درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The Iran Petroleum Contract (IPC) framework represents a significant shift in Iran's approach to attracting foreign investment in its oil sector while advancing its foreign policy interests. Drawing upon resource nationalism theory, foreign direct investment theory, and economic statecraft theory, this study addresses the central research question: How does the IPC framework aim to balance attracting foreign investment in Iran's oil sector with advancing its foreign policy objectives? Employing a descriptive-analytical approach, the research utilizes qualitative analysis, comparative analysis, and scenario planning to assess the IPC's implications. The findings highlight the IPC's potential to enhance technology transfer, boost oil production capacity, and foster regional cooperation. However, challenges arising from political risks, international sanctions, and domestic opposition must be addressed with targeted policy measures. The study offers recommendations to enhance the IPC's effectiveness, including streamlining bureaucratic processes, offering competitive fiscal terms, strengthening legal frameworks, enhancing transparency, and developing local capabilities. Moreover, aligning the IPC with Iran's foreign policy goals requires diversifying investment partnerships, leveraging the framework for regional cooperation, and integrating it with national development objectives. The insights provided contribute to understanding the complex interplay between contractual frameworks, foreign investment, and strategic interests in Iran's oil sector, informing policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers in their decision-making processes. The IPC's successful implementation will be crucial in shaping Iran's economic development and foreign policy trajectory in the years to come.

The exploration of emerging conflict concepts in the context of international law raises a theoretical question, particularly with the introduction of the novel concept of war. This paper analyzes the theoretical domain, emphasizing the necessity for analytical discourse that integrates legal arguments. It posits that the legitimization of conceptualizations, including the innovative notion of environmental warfare emerging from the modern concept of war, contributes to the development of a normative framework. With further in-depth study, this framework has the potential to advance theoretical discourse beyond the current epistemological boundaries of international law. The concept of environmental warfare-particularly the weaponization of border rivers-can be contextualized within the evolving landscape of international law by emphasizing the severe crises and famines caused by the destruction of vital water sources. As international law increasingly integrates environmental protection, it must confront the deliberate targeting of water resources, which poses catastrophic consequences for civilian populations reliant on these essential resources. Employing the socio-dogmatic method and utilizing quantitative measures, the current paper asserts that emerging conflicts are firstly a tangible phenomenon and secondly that all systemic rules of international law address it, encompassing the intricacies of environmental warfare as indicated in the Hamoun case study in the Iran-Afghanistan Aqua Conflict. This progressive approach acknowledges the changing nature of conflicts and emphasizes the need to address not only legal aspects but also the broader social, political, and environmental dimensions within existing normative frameworks.  

Oil and Gas exploration and exploitations have been ongoing for more than half a century in the Gulf of Guinea (GoG). However, recent discoveries of oil and gas deposits deep offshore along the coast of the GoG has increased exploration activities. Removal of offshore installation is a rigorous and complicated process which needs stringent regulations to ensure environmental protection of marine life and ensure safety of navigation at sea among other issues. Therefore, as these oil and gas installations approach the end of their productive life, removal of these installations from the marine environment becomes inevitable. Consequently, the need for the existence of a regional legal framework or policy to govern the removal process within the GoG becomes imperative. Using the doctrinal approach, the paper examines treaty provisions which are binding on individual member States, as well as their obligations under the GoG Commission in relation to the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Continental Shelf (GCS), the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the 1972 London Dumping Convention, and the 1981 Abidjan Convention. The paper finds that the absence of a regional protocol or legal framework on removal of offshore installations creates chaos for the marine environment when removal issues arise in the future along the coast of the GoG. It concludes by making recommendations for a regional legal framework to ensure the smooth removal of installations in the future.

“The Legal Implications of the United States' Strike on General Soleimani, His Associates and Iran's Response” offers a comprehensive examination of the assassination of General Soleimani from the perspective of international law.  This book sheds light on the subject by delving into the various dimensions of international law, including international treaty law, international criminal law, the use of force in international law, humanitarian law, and the fight against terrorism, with a focus on elucidating the act of terrorism committed by the United States. The book's strengths lie in its emphasis on international treaties and its reflection of Eastern thought regarding the assassination of an anti-terrorism hero within the framework of international law. Furthermore, the book seeks to establish legal convergence in the Middle East regarding the assassination of General Soleimani and to counter United States’ Lawfare against Iran's authorities. However, the book falls short in failing to address certain recent developments, such as changes in foreign policy after the Trump Administration, Iran's intention to bring the case before the International Court of Justice, and the conclusion of legal proceedings concerning General Soleimani's assassination in Iran and Iraq.