درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

After three years of enduring the immense failures and fallouts of the US “maximum pressure” sanctions imposed on Iran in the aftermath of the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal) in 2018, the Biden administration has signaled an important shift by promising to conduct a foreign policy that leads with diplomacy. The EU-brokered negotiations that have already taken place during the first half of 2021, although encountering some tactical obstacles and lack of momentum, nonetheless offer grounds for cautious optimism that the JCPOA can be rescued and that the return of all signatories to full compliance with the terms and conditions of the deal can be secured.The critical question that this article addresses is what are the key imperatives required for a durable outcome of the upcoming negotiations. This research is based on a critique of the failures of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” sanctions from the Ethical or Just War theoretical framework and the Utilitarian and Realist perspectives. The research methodologies are critical observation and empirical analysis. The article’s survey of the historical trajectory of US sanctions against Iran also supports this critique by clearly demonstrating that during periods of US over-reliance on sanctions to the exclusion of other foreign policy tools, including those of diplomacy, political engagement, and economic incentivization, successive administrations failed to advance their foreign policy goals and objectives vis-à-vis Iran. The article argues that rescuing Iran's nuclear deal and restoring its advantages for all signatories will require the implementation of essential US policy changes. It will also be necessary for the EU foreign policy establishment to direct its efforts to reinforce Biden’s inclination to return to the JCPOA in good faith with demonstrable full commitment to the terms of the original deal.

In many aspects, U.S. President Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy-making was in sharp contrast with that of his predecessors, particularly post-WWII presidents. His hostility toward the long-lasting liberal international order that was crafted and maintained by former presidents, his eccentric ways of solving foreign policy issues, and his unusual rhetoric regarding U.S. allies and adversaries, are all indications of his “unorthodox” foreign policy approach. In an attempt to explain this unorthodoxy, in this article we aim to examine Trump’s cognitions and compare them to those of his post-WWII predecessors. In particular, we have measured the cognitive complexity score for each of these presidents to determine Trump’s position among them. In order to do so, we have calculated the Flesch-Kincaid readability score of the presidents’ verbal statements, assuming that the complexity of the statements indicates the complexity of their author’s thoughts. The results have clearly demonstrated that Trump was at the lowest level of cognitive complexity among the presidents under examination, and since a low level of cognitive complexity pertains to viewing the situation from limited perspectives, a low need for broader information, adhering to a limited number of policy options, ignoring advice, and decisiveness, we may reasonably infer that his cognitive simplicity played an important role in the unorthodoxy of his foreign policy approach.

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.

The success of Developmental State in East Asia once again has proved the role of the state in the process of development and shed light on the weakness of Neoclassic theories in their emphasis on the role of the market as a balancing force. One of the necessary variables for the formation of a developmental state is the international context. Like many states in East Asia, the path toward development in post-revolution Iran seems to be through the formation of a developmental state in the context of the existing international system. But the reality is something different. Therefore, the objectives of the present paper are 1 - to study the relationship between the international context and formation of the developmental state in Iran; 2 – to study the role of the United States in the process of formation of the developmental state in Iran; 3 – to study the means the US has employed to block the formation of a developmental state in Iran; and, 4 – to study the role of Iran’s foreign policy behavior in the formation of the developmental state. The main question of the present paper is what are the international obstacles to the formation of a developmental government in the Islamic Republic of Iran? The main hypothesis of this paper is: International context, US hegemonic status in the international system, and various political and economic obstacles and sanctions imposed by the US have prevented the formation of a developmental government in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The findings of the research sustained the hypothesis of this study.

The significance of the role of interest groups in domestic politics in the US and EU countries is an undeniable fact. Lobbies, as a kind of interest group, play a crucial role in shaping the foreign policy of western countries. Israeli lobbies increasingly seek to transform the US and EU approaches in the Middle East in favor of Israel interests. In cooperation with their American counterparts, Israeli lobbyists struggle to strengthen their political presence in the EU states to ensure the achievement of their political aims. This article tries to explore these lobbyists’ objectives and activities in recent years across Europe. Findings indicate that they are committed to fighting anti-Semitism in Europe, to inhibit the growth of the BDS movement, to deviate the peace process in the Middle East from its normal path and toward Israel interests, to persuade EU leaders to take strict measures against Iran and the last, but not the least, to delegitimize Iran and Hezbollah in EU institutions and provoke EU states to recognize Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. This article basically seeks to explore the reasons behind Israelis’ efforts to establish Jewish lobbies across Europe. . To answer the research question, a case study of Israeli lobbies, established by influential Jews in the EU countries, is conducted.