Political International Researches
Year:2015 | Volume:7 | Issue:23|Papers Count:8

The present article tries to describe the internal and external challenges to the unity of Islamic world. In this direction the existing processes in the Islamic world have been explained to find out whether the present situation is an integration or disintegration. The present research by taking into consideration the realities of international system and the existing process in the Islamic world, wants to know whether the unity of Islamic world is possible in future? The finding of the study indicates that by examining the existing situation in the Islamic world one comes to the conclusion that  due to contradiction of the Islamic states, in short term we cannot witness the unity of Muslims. For solving this problem, first a plan of Islamic world unity should be prepared and this plan should initially bring about a consensus among the governmental and intellectual elite. Then practical measures and common programs should substitute hostility and contain extremism.

Globalization can be defined as a complex process in which the countries and societies of the world get more interconnected. Nowadays due to impact of globalization the international relations have expanded and the establishment and strengthening of international organizations have led to reduction of autonomy and sovereignty power of the states. The question arises her is what aspect of nation-state have been challenged by globalization? In what way the power and influence of the states have been weakened? The finding of the study which has been pursued by a descriptive-analytical method shows that expansion of new media has led to the formation of new concepts like global culture and global human rights and their acceptance by the peoples of the world have challenged national culture and sovereignty. In fact the advent of globalization with support of information revolution and delocalization and the emergence of the global human rights concept has limited the national boundaries and the absolute traditional hold on sovereignty. The requirement and implications of globalization have also challenged independence and national sovereignty of the states in favor of global culture. The supra-national and non-governmental organizations have gained more power than before. Hence we are witnessing the decline of the power of national governments. Of course it is to be noted that in international scene and interactions, the official actors are still national governments but gradually their power is decreasing and giving their place to supra national institutions.

BRICS is a group of emerging powers consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa who are pursuing a revisionist foreign policy in challenge to the United States unilateralism in international relations. This group of countries is trying to strengthen economic, political and demographic potentials of themselves and can constitute the as main poles of a multi-polar structure of future world. Meanwhile the attempt of this group of countries for creating a multilateral system is a usual practice in international relations which is based on their potentials. The question raised by the present article is what is the foreign policy of BRICS towards the unilateralism practiced by the United States in international relations? The underlying hypothesis is that BRICS has chosen a kind of revisionist policy based on soft balancing against the United States unilateralism. The theory of soft balance should be a suitable approach to examine the hypothesis through two variables, i.e. “disparity of power” and “economic dependency”. Finding of the study shows that BRICS is indirectly trying to strengthen multilateralism in international relations.

The relative deprivation theory of Ted Gurr was introduced to explain the conditions in which some citizens (or groups) avail themselves facilities, privileges and advantages more than others which consequently lead to deprivation and exclusion of second group. The emergence of the feeling of deprivation is a modern phenomenon originating from changes and fundamental developments of human societies which existed more in societies with traditional structure which of course this feeling gets aggravated once the people compare themselves with their counterparts in the society. On the whole Ted Gurr in his theory claims that disappointment and frustration of the people in achieving their goals leads to unconventional behavior by them. In the same manner this continued dissatisfaction prepares the ground and motivation for mass violence which terrorism is the sign of it. In recent years the Middle East is one of the strategic regions and at the same time the center of crisis and hotbed of growth and emergence of terrorism. The present article by making use of Ted Gurr’s theory as its theoretical framework tries to examine the efficiency of this theory in explaining and analyzing the phenomenon of terrorism in the Middle East. The finding of the study shows that the emergence and growth of terrorism in the Middle East region is not merely due to relative deprivation. In fact this factor is one of the factors which along with other factors i.e. inter-regional and extra-regional; leads to the growth of terrorism.

The political orientation of states determines the quality of their relationship. Foreign policy is basically an outcome of the identity theories and their actors cannot act efficiently and in a sustained manner unless they achieve a unified theory and ideology. Imam Khomeini considered “Islam” as a different entity so that “others” can be identified in his political identity and perception. Language and ideology emphasizes on justification, production and reproduction of hegemony and unequal power relationship and consider the aim of criticism paying attention to most profound aspect of power in society through exposing the hypocrisy of language. Critical discourse analysis from philosophical point of view is based on social constructivism which by emphasis on human factor reduces the reality to human structure. The aim of critical analysis is to show ideological belief and values which has reflected itself as common sense. Everyone knows that the United States has the role of “hostile” and “other” in Imam Khomeini’s discourse and this role remains until America does not change her behavioral pattern. In response to this question “What are the conditions for normalization of relations between the two countries in Imam Khomeini’s discourse?” factors like “mutual respect” and “change of confrontationist and hostile policy” are recognized. The article by a descriptive method based on library material examines Islamic ideas of Imam Khomeini, his critical discourse analysis in foreign policy and then tests the article’s hypothesis, to prove the general principles.

Public diplomacy is the main tool of soft power. This fact was an accepted fact since long time back but in recent years it has vividly shown itself in the performance of many countries. The United States and Russia are two strong countries who have the precedence of competition. Russia in recent years due to military and economic weakness cannot match her rival i.e. the United States and is investing more on public diplomacy but on this sphere also she is lagging behind despite that she has a good political and cultural potential. The present article wants to answer this question that what is the place of public diplomacy in the foreign policies of both the countries and in what fields they make use of it? The underlying hypothesis is that both the countries acknowledge the importance of public diplomacy in modern world but despite attempt made by Russia in recent years, she has not been successful in achieving its goals in the field of public diplomacy. One of the important obstacles in the way of promoting public diplomacy is the rigid and inflexible mentality of the Russian leaders. On the other hand the United States as one of the important actors in international system makes use of different tools to communicate her message to the peoples of the world and she has been more successful in this regard. The present article has examined the above issue by descriptive-analytical method.

Iran and Saudi Arabia are two prominent countries in the Islamic World. They play important role in the Middle East region’s developments. The present article examines the developments of the three countries of Iraq, Bahrain and Yemen as the sphere of influence of Iran and Saudi Arabia to find out the root cause competition and rivalry between the two governments and give suggestion for solving the problem. The aim of the present study is to show that the nature of the conflict between the two countries has roots in ideological consideration which originates from the prevalence of contrasting ideological and value system which has led to wide gulf between Iran and Saudi Arabia and strained regional relations. It seems that any attempt to strengthen the grounds of cooperation and interaction and attenuating the tension between the two depends on change in semantic structure of the two governments and flexibility on both sides.

The present article wants to study change and continuity in Brazilian foreign policy in her relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The article by a descriptive-analytical method examines the role of Brazil in international political scene and its impact on nuclear dossier of Iran. The nuclear program of Iran not only has been an important issue for the world big powers but the medium powers also have tried to enter it and mediate in the issue in order to increase their influencing power in world arena. One of these medium powers is Brazil which in a short span of time entered the nuclear dossier of Iran and took certain measures in this direction. The present article tires to find out the causes of entry of a medium power from a distant geographical region into the nuclear issue of Iran. Brazil by presenting new ways for nearing the viewpoints of Iran and 5+1 group of countries tried to play active diplomatic role. But Brazil could not break the Western countries and their allies’ consensus against Iran and eventually followed the path decided by the big powers.