STUDIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS JOURNAL (POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS JOURNAL)
Year:2013 | Volume:6 | Issue:23|Papers Count:6

The European Union (EU) is one of the most progressive and pervasive political and economic institutions in the world today. The Union consists of 28 member states, implying almost 500 million inhabitants. The creation of the EU itself has been a revolutionary act never encountered before in history, as several sovereign countries agreed on the long-term target of the generation of a common region of unitary legislation. Since its inception in the 50s, the EU has taken huge strides toward further integration and enlargement in the hope that it will provide peace, security and equality for its citizens and promote economic and social cohesion. Enumerating the advantages and opportunities resulting for economy, societies and individuals in the EU, one always has to take into consideration the serious challenges the formation of the Union poses to the particular member states and to their inhabitants. It has achieved a lot in many fields through a process of voluntary integration between the nation-states of Europe. Hence, it would not be unwise to conjecture that the EU is a unity within pluralism since it can unify various actors for achieving a set of shares objectives. Over fifty years later, the EU is neither a pure intergovernmental organization, nor a true federal state. However, the EU is teetering on the brink of stagnating or ‘euro scleroses in the face of financial crises in Greece as well as others in the EU, notably Portugal and Spain. The still-unfolding crises have questioned the euro zone’s ability to design a scheme capable of dealing with the threat of sovereign default. The specter of evolving challenges hangs over the region and continues to cloud its future.This paper attempts to examine some of the key contemporary challenges confronting the European Union, and to explain how they are challenging for the EU while paying a close attention to the possible solutions to the problems.

Many experts and analysts in the field of political and economic affairs believe that crisis of Syria not only was domestic struggles, but also was a field for contradiction with benefits of different countries. The aforesaid crisis due to having domestic, national and international complexities is regarded as center of global attention. In fact, Syria is regarded as small world in the Middle East and war in Syria was called as the begin for World War that was began by U.S.A, now the question is that is this war ends with U.S.A as well? As global crisis greatly influences on different countries, the Syria crisis influences on different countries as well. The Syrian crisis leads to going to astray in diplomatic relations of countries, convergence in region, turning old friend to most important enemies and enemies to possible friends in future. American people believe that, America never has permanent friend and enemy, rather the criterion for being friend or enemy is only benefits of America. If during the recent evolution in Middle East except Syria in the remained crisis the global superpowers specially U.S.A was only observer and in order to maintain its appearance and prevent from direct intervention, this issue was not correct for Syrian crisis. In fact, from the first days of Syrian crisis we observed strong participation of such countries specially U.S.A and its allies and Russia. Sending money, weapon, mass media assistance shows field evolutions, dispatching military lieutenants, intelligence service officers, spy satellites over Syria, dispatching terrorist to war of Afghanistan, Alqada terrorist group, Salafi and Wahhabism under supervision of Saudi Arabia government, presence of terrorists from Europe, Asia and terrorists from other African countries are all instances of pressure over people and country that intends to be determined for obtaining its national benefits. Otherwise, the plan of Large Middle East and several wars during recent decades in the Middle East only refers dominance of Israel on world. In fact, dominance over Middle East paves the way for dominance over other countries. Awakening countries and high energy of Islamic countries is regarded as serious impediment for progress of this plan. In this article, it is attempted to study the basics and consequences of intervention of the U.S. on Syrian crisis and some field observations in Syria over Middle East and other regions.

Expansion of the extreme right is one of the challenges facing European countries. This appeared in the two levels, official parties and illegal. A growing trend of Extreme right parties have begun in European politics in recent decades and able to oppose the presence of immigrants and multiculturalism warning about the attention of many voters, particularly young people and workers and attracted their views. The parties are antistructural approach of public discontent and distrust of the mainstream parties benefited and serve as the only alternative to the status quo and the true voice of the people present. The parties of the extreme right in between traditional fascism away and replaced identify and cultural issues, as alternatives to racism and could change populist approach to weight determines in many European countries and even when it attained the status of implementation. The groundwater level entities associated with extreme right groups such as neo-Nazis using tools like the Internet to promote xenophobia and violence against minorities resort and is becoming a serious threat to Europe.This article discusses characteristics of the extreme right and it examines the reasons for the spread of this subject. It seems that the issues of migration and culture and identity as the key factors affecting the growth of this subject and are more important than economic factors. Also, the recent economic crisis in Europe and economic austerity faced simultaneously with the failings of European Union and gave a new opportunity to development of these parties.

One of the most common areas of Iran and Belarus, which has led to the development of bilateral relations is that both countries in the field of foreign policy, independent of the orientation of his work have taken priority. Unlike some of the former republics of the Soviet Union after independence and dependence on the West's strategy to align its policy, Belarusian was independence orientation on the agenda. As an independent policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Westerners are not welcome to this policy and attempted to put various pressures to our country, independence views of Belarusian president and his officials also caused political challenges against Europe and America.Republic of Belarus and the far West surrender its independence policies, including policies on charges of human rights violations, international pressure, sanctions against officials and against Belarusian companies from 2011 including Bell oil company is in its agenda. Share the common view of independency in foreign policy made both countries close to each others. Belarus to the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution against Iran, the negative vote on the resolution and the Islamic Republic of Iran oil embargo by European Union was condemned on behalf Belarus. This article explores the relations between Iran and Belarus.

En francais:Les interactions entre le système culturel et le système politique s’avèrent par des multiples actes et les aspects politiques de la culture ne laissent aucun doute. Le sous-système des valeurs se lie directement avec le problème de la légitimation du pouvoir politique. C’est ainsi que tous les gouvernements ayant des soucis de légitimation de leur pouvoir ne restent pas indifférents.C’est ainsi que tous régimes politiques mènent une politique culturelle qui doit rassurer leur harmonie sociale: Mais dans une communauté ou union les politiques culturelles différentes peuvent poser des problèmes en ce qui concerne l’intégration politique. On voit deux tendances paradoxes au sein de l’Union Européenne qui peuvent altérer leur convergence. D’un côté une politique culturelle nationale et de l’autre côté les efforts des instances européennes pour le rapprochement culturel des différents peuples intégrés au sein de la communauté européenne.In English:The interaction between cultural subsystem and political system is adopted by all of sociologists. But a national politics of culture can be against a regional politics of culture. This paradox is visible in European Union. The State like France supports his cultural politics while the European authorities try to reduce the cultural difference between their countries.

During the Cold War competition between East block and West block in various fields based on two different ideologies, and the two blocks would use all tools that were available. So the United States used human rights as a tool of foreign policy before 1990. United States would condemn human rights violations in east block and did not attend human rights violations about its friends. Some of researchers believed that end of the Cold War and the triumph of liberal democracy lead the United States to be left double standards on human rights. However, U.S procedure after 1990 was as like as its Cold War policy in reality. United States don`t consider human rights violation by its friends that provide its strategic interests and use human rights to convict its enemies. The procedure of United States is realistic but American politicians try to show that it is liberalistic. So America's national interests is the conductor of U.S foreign policy and America use human rights as a tool of foreign policy when need it. The main question of this article is: How Human rights norms have affected on relations between the United States and developing countries after 1990?