درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Following the violent escalation on October 7, 2023, attributed to the actions of the Israeli regime in Gaza, a series of substantial measures have been implemented by international legal, judicial, and political organizations in support of the Palestinian cause and the resistance movement. These actions have involved key international bodies, such as the Security Council, the General Assembly, and judicial institutions including the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), as well as various countries and influential global experts. In this context, the international community has witnessed a historical and unprecedented series of judicial opinions, resolutions, and legal positions condemning the actions of the Israeli occupying forces in Gaza. Moreover, the recent focus on obligations to prevent genocide and end the occupation and violence in Palestine is unparalleled in its intensity and global consensus. These measures provide substantial and authoritative evidence supporting the legitimacy of the Palestinian cause, while simultaneously imposing binding legal responsibilities on states, international organizations, and in particular, the General Assembly and Security Council, to ensure the protection of Palestinian rights and the cessation of occupation and violence in the region. The present study adopts a descriptive-analytical methodology, utilizing documentary and library research approaches to critically analyze the nature and substance of these legal instruments and resolutions. In doing so, it aims to inform national, regional, and international executive bodies, while fostering academic dialogue and public awareness on the critical need for implementation of these judicial decisions. This research underscores the transformative legal, judicial, and diplomatic developments following October 7, 2023, developments that are crucial to the future trajectory of Gaza and Palestine, and which must be taken into account when formulating policies and strategies for the region's future.

Today, the debate over whether religion and religious actors can be influential in various political levels seems to be over and unnecessary. Rather, the discussions of experts are now focused on the question of how religion should be treated and interpreted. Is religion in international relations an object that can be examined and explained by various IR theories, or can religion itself act as a subject and provide an independent perspective and worldview in the form of a scientific theory for understanding and interpreting the world? In response to this question, there are two views among experts that will be discussed in this article. Some believe that it is possible to address religion in the form of existing IR theories, and others argue for the need to process independent theories by emphasizing the inadequacy of existing theories when referring to religion. While accepting the second view, this paper proposes that in the current state of IR discipline and given the inherent failure of existing theories of this knowledge to understand and interpret the behavior of religious actors caused by fundamental meta-theoretical differences, it is completely possible to develop a religious theory that can provide researchers with an independent perspective and worldview. This hypothesis, if proven, would underpin the formation of the religious theory of International Relations.

The contrast between tradition and modernity has always been criticized throughout the histo-ry of political thought, and many thinkers have presented their views in this field in the West-ern and Islamic worlds. Meanwhile, the concept of modernity in the thought of Dariush Shayegan as a free thinker and Seyed Hossein Nasr as a traditional thinker and theorist is ex-amined in this research. The theoretical framework of the research is a combination of Carl Gustav Jung's collective psychoanalysis and other hermeneutics theories. This research aims to answer the question, what is the approach of Dariush Shayegan and Seyed Hossein Nasr in facing modernity? The findings of the research also indicate that Dariush Shayegan as an Ira-nian thinker and intellectual underwent important changes during his intellectual life, and for this reason, his early views have very significant differences with his later opinions. On the other hand, Seyed Hossein Nasr, like Shayegan, is an ardent critic and opponent of modernity, and he believes that reforming religion leads to the deconstruction of religion and that there is no end except secularism and anti-religion. But his full-length defense of religious pluralism makes it difficult to make a final judgment about his thoughts. The method of descriptive an-alytical research and the method of collecting data is documentary.

The position of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Putin's doctrine of Eurasianism, especially after 2012, has gained considerable importance in Russia's foreign policy. In the light of Putin's Eurasianism discourse, the extensive relations between Iran and Russia in the political, economic, military, security, intelligence and nuclear fields were promoted to the level of two strategic allies. The main question raised in this research is, what was Iran's position in Putin's doctrine of Eurasianism? And what have been the most important influencing variables in the nuclear relations between the two countries? The findings of this research, which was carried out in a descriptive-analytical method and with a historical approach, show that the position of Iran in Putin's doctrine of Eurasianism is important in such a way that without Iran, the said doctrine will face serious problems and many variables will affect the increasing nuclear relations. It has been influential between the two countries, which shows the convergence of the societies and domestic elites between the two countries, the anti-Western foreign policy of the two countries, and the current international conditions resulting from the war between Russia and Ukraine.