IRANIAN REVIEW OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Year:2014 | Volume:5 | Issue:3 (19)|Papers Count:7

This article aims to study the foundations of change in Egypt’s foreign policy. From the Second World War onwards, the Egypt’s foreign policy has undergone at least four eras. Each era has its own distinctive context, principles and objectives that can be studied separately. Predominance of distinct identity elements in different eras has led to perceptible differences in the Egypt’s foreign policy. Jamal Abdel Nasser’s Pan-Arabism, Sadat’s patriotism, Mubarak’s dual identity and subsequently the Islamic identity of Morsi’s administration has given different identities frameworks and worldviews to the Egypt’s foreign policy decision makers. This argument is significant in terms of its explanatory value as well as in providing a framework for future examination of Egyptian foreign policy and other Arab countries. The present article, is an attempt to address the following primary question: what are the reasons for significant differences between the four main periods of Egypt’s foreign policy in objectives, tools and approaches to the outer world? In response to this question, the article argues that identity developments account for transformation of foreign policy and each identity development at the level of ruling elites give rise to change in Egypt’s foreign policy.

The aim of this paper is to examine the role of human rights in the making of United States foreign policy. While the concept of human rights has had a prominent place in US foreign policy especially since the early 1970s, this paper argues that Washington’s concern for human rights is mainly rhetorical and very much interwoven with perceived US national interests at any given time. This study takes examples from human rights policy of various US administrations, yet focuses on the Carter and Reagan presidencies in order to highlight the dynamics of human rights in US foreign policy both in theory and practice. The objective is to understand various executive approaches and limitations to and potentials for the promotion of human rights in American foreign policy. The reason for selecting these two administrations is that Jimmy Carter was the first US president to institutionalize human rights in US foreign policy formulation and implementation, while the Reagan Administration sought to roll it back. The article also demonstrates how human rights discourse can have its own impact on political developments abroad regardless of the intentions of foreign policymakers in Washington.

Historically religious, tribal, racial, and lingual differences have contributed to the political chasm in Yemen. It lacks social and religious cohesion due to its primarily tribal culture; this has paved the way for regional players and trans-regional actors’ interference such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the United States. Unlike Saudi Arabia, the Iranian interference is not military but morall and politicall support. Yemen has special ideological and strategic value for the two regional players; under their direction and control, in recent years, the social groups and movements have become very active in this country.The competition among regional powers and their attempts to expand their influence among these groups has created a power struggle among different groups. This has created much friction and tension among different groups and has prepared the context for maximum interference of the regional and non-regional powers through exploitation of the conflicts among the religious groups. In response to Islamic Republic’s support of the Houthis, the Saudi government has aligned itself with the U.S. to stabilize Yemen by managing the crisis in a way to maintain political structure, or at most unchanged.

Iran-U.S. relations have been characterized by ideological inconsistencies as well as strategic competitions during the past decades. At times, their competition has been intensified particularly in the Middle East and placed the two countries at the verge of military confrontation. That said, observing the two countries’ relations with Iraq is indicative of a different pattern. Unlike other areas, in Iraq, Iran and the United States have taken distance form grand strategic competition and inclined towards some kind of indirect cooperation. In contrast to the two major viewpoints about Iran-U.S. relations in Iraq which tend to describe them as either based on strategic cooperation or all-out confrontation, that the reality falls in between these two extreme views. What best describes the reality is that despite persistence of ideological inconsistencies and strategic conflicts in the Middle East, the geopolitical constraints in Iraq and emergence of joint threats in this country have driven Iran and the United States towards indirect cooperation. In other words, emerging challenges and threats in Iraq have introduced some grounds for cooperation between Iran and the United States.

This article outlines the dimensions of defensive relations between Iran and China, both from political and strategic aspects on the scope of defense diplomacy. Furthermore, the article shows, why the two countries are seeking to upgrade their relationship to a strategic level. In this respect, defense diplomacy is an important tool in international relations, and can illustrate the underlying mechanism that makes defense diplomacy an effective geopolitical tool. Although, there is a paucity of research on Iran-China defense diplomacy in the international security literature, yet this relationship has important implications for East Asia and Middle East regional security. This concept -specifically after 2013- became the central dynamics of the complex relationship between Iran and China where both countries have institutionalized a series of confidence building measures in bilateral defense-military relations. In this sense, the two countries seek to develop mutually beneficial ties to a stable international and regional environment. This paper discusses how China and Iran are preparing to launch a joint military exercise during the Rouhani era and in what ways the Islamic Republic's defense diplomacy has engaged in a continuing military modernization program with China that is expanding the capabilities available to the Iranian arms forces. Nevertheless, the paper suggests that due to China's political considerations and U.S. role in this regard, Sino-Iranian defense ties remain relatively shallow and sketchy.

One of the most serious international crisis in recent years that has involved majors powers in in long round of negotiations is the dilemma of Iranian nuclear program. While western powers, in particular the United States of America, accuse Iran of developing the capability for nuclear weapons, Iranian high officials categorically deny these accusations insisting that their nuclear program is totally peaceful and designed for civilian purposes. One effort to build confidence and create more transparency on the peaceful character of nuclear program the Fatwa, known as Nuclear Fatwa, issued by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic republic, Ayatollah Khamenei, banning the production and use of nuclear weapons. The Supreme Leader who has the ultimate authority over other branches of the state, and is the commander in chief of the armed forces of Iran, explicitly declared this principal based on Islamic teachings and beliefs. The Nuclear Fatwa delineates that the production and use of the nuclear weapons are prohibited in Islam. The Fatwa which in reality is Iran’s formal policy with regard to the weapons of mass destruction is based on the Islamic principles and edicts derived from the formal sources of the Islamic legal and jurisprudential system. In other words, the Nuclear Fatwa is an edict deduced from those formal sources and as a result, has special legal effects in Iranian legal system. This paper seeks to study the content and the nature of the Nuclear Fatwa in the light of the Islamic jurisprudence, the status of the Fatwa according to the Iranian constitution and practice, and in particular its status under international law as a unilateral statement made publicly by a head of state.

This article explores the impact of Iran's foreign policy on economic development since the end of the Iran-Iraq war. The main question discussed in this article is how foreign policy may affect economic development in the Islamic Republic of Iran. As a case study the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic during Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani’s presidency will be examined. To answer the main question, conceptual framework of development-orientated foreign policy, along with two examples, i.e. China and Nigeria, will be introduced. The hypothesis of the article is that with a more realistic and pragmatist foreign policy, more opportunities for success in economic development are created. The article argues that in the era of globalization, economic development of a country hinges on foreign relations with major economies and cooperation with international institutions and organizations, especially economic entities. Accordingly, if a country adopts a developmental approach in foreign policy, it should accept the existing international order, along with its components.