This research aims to explain the agents, structure, objectives, and ultimate end of transcendent international relations. To this end, at the meta-theoretical level, the epistemological, ontological, and anthropological foundations are addressed. The main question is: What are the characteristics of transcendent international relations at the meta-theoretical level? The findings indicate that in transcendent international relations, dynamism governs international interactions; evolution is inherent to its essence, and it is oriented toward an ultimate end. Rules, laws, and traditions govern it, demonstrating that human beings, states, and other international entities, while possessing free will, also bear responsibility and are accountable for their policies and actions. In explaining the agents of international relations, given the principles related to the study of human nature, it was determined that, in terms of the four human faculties—the rational (ʿāqila), the irascible (ghaḍabiyya), the estimative (wāhima), and the bestial (bahīmiyya)—eight types of human beings can be identified, and consequently eight types of agents in international relations. Each type produces a particular form of international relations through its actions. Among them, the type of agency in which the rational faculty predominates has the effective capacity to transform existing international relations toward transcendent or desirable international relations. Regarding the structure of international relations at global, regional, and national levels, two structures were discussed: the virtuous (fāḍila) and the non-virtuous. In the structure of virtuous international relations, its nature is just, flexible, adaptive and guiding, cultural, oriented toward transcendence, progressive, peace-seeking, and invitational. The process of this structure is based on changing the status quo, transformation, and evolution. In the objectives and ultimate end of transcendent international relations, the importance of power and its acquisition as one of the objectives was addressed. However, attaining power is not permissible by any means, and the goal of acquiring power is not domination or superiority-seeking; rather, power derives its meaning and significance in the service of realizing transcendent objectives. The development of ethics and divine-human values, and the establishment of justice in relations among countries, are considered other objectives. The ultimate end of international relations is oriented toward perfection, and its future horizon is bright and transcendent, encompassing the attainment of human societies to divine proximity (qurb ilāhī). The final finding is that, in order to achieve sustainable peace, effective structures and institutions, the elimination of discrimination and oppression, the establishment of justice and equality, the realization of the rights of nations, and the formation of a desirable international society, it is necessary to move beyond conventional and base international relations and attain transcendent international relations. The agents, structures, objectives, and transcendent ultimate end possess the necessary capacity and power to realize transcendent international relations. Methodologically, by selecting the macro level of analysis—both material and spiritual—and adopting a theological approach with a descriptive-analytical method, each of the characteristics of transcendent international relations is explained. International relations, as an independent academic discipline, possesses its own specific subject matter, set of issues, methodology, objectives, and theorists. Each of the existing theories, within the main currents of realism, liberalism, and communism, has its own ontological, epistemological, anthropological, and methodological foundations. Commitment to these foundations leads to the formation and production of knowledge and the construction of theory specific to it. A review of the history of theorizing in international relations shows that studies in this field have largely been influenced by materialist meta-theory and a positivist approach. This has caused international relations theories to address only one dimension of international relations, whereas broader dimensions can be conceived that go beyond the material. In transcendent international relations, not only are the material and worldly dimensions of human life in the global society considered, but—with attention to the existential purposes of humanity and the philosophy of creation—all dimensions of international relations, including material, spiritual, and otherworldly, are taken into account. What is certain is that any change or transformation in meta-theory and epistemological sources will bring about extensive effects and consequences in theory production. Transcendent international relations does not rest content with this level of explanation; rather, by choosing the macro level of analysis—material, spiritual, and eschatological—it presents a new narrative and explanation that encompasses everything from the macro level to the micro level and the action programs of states.

After decades of neglecting the role of culture in international relations, in recent years again attention has been paid to this factor. Nevertheless, once the discussion about the role and place of culture in international relations and politics arises there are different and at time misleading interpretation about the concept. The aim of the present article is to identify the links between culture and international relations. For this reason the article examines different texts which have focused on the subjects of culture and international relations. The study shows that although the scope of culture includes cultural policy priorities in foreign policy and thus cultural relations of nations, it is far from being limited to that. The impact of culture on foreign policy decision making, the role of cultural differences, as in looking into international system, in making misunderstandings, disputes and conflicts cover some other aspects of the relevancy. Finally the classification comes to an end by reviewing Ned Lebow’s cultural theory of international relations.

Following the developments that have occurred in recent decades, once again religion as an important variable have been entered in the social sphere and has challenged secularism authority in all areas. This led to not only have been focused attentions once again to the role of religion in political relations, rather many believe that despite the prevailing notion, religion has acted in the human life in different ways and has a positive function in order to achieve peace and a negative function by fueling tensions. In response to the how religion Is permanently acting In the public sphere in general, this hypothesis is followed that religion because it has been along human history and provides a framework that mankind think and act in its form, affect his life in a variety of ways and so, what is known as the secularist although denied the authority of religion as a guide to life, but could not quit itself from the and its indirect and hidden consequences of religion so that following change in circumstances and communities, onc again had proceeded besides hidden influence revitalized its authority in all aspects of human life.

Practice theory (PT) is one of the latest theories of International Relations (IR). This theory is the outcome of the practice turn in social theory in the first decade of the 21st century. There are controversies among scholars on the nature and identity of this theory. Some consider it as a new and developed version of constructivism or neo-constructivism. Others, on the contrary, regard it as a separate theory from constructivism. Likewise, this article, argues that PT is different from constructivism in such a way that it considers international practices as the unit of analysis and independent variable to empirically and practically explain “ir”. In fact, “ir” are defined and analyzed according to regular practices of international activists on a daily basis. The aim of this study is to articulate, explain, and critique PT in the Iranian IR community. To obtain this goal, first, the practice turn in IR is explained. Then different approaches and typologies of PT are clarified. The third section examines the principles, hypotheses, and theoretical commitments of PT. The fourth part deals with how ir are analyzed via PT referring to some case studies. Next, PT is critically evaluated. Finally, the findings of the study are presented.

Ethics and interest as two key controversial and basic concepts in international relations’ literature have been subject to different debates among the scholars and theorists in this filed. This article is an attempt to investigate ethics-oriented approach and Interests-oriented one trying to reveal the relationship between the two. Furthermore, it will attempt to indicate the consequences of each on international system evaluating the challenges and obstacles in the road and making international relations more ethical.

Islam as a religion contains a comprehensive set of principles, precepts and values (belief system) which lie at the foundation of a quite elaborate body of practical edicts (do’s and don’ts) governing all aspects of the behavior and life of the faithful, at the personal as well as communal/social levels, with the ultimate goal of leading a pious, happy life and “salvation” in the Hereafter. Over and above the personal and communal affairs, Islam is also concerned with the affairs of the state, as the embodiment of the apparatus in charge of the collective affairs of the society, and its behavior at all levels, both domestic and external. Based on this overall framework, this article looks into the Qur’anic approach to international relations and tries to analyze Qur’anic propositions in order to arrive at an Islamic understanding of the nature, rules, and behavioral principles governing these relations. To this end, the author advances an analytical model for "semantic structure and legal institutions" and studies the Qur’anic precepts/propositions from the vantage point of comparison between the two semantic structures of the Jahilyya [pre-Islamic paganism] and Islam. The article then proceeds to lay out the general principles of an Islamic theory of international relations-consisting of the three principles of conviction, blissfulness, and "Velaya" [acceptance of the guardianship of jurisprudence], which, in my reckoning, could fit under the general title of an "objective ethical theory."

International relations, as an academic discipline which emerged and developed in the twentieth century, has sought to answer questions and address concerns originating from the modern thoughts and lives of human beings. This includes reasons for and international insecurity as well as ways to establish peace and security, which are among the most important questions that mainstream theories of international relations, has sought to answer. Utilitarian rationality and a tendency for scientific positivist methods are the main features of mainstream theories; these are deeply rooted in modernity. Therefore, modernity's assumptions have a determining role in the construction of international relations theory. During the last decades, a wide range of international relations scholars have challenged this dominant approach. While some thinkers such as post adopted a pure relativism, others critical theory - believe that it would be possible to propose a more moral and humanistic reading of modernity through a revision of its content; thereby shifting the theory of international relations from utilitarian rationality to a moral and justice-oriented rationality.