International Regimes

The peace and looking for ways to keep it have been one of the most essential obsessions of the human beings throughout the history. Creation of regional or international organizations is considered as a way to peace building and keeping. In fact, one of the causes of transformation of international organization after the Cold War has been settlement of peace and security. The role of international organizations in order to settle conflicts is more vital and important, because most of these organizations have the ability and legitimacy to play an important role in this regard. In this regard, this article using descriptive- analytic method is intended to investigate the question: “why after the Cold War we have witnessed lower conflicts and tensions in the South East Asia than Middle East, Central Asia, Caucasus and Africa?” Research findings show that ASEAN has had an effective role in peace building and peace keeping through creating norms and regimes of peaceful settlement of disputes and strengthening interdependency, and even it has been successful to make a security community. .

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.