The advent of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979 significantly worsened Iran-U.S. relations. Although this relationship has been founded upon hostility ever since, the 1984-86 period can be mentioned as one when relations between the two actors were exempt to the rule, with both sides trying to establish unofficial relationships. This article seeks to explore the reasons for U.S. proximity to Iran during those years and to answer the following question: Why did the United States pursue rapprochement with Iran in 1984-86 in spite of hostility and negative space found between the two states? The hypothesis which is proposed in this writing revolves around the discussion of fear of Communist influence in Iran; a fear that made the United States devise a plan for approaching Iran. This ultimately resulted in the Iran-Gate or Iran-Contra affair. In other words, this research seeks to test the following hypothesis: Fear of Communist influence in Iran led the United States to approach Iran in the 1984-86 period.

Firmly can say after world war two, soviet union collapsing was the most important international political evolution in twentieth century. This evolution was the end of forty five years of cold war and bipolar system and forced the new basic conditions to the international system. Because of that a lot of scientists and researchers especially in political science field and international relations research on the failure of communism and collapse of the first practical experience of communism system in early decade 1990 and discussed different aspect of this subject. In this article tried discusses the insufficiency attention to end of the bipolar system and in this frame work cases such as nonflexible economic that based on concentrated programs, not attention to personal motivation of people in economic activities, social problems based on the distance between people and governors, lack of dynamism political of society, nonperson freedom, lose in military and scientific competition with imperialism and other things in form of communism scientific insufficiency which explained and then also these insufficiencies in theory aspects were discussed. In communism insufficiencies subject, subjects such as not attention to freedoms and its manifestation, exaggerating in proletariat role, no view in field work, faraway of rationalism no experience historical obligation (dialectical materialism) and finely disability in making a hard ideological link between nations, have been studied.

In this paper, after some introductory notes on "communism" and on the relation between Aristotle and Plato (in section 1), we proceed to narrate briefly Aristotle's report (section 2), and his criticism (in sections 3 and 4), of the theory of family and wealth communism in Plato's philosophy. Then, we try to have a glance on this theory as it has proposed by Plato in his Republic (section 5). At the end, we endeavor, on the core of Plato's message, to assessing Aristotle's report and criticism of the theory (section 6). In the last section, while we accept Aristotle's words in a special level, we try to clear Plato of Aristotelian accusations.

Years of 1330-1332 / 1951-1953 are of great importance for various reasons. One of the important aspects of the mentioned period is Iranian nation's movement for nationalizing oil, and reaction of the United States of America against it. This article, by an emphasis on the national interest of the United States, is going to review the factors that changed America's approach towards the nationalization of the oil industry and the removal of Mosadaq as the Iranian prime minister. Unlike the well-known thought, the reason does not seem to be the fear of growing power of communism in Iran, but the main factor is Iran's strategic position, and USA’s craving for a share of oil. This main objective of this paper is to documentary focus on the nationalization of Oil industry in Iran during the era of Dr. Mosadaq and how the United States interest in the region placed the USA on the side of the United Kingdom in the removal of Mosadaq from power.

After the victory of the October Revolution in 1917 and the establishment of the communist regime in the Soviet Union, this land became the utopia of many intellectuals. Among them André Gide, who was invited by the Union of Soviet Writers in 1936 to visit the land of his dreams. But what he saw and wrote in his return entitled Return from the U.S.S.R (1936) and Afterthoughts on the U.S.S.R. (1937) expressed his regret and despair for the realization of the great human aspirations of the twentieth century. This apparent disillusionment in Gide's text, however, is not simply achieved, but at the same time conveys the effects and factors that, according to Michel Foucault, shape the discourse of power in a particular period and influence the individual and collective choices of the author. In this article, we try to figure out the interaction of central discourses of power and their relation to the possibility of communism disillusionment by Gide, using the historical research methodology and relying on new historicism theories.

After the World War I, the generation of authors who had experienced this period condemns the principles of socio-cultural and ideological foundations of the western identity on which the society was based upon. They find the neglected western values in distant territories among which Asia occupies a different and special position.André Malraux, one of the most famous writers of this generation, sets his most remarkable Asian novelHuman Fate in China which represents the confusing space of that period. In the beginning of the 20th century, there are many Europeans in China. In the novel, the presence of various nationalities within this multiracial space creates a suitable occasion for western colonialism. Eastern and western characters belonging to different cultural and geographical contexts are part of the different “intercultural” and “geocultural” space. How is the presence of these multiracial characters, most of them in struggle with identity crisis, justified in the story? Why does the European spirit and ideology dominate the setting of the novel? How are the concepts of occidental “Identity” and “Alterity” applied in the novel.   French: Imagologie identitaire des personnages dans La Condition humaine Apres la Premiere Guerre mondiale, une generation d’ecrivains qui a vecu la guerre, met en cause les principes socioculturels et les fondements ideologiques sur lesquels est basee l’identite occidentale.Ils sont en quete des valeurs oubliees de l’Occident dans les territoires lointains dont l’Asie, parmi d’autres, occupe une place a part entiere.Faisant partie de cette meme generation d’ecrivains d’entre-deuxguerres, Malraux situe l’action de son roman asiatique le plus estime, La Condition humaine, dans la Chine qui est un espace confus de la contingence a l’epoque. La Chine du debut du XXe siecle est peuplee d’etrangers, et notamment d’Europeens. La presence de multiples nationalites au sein de cet espace multiraciste marque le climat favorable au colonialisme occidental. DansLa Condition humaine, les personnages europeens et orientaux font partis de l’espace (intercultural) et (geoculturel) different. Quelle justification peut avoir la presence de ces personnages multiraciaux, plus ou moins en crise d’identite? Pourquoi est-ce l’ideologie, surtout le communisme, et l’esprit europeen, qui dominent l’espace oriental du roman? Comment les concepts d’ (Identite) et d’ (Alterite) occidentales sont appliques dans cet espace multiraciste.Keywords: Espace Multi Raciste, Identite, Alterite, Colonialisme, Communisme

Iran's concession of UN's resolution no. 598 was regarded as a sign of waver in the beliefs of the political leaders of the regime and a retreat in the causes of the Islamic Revolution. This claim was repeatedly announced in various tribunes. Publication of Imam's letter to Gorbachev just 5 months after Iran's concession of resolution no. 598 radically changed the political atmosphere in and out of the country. Due to the status of Islamic Revolution and that of Imam Khomeini among Muslims all over the world on the one hand, and the evolutions initiated by Gorbachev in the former Soviet Union on the other hand, the letter and its content attracted the public attention, especially that of the authorities in international relations. The present article, while reflecting the conditions under which the letter was issued and dealing with the probable reasons for writing such a letter as well as indicating its content, is an attempt to infer some principles of Imam's political practice in encountering such a situation.

During Reza Shah reign, propagandists of communist ideas were arrested and sent to exile. The policy of government in exile was different from that of other dissidents. The main purpose of this research is to determine which policy has been chosen and based on what elements. The hypothesis of this study shows that the enthusiasm of propaganda and spying activities of communists in the first half of the year influenced the kind of government’ s encounter with them, which can be seen in the choice of exile, the provision of their jobs and their livelihood, and the duration of their exile. This research is based on descriptive analytical method and with the help of archival documents and archival sources. Wherever possible, there are numbers used for analysis. The findings of this research show that the entanglement of Soviet propaganda and spy activities during Reza Shah reign caused the government’ s action to send communist to exile, and deportees with an inappropriate climate for them were considered. Communist activists were sent to exile from mostly frozen regions to religious, warm, dry, and domestic communities. Also due to the mixing of the propaganda and spying activities of these exiles and despite the fact that they were specialized forces that could be used to revitalize the era of Reza Shahi, they were strictly used to approach the security approach and were not using their capacity. Contrary to other exiles, Reza Shah’ s regime maintained their approach to send communists on exile than exiled nationals. Exiles who year reform were usually exiled for several months to one year, but the end of the opposed the three exile period for exile activities was unclear and was not allowed to be freed. The punishment for exile in based imprisonment, and a person has spent a certain this period is a criminal offense, unlike time period in prison; however, in relation to exile during this period and in relation to communist and exiled exiles, time is not at all considered and the place of exile is important and there is no time for the end of the exile, and the time has come for the exiles to be released on September 13, 1941.