درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

One of the most important elements of public space in Stone Town of Zanzibar is the baraza. The baraza is the place where people sit, meet, talk, and even rest. In its simplest form, the baraza is a platform built in front of houses or in open public spaces. Although the baraza was brought to Stone Town from rural areas of Zanzibar in the past century, today it is a part of its identity. The main question of this research is that at the present time, given the formation of new public spaces, as well as the development of communication and social networks, what role do barazas play in the daily life of the inhabitants of Stone Town? Primary research data has been compiled through semi-structured interviews with residents, and secondary reports, articles and books have also been consulted. This research shows that in spite of lifestyle changes and the development of the media, the baraza is still an essential part of the everyday life and culture of the inhabitants of Stone Town: it is regarded as an information base, a place for entertainment, a social unit, a political platform, and a religious base.

Research on the special relationship between the United States and Israel has usually been focused on strategic aspects, whilst fewer scholars have focused on non-material dimensions of the relationship. In addition, the existing research is mostly confined to the political and decision-making realms, with very few excursions into the academic arena. The current article aims to fill this lacuna through the study of pro-Israel academic discourse in America, focusing on the specific case of the field of terrorism studies. Critical discourse analysis of pro-Israel academic texts in this field is carried out to reveal the discourse, themes and arguments used to build this ideational pillar of the special relationship and move towards a common identity between the US and Israel. The common ingroup identity model (CIIM) is used to describe the process through which a common identity is constructed. The article concludes that defining the Self, defining the Other, and defining the norms are the three main strategies employed in the studied texts to achieve this goal.

Two parallel but contradictory trends have come to characterize the early decades of the twenty-first century.  On the one hand, the traditional principles of international law highlighted in the UN Charter, such as the principles of state sovereignty, non-intervention, and the state officials’ immunity, have become considerably weaker norms.  The dimension of moral sovereignty of governments, by contrast, has gained much traction, as more and more states tend to prioritize the protection of internal jurisdiction over the promotion of human rights. However, at the same time, the notion of the responsibility to protect (R2P) and transitional justice in practice have cast their specter over countries’ internal developments, misconduct, and human rights violations, holding them accountable  to domestic and international laws. These conflicting trajectories have come to a head during and in the aftermath of the 2011 Arab uprisings.  Charged with human rights violations, the ruling elites of Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt faced trials—both locally and internationally by the International Criminal Court. The UN Security Council authorized applying R2P to protect Libyan people and International Criminal Court issued the arrest warrants against Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, and Abdullah Gaddafi. In Tunisia, an absentee trial for the deposed President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was held.  In Egypt, however, the trial of Hosni Mubarak and those associated with his regime bypassed the so-called transitional justice model, while following the all too familiar pathway to promoting stability under the guise of national reconciliation. This paper’s central thrust is that political interests of the new rulers of Egypt, most notably the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF), the Muslim Brotherhood, and the military-backed interim government have turned the accepted and modern notion of transitional justice process on its head, while pursuing instead an authoritarian and managed judicial process in the name of state sovereignty and national stability.  

Artificial Intelligence (AI), as a strategic technology, has provided a platform for international competition; ever since the development of the first AI strategy in 2017, to the final days of 2021, more than fifty countries drafted or declared their national strategy aiming at becoming one of the pioneering countries in this field. Although the United States is known as the current pioneering country in the field of AI, China has been able to lead in various areas related to AI, such as occupational opportunities, Internet of Things (IoT), Big Data, Blockchain, and G5, which, due to the historical significance of emerging technologies in changing the balance of power, present a clear image of what is to come at the international stage. Given the novelty of artificial intelligence in the balance of power, the author asks about the effect of China’s artificial intelligence on the international balance of power. The answer is the hypothesis that China tries to effectively interact with its leading private artificial intelligence companies and implement this technology in internal, economic, and military governance. Thus, China aims to raise its national power and challenge the American hegemony through hard internal balance, paving the way for a multipolar world order alongside other regional powers leading in artificial intelligence. This could lead to further instability in the international system. The research hypothesis was analyzed using the explanatory method and Mearsheimer's Balance of Power Theory, and the data collection method consisted of library research.

significance, as they have grappled with enduring economic and political sanctions imposed by Western powers. Over time, both Iran and Russia have confronted a series of sanctions targeting their economic and financial sectors. In response to the adverse effects of these sanctions, both nations have embraced a strategy of 'resistance.' Experts contend that financial and economic sanctions induce substantial shifts in a country's macroeconomic landscape, prompting the adoption of distinct policies and strategic orientations. Against this backdrop, this research undertakes a comprehensive examination and analysis of the discourses surrounding economic resistance and resilient economies in Iran and the Russian Federation, with a focus on elucidating their commonalities and disparities. The research methodology employed in this study is the SWOT analysis method. Findings reveal that both Iran and Russia, while contending with Western sanctions, have pursued the implementation of resilient economy and economic resistance strategies, respectively. Iran's resilient economy signifies a transition towards long-term economic resilience rooted in religious principles. Conversely, Russia's economic resistance constitutes a short-term response to sanctions driven by political considerations".