مطالب مرتبط با کلیدواژه

Copenhagen school


۱.

America and Securitization of Iran after the Islamic revolution 1979 till 2013; continuation or change(مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)

کلیدواژه‌ها: Iran U S Foreign policy Islamic revolution Copenhagen school Securitization

حوزه های تخصصی:
تعداد بازدید : ۹۵۳ تعداد دانلود : ۶۵۴
U.S foreign policy toward Iran had been so uncertain and variable since the beginning of this relation, but alongside fluctuations, some kind of consistency is distinguishable. Until the Islamic revolution of 1979by the Iranian people, Iran was playing a major role in the U.S. anti-communist strategy in the Middle East. U.S grand strategy was based on its confrontation with USSR and Iran was the key for controlling the Middle East and process of underpinning Iran’s power as a liberal ally in the region was at the core of U.S considerations in Iran. After the 1979 revolution, Iran’s priority had changed as a regional actor and it no longer identified itself as a member in the Western coalition based on American foreign policy. On the other hand, U.S. also stopped to identify Iran as a friend and started to demonize the new role Iran was playing in the Middle East and the world. By having these trends in mind, a very fundamental, important question strikes the mind: Did U.S has a turning point in its foreign policy toward Iran after the 1979 or the principle of its foreign policy was fixed and only tactical changes occurred? In order to answer this question I’m going to examine the history of U.S foreign policy toward Iran, particularly the post-revolutionary period. This analysis will be conducted according to the Copenhagen school definition of security and concept of securitization. This theoretical frame work brought us a comprehensive understanding of security and also a relative, useful categorization of security strategy in foreign policy. Different methodological approaches could be used in these frameworks but in this research I have used the discourse analysis method to explore the subject of research. Conclusion of the research shows us that American strategy toward Iran covers both permanent and variable factors but the permanent element was the key and variable factors made changes only in tactical level. U.S foreign policy was basically directed toward securitizing Iran but the world system, regional and national events also made it more powerful. It means that after the Islamic revolution of Iran, U.S. has continuously made an attempt in persuading other actors to securitize Iran. Before the Cold War, this securitization was in a low level but after the Cold War it can be classified as a high-securitization.
۲.

Analyzing the Consequences of the UAE Creating Artificial Islands in The Persian Gulf (Considering the Copenhagen School)(مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)

کلیدواژه‌ها: Copenhagen school Iran Persian Gulf artificial islands Securitization the United Arab Emirates (UAE)

حوزه های تخصصی:
تعداد بازدید : ۵۶۱ تعداد دانلود : ۵۰۵
In recent years, the United Arab Emirates has begun creating artificial islands in the Persian Gulf. These actions have sparked many concerns throughout the region, particularly from Iran. This study defines and analyzes the process of securitizing the creation of the UAE artificial islands in the Persian Gulf. Although, according to the Law of the Sea Convention, coastal states are entitled to create artificial islands, observing neighboring states’ interests are a primary prerequisite for creating these lands. This study seeks to answer the following question: What are the consequences of the UAE creating artificial islands in the Persian Gulf for Iran? The hypothesis of this paper proposes that creating these islands, regarding the expanding nature of the concept of security in the contemporary world, will have a fivefold consequence for Iran; creating artificial islands by the UAE will cause military, political, environmental, economic, and social insecurities for Iran in the Persian Gulf. The research follows a descriptive-analytical method and studies the question utilizing library sources. The Copenhagen School of Security Studies constitutes the theoretical framework of the paper.
۳.

Russia's Strategy Toward Nagorno-Karabakh and Georgia (2008-2020)(مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)

نویسنده:

کلیدواژه‌ها: Russia Nagorno Karabakh Georgia Iran Security Strategy Copenhagen school

حوزه های تخصصی:
تعداد بازدید : ۲۰۸ تعداد دانلود : ۱۲۴
The South Caucasus region is experiencing crises that have continued for many years. Russia's war with Georgia in 2008 and the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region after the collapse of the Soviet Union (1991) changed the security order in the South Caucasus. Russia has interests as a global player in the South Caucasus region and Kremlin considers it's near abroad as its backyard and exclusive sphere of influence. This article uses a descriptive-analytical method as well as the theory of regional security of Barry Buzan to answer the question of what is Russia's security strategy towards the South Caucasus region. The main hypothesis emphasizes that Russia's strategy in the South Caucasus region is to prevent securitization of the region against its economic and political interests, as well as prevent the influence and presence of NATO, in the region. The results show that in tensions with Georgia, Russia seeks to prevent Western interference and urges them to recognize the separation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia. On the other hand, Russia's foreign policy in the face of the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis is to maintain a balance between the two parties involved, Armenia and Azerbaijan, to cooperate with both countries, and to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict by a political solution, not a military one. The purpose of this article is to examine Russia's security strategy in the South Caucasus, with a particular focus on Georgia and the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis from the beginning of the crisis until 2020. And then it offers specific reasons for the confrontation between Russia and the West, as well as Iran's role in regional security issues.