Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract In international relations, those who impose sanctions have different motives for using this tool. A change in the US government's policy toward the Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or the JCPOA, is a notable issue in this regard. The question asked by the present article is: Where was the theoretical point of departure for the difference in sanctions diplomacy under US President Donald Trump and his predecessor Barack Obama toward Iran despite its commitment to the terms of the agreement? The article's hypothesis is that while the Obama administration's sanctions policy was more based on a motivation to make Iran committed to conforming to international norms, the Trump administration's main objective is to advance US interests as far as possible regardless of international legal restrictions. From this perspective, the nuclear deal was considered effective by the Obama administration, while the Trump administration regards it as ineffective. The hypothesis is theoretically based on realism and liberalism theories about the function of sanctions in international relations and has been studied here using an analytical-explanatory model and reliable data.
 
 

Abstract This article tries to discuss status of justice and dialogue in practices of international security. The main question is that “how can dialogue make a more just international security? Realism, liberalism and constructivism can explain the status of dialogue. The process of globalization and emergence of fundamentalism has entered dialogue into theory and practice. In other words, dialogue and globalization have mutual relationship, which means that globalization could strengthen dialogue and dialogue helps globalization process.  From other point of view, dialogue and justice in practice through communicative action and tolerance which are based on rationality, can exclude fundamentalism.  This article first reviews genealogy of dialogue and justice then explains their status in international security using international theories. The last section explores this article’s relation with globalization and fundamentalism.

Abstract : Israeli politicians, in the early years of formation, argued that revolution and dispute in Arab states is in favor of Israel security. They supposed that democratic Arab states will decrease hostility toward Israel. Despite that supposition, since Arab spring, Israel security is confronting a great challenge.   Possible spread of Arab spring to Israel, and also increasing fragility of Israel state, is real threats against Israel.

Abstract The report of the UN Development Program (UNDP) in 1994 describes human security as a situation in which the people are free of any pressures and restrictions surrounding human development.   This survey considers the questions that why the concept of human security enters into the security related texts and research circles. It also raises another question regarding the aims of the concept and its usefulness. Finally the paper concludes with discussing the link between human oriented and state oriented security.   For the author of this paper, the concept of human security demonstrates that it is not enough to limit the analyses to merely realism, as the dominant paradigm in the context of state oriented security, but this concept calls for Realism to explain that when state is not a tool of security, why we should assume it as the reference of security?

Abstract Analysis of foreign policy in the international arena is a principal issue for Political Science as well as International Relations and so far many views and analyses have been provided in this area. While, during the early phases, Realism was the dominant approach in analysis of foreign policy, in the aftermath of the revolution in behavioral sciences, three new views, including, decision making process, comparative foreign policy and psychological environment were created. However, with the development of Post-Positivism in the field of Social Science three other new approaches are produced which are: Institutional Approach, Sociological Approach, and Culture and Identity Approach. Therefore, while considering these approaches, in order to provide a new analysis on International Relations, the author of this paper attempts to build a link between these new approaches. 

Abstract Academic books and resources as one of the main references in studying the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran are focused and considered in this paper. Therefore, the paper attempts to find out what principles and foundations are introduced in those texts? Based on this paper's hypothesis, the main concern of these texts has been the conflict of Idealism versus Realism which is illustrated in three sections: historical aspect, Idealism versus Realism in the context of the Revolutionary, Islamic and Nationalistic approaches and finally some suggestions to coupe with paradoxical issues in this regard.

Abstract The realistic discourse based on "State" which assumes State as the only interactor in the field of politics and international relations, has been changed and redefined due to the following factors: new developments of the post Cold War era, globalization, interdependency, spreading role of transnational social movements, global civil society, national and international NGOs and growing terrorist groups. The present study while using James Rosenoua's triple approaches on International Relations, intends to illustrate the transition from an interactor attitude of State in Realism, and also to survey its conceptual developments in an age when Pluralism is its prominent aspect. Finally the author concludes with evaluation and criticism of the current views on State.

Abstract This paper focuses on developments of the concept of humanitarian intervention through the prism of theories of International Relations. Humanitarian intervention as a rule is a difficult experiment for the international community which is mainly based on principals of sovereignty, non–intervention and not to use of force.  With the globalization of human rights and paying special attention to prohibition of genocide, torture and breach of basic human rights, this humanitarian principal is in conflict with the principals of sovereignty and non– intervention. In the mean time, this concept has experienced a deep change prior to and after the Cold War era. Here, first the concept of intervention is addressed with using the theories of Realism and Liberalism. Then, while using the theory of Constructivism, the concept of humanitarian intervention, as a normative, value-based and international rule is discussed and finally the development of the concept of humanitarian intervention is illustrated, as a whole, in International Relations.

Abstract Regarding Iraq War, there have been a conflict between two rival theory in International policy, namely realism & neo – conservatism. In view pf neo – conservatism, democracy is the most powerful political idealogy in the world. Accordingly, if united statetes attempts to build on a world based on democracy, peace will be developed. They stressed on the importance of development of democracy in the middle east by military means and occupation of iraq was one of the first steps in this regared. In contrast, realists believe that we do not live in a world based on opportunism but in a world based on balance of powers. In their view, the most powerful political idealogy is nationalism not democracy. Therefor, invading and occupying nations have very high costs and creating the conditions for developing nationalism and arising unstability

Abstract We witnessed a new school in international politics so called neo-realism after Hans Morgenthau's dead in July 1980. Kenneth Waltz – the notably scientist in IR – made some adjustments in realism produced by Morgenthau for analyzing international order and disorder in his The Theory of International Politics. In the paper could be found the differentiations between Realism and Neo- Realism in concerned with Waltz's book, so it needs to respond what is the cognitive manner and international security analyses in Neo-Realism? With the reviewing the adjustments and the presuppositions and the key concepts of Neo- Realism it is make popper condition for focus on four main ideas of it. Rethinking the essential suppositions of realism by Neo-realism, the author argues; make proper explanation in international security for regarding to dynamic nature and logics of affairs and conception.

Abstract International relations field is crafted to study interactions among the states and to explain and to predict their conducts. Perhaps this is the reason why some have described international relations theory as the theory of relations among the states. What is discussed in international relations includes a wide range of varying subjects comprising of the states’ foreign policies within the international system, international organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and multinational companies, proliferation of nuclear weapons, environmental questions, nationalism, international political economy and issues related to economic development and human rights all of which have a bearing on the state.   The state, if not as the single actor rather as one of the most important concepts in international relations, possesses a critical status in the discipline’s theories, and it has passed considerable transformations. All of the international relations theories have dealt with the subject and each of them presents its particular outlook on the nature, domain, range of activity and power of the state,Considering the fundamental assumptions of each of the international relations theories, this article examines the concept of state and its change in a variety of theories in this discipline.

Abstract This article seeks to answer the question that what the factual understanding is and how it is possible. The author’s hypothesis is that in the realist understanding, ‘causal explanation’ takes precedence over the ‘description’ (as is common in the hermeneutic outlook) and over the ‘prescription’ (as is prevalent in logical positivism). This article has chosen Hobbes’ Leviathan as the classical example of realist analysis and has founded its arguments on that everlasting work and explained them. On this ground, initially the key teachings of the realist school are described in the context of four categories, namely the conviction and truth, definition of positions based on power, according priority to political morality, and granting independence to the sphere of political action, and then methodological requirements of realism are offered. The author, in this section, refers to materialism, analysis and synthesis of statements, nominalist semiotics of concepts and finally the definition of conditions according to their antitheses, and concludes that Leviathan is though the most important reference in the modern political science, the book fails to deal with such issues as how such facts like national interests and the Leviathan’s interests are distinguished and separated. Other facts include how savage and wild human beings conclude and enforce a contract, and more importantly, whether the rationalist reason is reliable in justifying all human behaviors.