مطالب

The way we look at international institutions has always been one of the most controversial issues in the field of international relations, and after the Islamic Revolution, Iran's foreign policy took a new approach to international institutions. In addition, with the recent withdrawal of the United States from several international treaties, including the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) under Trump Administration the issue of international regimes and their effectiveness has gained new political and intellectual significance. The question of the present article is what are the determining factors in the formation of international regimes, their efficiency and permanence? The hypothesis is that the three factors of power, interests, and pride simultaneously play a role in the creation, efficiency, and permanence of regimes. This article examines three major approaches to the definition of international regimes, each of which emphasizes one of the factors of power, interests, and ideas, and concludes that one-factor explanations can not provide a deep understanding of the formation and functioning of regimes. Therefore assuming that difference between propositions of the studied approaches are does not necessarily mean that they are inconsistent, we Introduce a multivariate approach that goes beyond the mere integration of the perspectives under consideration, combining the three factors into a general analytical framework and Using Islamic thought, we have considered Fitrah along with the two stimuli of fear and profit as the third side of the triangle of fundamental stimuli in determining the behavior of international actors.

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.