campaigns for peace without governmental interventions. Similarly, due to the increasing violence and conflict between Iran and the United States during recent decades, the groups such as A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition, Code Pink, International Action Center (IAC), Peace Action West, United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) expressed their opposition against war </strong>with Iran mainly after September 11th</sup> and have been progressive and helpful in some cases. Nevertheless, in spite of their long history of activism and firm institutions could never seriously disobey US government regulations and policies.