the United States

The end of Cold War created a unique opportunity for both the Arabs and Israelis to end their animosity and for the United States to play an important role to bring them to peace negotiations. Therefore, during the 1990s, the U.S. facilitated several rounds of talks between Syria and Israel, but the negotiations complicated gradually. The talks were stalled over the fact that Israel did not want to withdraw from the Golan Heights prior to concluding security arrangements and normalization of relations with Syria. There were variety of reasons that prevented Syria and Israel from reaching a peace agreement. Besides, unresolved issues such as the Golan Heights, the biased role of the United States in the Syrian-Israeli talks left the process at an intractable impasse. The fact that the U.S. had strategic relations with Israel and due to the increasing power of the Zionist lobby in the U.S. Congress, Washington failed to be an honest broker. Both Syrian and Israeli inflexibility, mutual mistrust and suspicious along with tentative and conditional nature of talks were proved hindrances. The U.S. could play an active role through urging both Damascus and Tel Aviv to comply with the basic and logical needs of peace, pushing the Israelis to withdraw from the Syrian territory, urging the Syrians to moderate their positions-allowing new demarcation of border-strengthening confidence-building measures between the parties and assuring them that peace will provide their basic needs, and in no way will the conflict be settled at the expense of either’s interests.

In the past four decades, the US-Iran relations have been hostile, especially after Donald Trump took office as president in 2017. Since 1979, Washington's official policy toward Iran has been predicated on containment, push-back, and change of behavior. However, Iran usually perceives the US policy regarding itself in terms of regime change or metamorphosis. The United States has countered Iran through coercive diplomacy, crippling sanctions, military blockade, delegitimization, isolation, and demonization. The present paper aims to investigate the antagonism between the two countries in Donald Trump's administration. The main reasons behind Trump's maximum pressure campaign against Iran and Iran’s perception of this attitude constitute the main research questions addressed in this paper. The findings show that the two countries have different understandings of their hostilities. Although the US preference in Trump’s era for Iran was regime change, it would settle for a non-challenging or so-called a normal Iran. But Iran perceived the US policy as undermining its independence, identity, and existence. In fact Iran perceived Trump’s gesture on negotiation or making new deal as just a propaganda show. This paradigmatic different outlooks has blocked diplomacy. The present paper, through a descriptive-analytic method, elaborates on this antinomy mainly from Iranian side.

The success of Developmental State in East Asia once again has proved the role of the state in the process of development and shed light on the weakness of Neoclassic theories in their emphasis on the role of the market as a balancing force. One of the necessary variables for the formation of a developmental state is the international context. Like many states in East Asia, the path toward development in post-revolution Iran seems to be through the formation of a developmental state in the context of the existing international system. But the reality is something different. Therefore, the objectives of the present paper are 1 - to study the relationship between the international context and formation of the developmental state in Iran; 2 – to study the role of the United States in the process of formation of the developmental state in Iran; 3 – to study the means the US has employed to block the formation of a developmental state in Iran; and, 4 – to study the role of Iran’s foreign policy behavior in the formation of the developmental state. The main question of the present paper is what are the international obstacles to the formation of a developmental government in the Islamic Republic of Iran? The main hypothesis of this paper is: International context, US hegemonic status in the international system, and various political and economic obstacles and sanctions imposed by the US have prevented the formation of a developmental government in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The findings of the research sustained the hypothesis of this study.

General Soleimani’s View on Humanistic Aspects of Resistance vs. Terror: A Thematic Analysis of His Speeches during Two Last Years before Martyrdom Terrorizing general Soleimani in January 2020 has brought the confrontation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States into a new moment which is considered by many IR scholars as a paradigm shift. The present paper is an attempt to delve into the Western, in particular American, sources in order to find how they mis-represent Soleimani as the “leader of the terrorist front”. It, then, addresses an intentionally ignored side which is grasping Soleimani’s outlook on the resistance axis in term of a transnational front with a humanitarian outlook at its heart. The paper looks to produce such an alternative knowledge by employing Atlas.ti software and reflexive thematic analysis. It covers a comprehensive list of Soleimani’s speeches and will which were given during his last two years of life. The extracted motifs lead to four major themes, including: a) the individual maturity and empowerment as a prelude to shape the resistance front, b) the dominance of the transnational and global concerns, c) the disciplinary hierarchy within the resistance front, d) resistance as a log-term social and political engine of development.

The expansion of NATO to the East under the policies of Atlanticism is one of the current issues of international relations, which has a lot to think about for the countries involved in this policy, their neighbors and the international order. After the expansion of NATO to the east, what will happen in the spheres of influence of NATO and the neighboring countries of those spheres and the conditions created, causes predictions in this field; One of them is the evaluation of the feasibility of cooperation between China and Russia with their own special conditions against this action, that is, Atlanticism. After experiencing many ups and downs in China-Russia relations, these two countries have gradually expanded their comprehensive cooperation since the mid-1990s. In the meantime, the expansion of NATO to the east is one of the important political, military and security issues that has led to the expression of common concern. And at the same time, the cooperation and positions of the two countries have come closer, especially towards the policies and actions of America and even Europe. Russia's concern about the presence of NATO in its borders and China's concern about the close military cooperation of the West with Taiwan have caused the two countries to work harder for mutual cooperation and their development fields. The concept of new Atlanticism provides a framework for analyzing security and normative challenges facing Europe and the world. This work and many similar works emphasize the fact that the behavior of America and its allies in the international system has become the basis for the creation of various coalitions and alliances. From the perspective of this research and emphasizing the threat balance theory, when the hegemon country and its allies create threats, or show threatening behaviors; They will create coalitions and alliances. In this article, an attempt was made to discuss the feasibility of expanding cooperation between China and Russia against Atlanticism by using the theoretical framework of threat balance. And the topic of these cooperation was examined according to the concepts, general capabilities such as (population, economic power, military power, etc.), geographical proximity, offensive capabilities and offensive intentions from the perspective of the threat balance theory.

Sino-US Relations in the Persian Gulf during Obama’s AdministrationAbstract:The Persian Gulf is one of the most important regions of the world that has been vital for the great powers since long time ago, not only for its energy resources but also its strategic location. After the British withdrawal from the region in 1971, the United States filled the vacuum and tried to preserve the status quo during the cold war. Since 1980s China was also attracted by the huge energy resources and the vast market of the region. But in the 21st century and the rise of China as the second largest economy of the world, the importance of the Persian Gulf enhanced in China’s view to manage its energy needs and benefit from its lucrative market and possible bilateral capital investment. This article intends to examine the relationships between China and the United States of America during the Obama’s administration. By using the “Power Cycle Theory” it is concluded that the United States has accepted the Chinese position as the rising power in the Persian Gulf region; and that their relationships were based on collaboration and competition, not confrontation or hostility; which seems to continue in the foreseeable future as well. Key Words: The Persian Gulf, China, The United States, Collaboration, Competition, Confrontation, Hostility.