World Sociopolitical Studies

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.

According to Iran's constitution, expanding relations with Africa has always been one of the strategic principles in the country’s foreign policy; all previous presidents have therefore sought to expand the country's relations with Africa. Rouhani, however, pursued a different policy in Africa. His arrival in the office marked a considerable shift in Iran’s foreign policy. Rouhani’s African policy, compared to his predecessors, presents a peculiar case, because rhetorically he highlighted the importance of improving relations with Africa, but in practice, he almost neglected Africa at least in terms of trade and official visits. In other words, in Rouhani’s presidency, Africa remained as a key principle in the IRI’s foreign policy but not as a strategic partner. This paper uses a qualitative content analysis for analysing Rouhani’s rhetorical positions on Africa. By adopting the constructivist theory of IR and the importance of policymaking theories, the paper also argues that due to the geopolitical importance of Africa, Iran’s relations with Africa, although insignificant, remained unchanged. In Rouhani’s time, however, relations declined significantly due to his Westward policy. In discussing this policy shift, the role of both structure and agency are important and emphasize the reactionary nature of Iran’s foreign policy.

This paper pays particular attention to three critical junctures in Iran’s contemporary history: The Russo-Persian wars of the 19th century, Iran’s occupation by the Allies in 1941, and the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s. Combining a constructivist approach to geopolitics with the theory of Social Reality Construction, this article argues that these series of wars in the past two centuries have created an intersubjectivity, making Iranians feel “lonely” when the very survival of their state was at the stake. While Iran’s geographical situation has brought the country to the core of the great powers’ attention, repeated foreign invasions or interventions seem to have reproduced a sense of vulnerability for the Iranians. This paper is constructed around the following question: Is there something embedded in Iran’s geography that betrays this land’s sovereignty and imposes loneliness? The conclusion is that there is no natural or geographical reason to justify Iran's loneliness in the international arena, but rather, a perceptual construct reproduced by the historical context of events. The imposition of great political powers to contain Iran in its geography and to make it a buffer zone constitute a spatial reality; however, the feeling of loneliness derives from the social construction of reality.

This paper compares Islamic teachings regarding Jihad with Gandhi’s Satyagraha or non-violent resistance. Abdul Ghaffar Khan, one of Gandhi’s Muslim followers, has argued that not only was Islam compatible with non-violent methods, but that Prophet Muhammad had taught his followers non-violent resistance hundreds of years earlier than Gandhi had. Scholars such as Eknath Easwaran have also reiterated this argument (Easwaran, 1999, 34). This paper on the other hand argues that Islamic teachings regarding non-violence are more complicated than what Khan proclaimed. The verses of the Quran regarding Jihad or struggle can be divided between the revelations in Mecca, during the first thirteen years of the Prophet’s campaign, and the final ten years of his life, after he and his followers immigrated to the city of Medina. In the first thirteen years, Prophet Muhammad preached non-violent resistance even though Muslims were under severe pressure and prosecution. During this period Islamic teaching are quite compatible with Gandhi’s Satyagraha. However, after the new Muslim community immigrated to Medina and formed an Islamic government it came under the threat of annihilation by a foreign invading army, at which time Islam and its Prophet permitted defensive wars, unlike Gandhi’s teachings and Khan’s assertions. The paper concludes that Ahimsa may work only in the route towards power, whereas when the position of power achieved and an independent political community and its leadership formed, according to Islam, means of legitimate and justified violence could not be avoided altogether.

Two years after the beginning of the pandemic, various strains of COVID-19 continue to affect relatively all regions and countries in the world. Each country responded to the pandemic based on its facilities, approaches, beliefs, and costumes. The main objective of this research is to study the responses, as well as the social and cultural approaches of COVID-19 patients in Iran. Twenty patients, who recovered from COVID-19 in Tehran, participated in this phenomenological and descriptive-interpretative-based research. The extracted profile includes social black holes, individual and social reactions to COVID-19, as well as outlooks on the different aspects of COVID-19 and post-traumatic growth. The findings of the study suggest that the patients face problems such as economic difficulties that coincided with the pandemic, as well as a lack of adequate medical equipment. This led them to ambivalence, which in turn prepared them for change; patients eventually reached a degree of acceptance and achieved post-disease growth.

A conflict can involve anything from a personal disagreement between two people to the emergence of a world war. When a conflict arises, a combination of the main components of geopolitics (geography, politics and power) plays a role in its formation. Thus, the roots of the conflict can be explained in the frame of the principles of geopolitics. Most of the conflicts in Africa occur in 0-15 degrees north. The current study is a work of “basic research”. In terms of nature and method, it is “descriptive” and in terms of attitude, it falls in the category of “descriptive-analytic” research. Data gathering was done by a documentary method and through consulting library resources. The data analysis method was qualitative. The research set out to find an answer to the following question: “From a geopolitical point of view, which factors affect interstate and intrastate conflicts in circle 0 to 15th parallel north of Africa?” The current study has explained the roots of the conflicts from a geopolitical perspective through studying the conflicts in circle 0 to 15th parallel north of Africa. This study led to the presentation and introduction of 26 geopolitical root causes for conflicts.