Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract Balance of power theory, once regarded as the “iron law” of international politics, encountered serious explanatory challenges in the post–Cold War era. However, China’s rapid rise over the past two decades has once again brought the logic of balancing to the center of academic debate. Nevertheless, the principal balance of power in the contemporary international system—between the United States and a rising China—has moved beyond traditional patterns of balancing toward an active strategy that can be described as the “disruption of the balancing process.” Accordingly, this study distinguishes between “balancing as an automatic structural outcome” and “balance-making as an intentional, agent-driven process” in order to address the following question: how can a dominant power delay this outcome and render its position of superiority more durable? Drawing on neoclassical realist insights and integrating the concepts of “underbalancing” and “resource mobilization,” the study argues that the United States has disrupted the natural process of international balancing through a model of “hybrid and networked balance-making.” This interventionist strategy, grounded in the securitization of trade and technology, seeks to prevent the emergence of rival poles in the global order by moving beyond traditional alliances toward new forms of multilateral linkages. It should be noted that this research adopts a fundamental–developmental orientation and employs a case study (U.S. balancing disruption vis-à-vis China) alongside process tracing. To achieve its objectives, the study utilizes a mixed-methods approach within a scientific-empirical paradigm, enabling both systematic data usage and analytical interpretation.

Abstract Introduction
The relationship between Iran and the United States has been turbulent, especially following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have used different strategies to pressure Iran, making this one of the most complex relationships in international affairs. Examining this dynamic—particularly in light of major historical events like the 1953 coup and the post-1979 tensions—is a multi-layered challenge that goes beyond politics. It also involves sociology, economics, and security studies, reflecting the deep and evolving complexities of global power structures. However, over the years, scholars and analysts have studied the various strategies the U.S. has employed against Iran, identifying patterns of hostility. This paper focuses on the Biden administration’s approach, assessing how it builds on past U.S. policies while introducing its own methods in response to global changes.
Methodology
This study explores a key question: What framework defines the "Hybrid Containment" strategy used by the Biden administration against Iran? The main goal is to understand how the U.S. applies a mix of tactics to exert pressure on Iran. The research is both theoretical and practical, contributing to policy discussions while offering operational insights. It relies on documentary and library sources, combining deductive and inductive reasoning, and uses a descriptive-analytical approach for interpretation. Since the study is exploratory, it does not test specific hypotheses.
Discussion and Results
The study finds that the Biden administration’s approach to Iran falls under the concept of "Hybrid Containment in a Complex Environment." This strategy reflects the unpredictable and deeply interconnected nature of economic, security, and social factors influencing global relations today. Because of this complexity, two key aspects—planning and exploitation —are essential. The U.S. aims not only to structure a containment strategy for Iran but also to take advantage of unexpected developments and interactions.
Washington’s approach involves two main elements: deterrence (blocking Iran’s actions) and compellence (forcing Iran to comply). This strategy is shaped by broader shifts in global power dynamics, particularly the U.S. effort to manage its declining influence while countering emerging powers like China. Moreover, the foundation of U.S. policy toward Iran operates on two levels. The first level concerns Iran itself—its post-revolution identity and the nature of the Islamic Republic. The second level involves Iran’s geopolitical and economic significance, particularly its role in China’s Belt and Road Initiative and Russia’s access to southern trade routes. The Ukraine war has, in turn, increased Iran’s strategic importance in global trade.
To counter Iran’s influence, the U.S. has adopted two key strategies:

"Neither Negotiation nor Confrontation" – Keeping Iran in a frozen state diplomatically while minimizing its geopolitical relevance.
Undermining the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic – Portraying Iran as ineffective and creating social divisions.

Within these strategies, the U.S. and its allies employ various techniques. One common approach is gray-zone deterrence, applying pressure below the threshold of open war to limit Iran’s ability to respond. Specific tactics include:

Expanding economic sanctions, disrupting Iran’s oil exports, and interfering with financial transactions.
Supporting a network of terrorist groups and regional allies—including India, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel—as a counterweight to Iran’s axis of resistance and China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Using media and psychological tactics to weaken Iran’s domestic unity, polarizing society, and questioning the future of the resistance movement.

Conclusion
The Biden administration’s Iran strategy reflects a blend of historical precedents and modern geopolitical shifts. Its hybrid containment model operates within a deeply interconnected global environment, balancing deterrence with strategic exploitation. The U.S. aims to limit Iran’s regional influence while shaping a global order that preserves American power in an era of rising competition.

Abstract Introduction The rise of China as a major power is one of the most significant developments in global politics in the 21st century. As a result, this has sparked concerns from the United States and Southeast Asian countries. In response, Washington has implemented its grand strategy to enhance deterrence and maintain the balance of power in Asia through the "Pivot to Asia" and "Indo-Pacific" strategies. Chinese leadership, on the other hand, views these American strategies as intensifying the security dilemma in the region, which not only increases the likelihood of direct confrontation, but also poses a serious challenge to China's growth trajectory. Given the current situation and China's desire for economic development and strategic engagement with Washington, the question is “What strategy should Beijing adopt to avoid being harmed by pressure from the United States and its allies in Southeast Asia?” China's actions suggest that it has adopted what is known as a "hedging" strategy to secure its strategic interests while avoiding confrontation with the US. Indeed, it seeks to foster its development by leveraging its strategic engagement with the US. In other words, Beijing has endeavored to respond decisively but with strategic caution, to avoid conflict with the US, prevent anti-balancing coalitions (by Southeast Asian countries), and ensure the continuation of its power growth. The hedging strategy is a thoughtful approach that manifests as a cautious response to risks in a constructive, peaceful, and non-confrontational manner. It closely aligns with Beijing's peaceful diplomacy in the region, aimed at maximizing benefits and minimizing threats. In general, China's hedging strategy is based on two pillars: first, reassuring its surrounding environment (Southeast Asia) regarding the benign consequences of Beijing's growing power; and second, indirectly balancing the US through soft competition.   Methodology The article's hypothesis is examined through a descriptive-analytical method and involves two main variables: First, the independent variable, which includes the "Pivot to Asia" strategy—a form of rebalancing by the United States against China—and the "Indo-Pacific" strategy, which represents an aggressive policy by the United States towards China. Second, the dependent variable is China's hedging strategy.   Result and Discussion The relationship between China and the United States, as two major powers, has ranged from cooperation to competition over the past two decades. Throughout this period, Chinese political leaders (from the second generation of leadership to the present) have sought to secure their interests and respond to threats by addressing structural and domestic factors. In essence, China's foreign policy has been based on economic growth aimed at peaceful development and strategic caution in the face of security risks. This approach has enabled Beijing to take steady steps towards continued economic growth and, in parallel, enhance and stabilize its power in the region as it entered the new millennium. In the meantime, China's increasing role in Asia and its high potential to become a hegemon prompted the United States to operationalize its strategy to enhance deterrence and contain Beijing through the "Pivot to Asia" and "Indo-Pacific" strategies. In response, Beijing adopted the hedging strategy as its Asian policy.   Conclusion Beijing's hedging strategy is structured in two layers. The initial layer itself has two dimensions. The first pertains to the mutual dependency between Beijing and the United States, which China seeks to maintain and exploit to sustain its power growth. The second relates to China's growing security concerns regarding threats from the US, which may lead to a confrontation. These considerations have driven China to manage its relations carefully and avoid geopolitical competition with the US. The subsequent layer concerns Beijing's response to US actions in its surrounding environment, namely Southeast Asia. In this regard, Beijing has attempted to overcome challenges posed by the US by adopting a "reassurance approach" to weaken any coalitions against China.

Abstract The study is aimed at investigating the attitude adopted by the Chinese toward the issue of security. The main question is what approach and methods China has employed in recent decades to provide security in the country. The researchers argue that the new generation of Chinese leaders have realized the ineffectiveness of a negative attitude to security in this era and have adopted a positive stance in this regard, which calls for a comprehensive security approach and cooperation with the international community to address security challenges and ensure security. This way they have managed to deal with many of domestic and foreign security challenges at a lower cost.