Ukraine

This paper utilizes an approach that combines studies of Samanid period artifacts and textual accounts with modern genetic studies to explore the identity of the people who were involved in long distance trade from the far eastern regions of the Central Asia into Northern Europe. Although this study does not analyze the Samanid works, it reiterates and illustrates how important Iran/Persia was in the history of Europe as well as Central Asia. The information contained in the artifacts and texts gives us the evidence needed to understand the vast trade network and the people who were responsible for the movement of these goods, people and ideas. This study reconfirmed recent genetic studies that the people, collectively termed Rus or Vikings, were a mixture primarily of Scandinavians, Slavs, and Turks, with additional admixing with local populations. The importance of the Persian and Arabic sources addressing contact between the Rus and Eastern people has been thoroughly discussed by Thorir Jonsson Hraundal. In these texts, the Rus were referred to by different names including Majus, Northmanni, Urduman, Warank as well as by other names. One of his many observations is the unmistakable influence of Turkic culture on that of the Rus. This complex ancestry is supported by recent genetic studies and will be discussed in more detail below in light of archaeological evidence. Thus, the term Rus refers to a way of life rather than a homogenous ethnic or cultural group. However, this study refined the identity of the people responsible by observing a correlation between the distribution of the genetic haplogroup R1a sub-clade and the long-distance trade routes across Central Asia to Northern Europe, with the central focus in Eastern Europe. Despite the vast distance, the evidence indicates that there were cultural contacts between people with linked ancestry. The study is important because it begins to reveal the unexpected influence of Eastern cultures on those of Northern Europe.

This article discusses the political initiatives of certain states to establish a special tribunal for the prosecution of the crime of aggression which was allegedly committed within the Ukraine situation. The article raises questions about the feasibility of establishing such a court, given that the International Criminal Court (ICC) has within its mandate the possibility to try an aggression case. However, in this article it will be explained why the ICC is not a viable option in this regard, while a new Ukraine tribunal also creates various legal obstacles. The article suggests that the political motivations behind this proposal should be balanced against these legal obstacles, including procedural obstacles related to the crime of aggression and functional immunities, and how proceedings should be conducted in the presence or absence of the accused. The article concludes that a thorough assessment of these legal and procedural considerations must be made before deciding to establish a special Ukraine tribunal.

Russia's military attack on Ukraine has had profound consequences not only for the Middle East, but also for the world. The political-security relations of the two countries, have been affected by this war. Since the beginning of Russia's military operation in Ukraine, Tehran has accepted Moscow's rationale for this attack and has shown its political support at the United Nations General Assembly, but Iran has been cautious in fully supporting this war. Iran's approach regarding the war in Ukraine is important in two ways. First, Iran's orientation towards this war affects Tehran's relations with Moscow. Second, this orientation affects Iran's interests in the international system. For this reason, the main question of this article is "What was Iran's attitude towards the war in Ukraine and how did it affect the relations between Tehran and Moscow?" The hypothesis of the authors is that "Iran's approach towards the war in Ukraine has been cautious - it has neither officially condemned nor supported the Russian invasion of Ukraine - this policy is aimed at maintaining and continuing the relations between the two countries. The purpose of this article is to examine the orientations of the Islamic Republic of Iran towards the war in Ukraine and its effect on the country's relations with Russia. The authors' method in this research is qualitative with a descriptive-analytical approach.

When the war broke out in Ukraine, this eastern European country started a successful resistance that pinned down the Russian army in many regions and created a stalemate that has sparked a war of attrition not only in Ukraine, but also on social media territories in other political spheres. This study investigates the way in which Ukraine war is represented -or to be more precise, fought- in the Iranian X. Data mining methods were employed to search, find and extract posts including “Ukraine war” -or “جنگ اوکراین” in Persian. Our main question was, how did Iranian X users position themselves with regard to war in Ukraine? Using Python, a popular social media research tools, 2027 relevant posts were extracted to show the way in which Iranian users position themselves with regard to Ukraine war. Results revealed that the two Iranian main political factions  -namely Reformists and Fundamentalists- see this war not as a war of other countries, but that of their own. The pro-Western Reformists favor the Ukrainian side of the war and the pro-Eastern Fundamentalists favor the Russian side of the war. They fight on social media as though the Ukrainian war is their own war.