Political International Researches
Year:2014 | Volume:6 | Issue:18|Papers Count:8

Islamic fundamentalism as an extremist movement that claims for the true Islam and denial of modern world, has regarded as a serious threat to international community. These movements are active in Central Asia region particularly in the Republic of Uzbekistan. Islamic groups in other countries and Taliban have undoubtedly strengthened the Islamic movements in Uzbekistan. This study tries to answer this main question: what is the most important factor in challenging the political sovereignty of Central Asian states (especially Uzbekistan)? The primary hypothesis in this study assumes that Islamic fundamentalism is a major competitor and serious threat to the sovereignty and security of these states (especially Uzbekistan).

After 9.11, the doctrine of the regime change for elimination of the anti-American’s hegemony became the main part of the new strategy of US national security. Therefore American neoconservative policymakers, focused on the strategy of regime change. The first step of this strategy was enforced in Afghanistan. Authors of the present study, considering the strategic importance of the military invasion of Iran’s neighbor, want to answer this question: How can we compare the academic Iranians' viewpoints about US military invasion of Afghanistan? Limiting the scope of the research to the comparison of the printed articles of three top Iranian experts on US studies, authors tried to test the following  hypothesis: There have been a twofold aspect (military and civilian) to the US invasion of Afghanistan: Elimination of a failed state and creation of a pattern state.

The four countries of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon in the west Asia have common security concerns a part of which is about resistance against any regional common threat. Since the Islamic Republic of Iran regards the west Asia as its own security territory, it can not be indifferent to political, religious, ethnic and racial challenges and developments in this region. Therefore, the geopolitical alliance of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon in the funnel-like strategic region of west Asia would result in a powerful alliance. Based on 'regional security' theory and 'geopolitical funnel' model, using a descriptive-analytical methodology, the present study aims at investigating the role of Iran in political and security developments of the west Asia. The results indicate that the Zionist regime of Israel, Shiite-phobia by Arab states and terrorist groups in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon as well as the challenges caused by the USA are among the most important common security concerns of the member states in this region. It seems building a geopolitical alliance is the most reliable solution to these threats. In addition, Iran's power components particularly its superior geopolitical and geostrategic position in the region, its huge population, etc. would contribute to Iran's pivotal and prominent role in this region.

Human rights as one of the main features of civilization and development of human community enjoy special significance in international relations. However, ambiguity in its definition and the instrumental use of this concept are considered as major challenges for the promotion of the current status of human rights in the World. Under such conditions, the West particularly the US, intervening in the internal affairs of other countries on the pretext of defending democracy and human rights, has launched propaganda against many countries through its public and media diplomacy. From 1993 to 1996, the US imposed over 61 unilateral sanctions on 35 countries which covered 42% of the world’s population. The extraterritorial nature of the unilateral sanctions by the US has caused a controversy. Many states believe that such sanctions violate their sovereignty rights as independent nations. Since the victory of the Islamic Revolution, the US has always considered 'sanctions' as one of the tools to change Iran’s approach. Washington has highlighted human rights sanctions as 'smart sanctions', imposed under human rights claims to pressure Iran to give concessions and adopt an inactive diplomacy in political fields particularly in nuclear issue. This paper seeks to study the role of human rights sanctions in the US strategy against Iran and find proper and practical approaches to manage the challenges and opportunities facing Iran in this regard.

The US led coalition forces attack to Iraq on the pretext of WMD has turned this country's events into one of the main topics discussed by the experts in political and international issues. Based on the new Iraqi constitution, which was approved by Parliament and the majority of Iraqi people, the government was established as 'democratic, federal parliamentary republic'. This paper tries to answer the following question: what is the impact of the federal system in Iraq on Iran's national security? To answer this question, authors have used descriptive-analytical method. Compared to Iraq’s thereat, as a unitary state, for Iran’s national security (as was the case of the last Iran- Iraq war) or as a distorted country which paves the way for inference of trans regional powers in opposition to Iran’s national interests, it seems that the new Iraq federal system regardless of some challenges that may cause for neighbors including Iran, can be the best model for national security.

Protecting of basic freedoms and rights and giving an effective guarantee in the form of written law is considered as the main aim of responsible sovereignty. It means that responsible sovereignty manifests itself in the government that sets a restriction on its legal and sovereign boundaries according to an advanced system of laws and also, endeavors to meet the requirements of human rights in the international level. The main discussion is that responsible sovereignty is formed by considering the human rights in a democratic system, looks after its responsibilities to the citizens and international society, and is far away from the negation of human rights & similar issues. The UN Human Rights Council develops and promotes the principles of responsible sovereignty from 2006 to consolidate the rule of law and fundamental freedoms. The mentioned subject became a part of the literature of human rights of the U.N. By considering the agents of responsible sovereignty, the UN Human Rights Council dispatches the reporters to survey some subjects such as lost rights and freedoms of citizens in the governments that are not able or do not want to comply with their responsibilities. The mentioned council defends the human rights by sending away reporters on different subjects like freedom of speech and opinions, independence of lawyers and judges, extrajudicial and arbitrary executions and peaceful gatherings. Moreover, this council specifies the responsible sovereignty as guaranteeing citizens’ basic rights and freedoms to the citizens and tries to develop and promote them.

According to the scholars of international relations of the twentieth century, the First World War and the attempt to prevent this inhuman incident from happening again shaped the field of IR. Liberalism was born out of the efforts in international relations for peace. The end of the Cold War led to a dramatic decline of realism and the rise of other approaches. Many researchers expanded Thomas Kuhn's approach in the evolution of science (phisics) to the major theories of international relations. In this paper, we answer this question: Can we call the field of international relations theoretically, methodologically and epistemologically paradigmatic? The answer to this question is based on research and surveys carried out in the United States of America and some other countries, by 'the institution of the theory and practice of international relations'. Our hypothesis is that given the multiplicity and diversity of opinions in the field of international relations, techniques used in the field of international relations theories, cannot be called Paradigm. Therefore, in this paper we believe that the field of international relations is not paradigmatic.

Over the past year in restive Yemen, in Abyan and Shabwa provincial regions, it was declared that fighters of Al-Qaeda, who were related to Saudi Arabia, were hiding and accumulating their power which resulted in shaping new groups such as Ansar al-Sharia. In this regard, the above-mentioned group, before being destroyed by Yemeni military in summer 2012, was attacked by unmanned drones, in line with Obama‘s counterterrorism strategy. The present study discusses whether the use of unmanned drones can help promote regional stability and security or it only serves as a new way to expand and extend extremism? We argue that the drone strikes in so called counterterrorism operations in tribal Pakistani areas and expanding these operations to Yemen has helped extremism and rise of bloody conflicts in the region and Al-Qaeda and Taliban have used this opportunity for more destabilizing the region. This indicates that Obama's counterterrorism and military strategy does not work.