This paper aims to investigate the reasons why MILITARY groups intervene in politics. It also explores how political hegemony must deal with them in order to prevent socio-political crisis in a nation. Another central issue discusses why a MILITARY group fails to stay in power for a long time, and has to leave the power to non-MILITARY groups.

United Nations Charter, relying on historical events, absolutely prohibited the use of force in international law and relations. In spite of this, the need for predicting the cases of using force in order to keep international peace and security requires it that through systematizing the possibility of resorting to force and institutionalizing it within the system of the Security Council of the United Nations, the use of force be allowed in cases where the realities of the international community not only logically explains but also authorizes the use of force. Although the right of self-defense and the authority of the Security Council are the two exceptions contained in the UN Charter to materialize the mentioned goal, in recent decades, a concept, known as humanitarian INTERVENTION, has emerged, and has been considered by some states as the third exception to the principle of prohibition of the use of force. The question the present study asks in this regard is that if NATO's INTERVENTION in Kosovo War can be considered as legitimate within the definition of humanitarian INTERVENTION of the international law. Can one claim that a new tradition, or put differently, a new exception to the principle of the prohibition of resorting to force is being formed? The response to this question is that currently no exception to the aforementioned principle has been accepted under the title of humanitarian INTERVENTION. This article discusses the concept of humanitarian INTERVENTION and the legitimacy of such a claim.

Introdution: Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) remains one of the most complex and unresolved aspects of ischemic heart disease that the impact of percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION (PCI) on improvement of intensity of ischemic mitral regurgitation is not well clarified. Patients with coronary artery diseases and ischemic mitral regurgitation have a worse prognosis than the patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and those without ischemic mitral regurgitation. We sought to investigate the impact of complete revascularization by percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION PCI on improvement of IMR in patients with CAD and comparisons of echocardiography indices in patients with and without improvement of ischemic mitral regurgitation. Methods: In this cross sectional retrospective study, echocardiographic reports in pre-percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION time and 12 months after PCI of patients with moderate (≥ 2+) ischemic mitral regurgitation who underwent complete revascularization by percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION from Farvardin 1391 to Esfand 1393 were included in the study. Then, echocardiographic data of the patients with improved ischemic mitral regurgitation compared with the patients with non-improved ischemic mitral regurgitation. Results: Comparison of echocardiographic indices before and after percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION revealed that after percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION (P = 0. 002) in 15 patients (16%), improvement in ischemic mitral regurgitation was occurred. Also, left ventricular ejection fraction (P = 0. 010), left ventricular end-diastolic (P = 0. 003) and end-systolic diameters (P < 0. 001), wall motion score index (P = 0. 003), left atrial area (P = 0. 001) and systolic pulmonary artery pressure (P = 0. 046) in pre-percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION echocardiography were different between improved and none-improved IMR group. Conclusion: Although, percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION can lead to improvement of ischemic mitral regurgitation but most patients did not show improvement of ischemic mitral regurgitation after percutaneous coronary INTERVENTION. The structural abnormality of left ventricle and atrium were different between improved and none-improved IMR group.

Following the developments in recent decades in the Middle East, many tragic events have unfolded in this region. From the imposed war of Iraq's dictator, Saddam Hussein, against Iran in the 1980s, Kuwait's occupation by Ba'athist Iraq, acts of aggression by Israel's regime against Lebanon, Gaza along with other incidents, MILITARY INTERVENTION in Afghanistan and Iraq by the United States and its allies, brutal and criminal acts of violence committed by terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria with the support of regional and trans-regional powers, to the most recent MILITARY INTERVENTION and acts of war against the people of Yemen. Not only have these events been in violation of fundamental rules and principles of the International law, but they have also endangered the current international order. Unfortunately, the international practice especially responses by a number of States and international organizations have not been as expected. This essay reviews the facts and issues regarding the MILITARY INTERVENTION in Yemen according to the rules and principles of International Law and International Customary Law, to prove it as an unjustified and illegitimate act.

Among the topics studied in political sociology, is MILITARY INTERVENTION, as one of the organized social groups, in politics. MILITARY INTERVENTION in politics is a global phenomenon that occurs in many countries of the world in varying degrees and forms. In all the states, the army and MILITARY organization form and act in order to carry out certain tasks that the protection of territorial integrity of the country and the safekeeping of the state structure and the existence of governors are among the most important of them. But it often happens that these forces clearly go beyond their defined tasks and tend to interfere in politics and government and gain political power or influence politics and politicians. Imam Khomeini, the late leader of the Islamic Revolution emphasized repeatedly the need for non-MILITARY INTERVENTION in politics from the very beginning of the revolution. The question posed in this study is why, while Imam Khomeini emphasized the need for all citizens to be involved in politics, he opposed MILITARY INTERVENTION in politics? In other words, what was the main reason for the imam's opposition to MILITARY INTERVENTION in politics? The present paper, using the Huntington Army's professionalism theoretical framework, tests this hypothesis that Imam Khomeini considered MILITARY INTERVENTION in politics a reason to reduce MILITARY professionalism and the withdrawal of the MILITARY organization from its professional tasks, and thus strongly opposed it.

Maintaining international peace and security in accordance with the Charter is among the primary duties of the Security Council as it can even be claimed, the cornerstone of the formation of the United Nations is based on the maintenance of international peace and security. In this regard, the Security Council has been pursuing peace-keeping operations that, as international law advances, saw the next generation of such an operation. The author, with assuming the validity of the state's satisfaction in granting it to foreign MILITARY INTERVENTION, considers the relationship between peace operations and the issue of foreign MILITARY INTERVENTION in an analytical manner and attempts have been made to determine from this transition whether peace operations could be included in the sovereignty of states in order to give consent to MILITARY INTERVENTION in the territory of the said state. A review of the various generations of peace operations suggests that the combination of two criteria of consent and MILITARY action has not been taken in any of the concepts of peacekeeping, peacebuilding and peace enforcement, therefore Peace Operations regarded as a subset calls for foreign MILITARY INTERVENTION, is not possible.

Background: Despite recent improvement in coronary INTERVENTION, there are many controversies about its results in diabetic patients. The goal of this study is comparison of in hospital outcome of diabetics after coronary INTERVENTION with nondiabetics.Methods: In this study 115 diabetic and 115non diabetic patients who admitted for coronary INTERVENTION in our center during 1383&84 were entered in an analytic study of Cohort type. Datas about clinical, aniographic, procedural and post procedural (24hours) characteristics were entered in each patient’s form. Independent T test,chi-square and Fisher’s exact test were used for analyzing datas.Results: The Diabetic Patients were most often older men, and they had higher angina class, more co-risk factors and lower ejection fractions. Diabetic’s lesions were longer and more located in proximal portion of vessels. But success rate, major complication (death, revascularization, Q Wave MI and CVA), and minor complications (coronary/peripheral arteries complication, pulmonary edema, ischemic ECG) had no significant differences between two groups.Conclusion: Diabetes mellitus does not affect short outcomes of coronary INTERVENTION as an independent factor. So INTERVENTION could be done in these patients with considering favorable outcomes.

This article discusses the German, Ottoman and British rivalries to dominate the oil lands of Caucasia just after the Bolshevik revolution of Russia and surveys the impact of above-mentioned rivalries on the general situation of region. Hence, the strategic importance of the region will be discussed from the viewpoints of the three great powers. Furthermore, the main MILITARY force of Britain in Caucasia, i.e., Dunsterforce, has been introduced and its role in the regional struggles between the great powers has been studied. This article will illustrate how Dunsterforce, despite its short presence in Caucasia, could reach its main goal that was to prevent the German influence in Britain's eastern colonies; one main reason of this success was the defeat of German forces in World War I and withdrawal of Ottoman forces from Caucasia.

The principle of non-interference is the fundamental rights and obligations of each state, which originates from the principle of equality of their sovereignty. One of the principles that follows the principle of nonINTERVENTION is the rule of non-use of force. One of the fundamental rules of international law is stated in various international documents and treaties, specifically in paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the UN Charter. But the principle of non-INTERVENTION has exceptions, one of which is the invitation to intervene. INTERVENTION based on the invitation is basically used in the case of MILITARY assistance of the foreign states's forces in an internal armed conflict with the prior consent of the legitimate and legal government of another state and with the aim of supporting the government's efforts against any non-state entity or real persons in the territory and the insurgent group does not have the right to invite foreign forces in international law, and only the legitimate government has this right. Therefore, the consent of the ruling government is the basic element regarding the concept of an invitation to intervene and the international responsibility of the third country will be fulfilled in the absence of this factor, and the action of that state will be considered an act of aggression. In this regard, it has provided the important theories for the legal validity including recognition, effective control, and democratic legitimacy. Of course, the issue of inviting INTERVENTION and its connection with the right of people to self-determination is one of the controversial issues in contemporary international law. So, this research has tried to investigate the legal aspects of the issue of consent to MILITARY INTERVENTION by a third state.