The Republics of Azerbaijan and Armenia as the two main parties in the Karabakh conflict try to strengthen their positions through the principles of international law. Azerbaijan addresses ...
Read More
The Republics of Azerbaijan and Armenia as the two main parties in the Karabakh conflict try to strengthen their positions through the principles of international law. Azerbaijan addresses the principle of territorial integrity of the UN and as per many international treaties and likewise conventions claiming the need of withdrawal for Armenian military forces from Karabakh and specifically denying the independence announcement of this area. However, Armenia and Self-proclaimed Republic of Karabakh adhere to the principle of self-determination, in the consent of independence of Mountainous Karabakh and even its incorporation with Armenia to be assumed the right of the local people. They also believe that, in this regard, a referendum held in 1993, and since then, several presidential, parliamentary and local authority elections have been held in Karabakh. The purpose of this article is to assess occupation of Karabakh, the positions of the parties and the players in this conflict from the perspective of the international law. As a matter of fact, this article seeks to answer the following question: To what extent the adherence to the principle of territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and Armenian separatists in Karabakh and Armenia stance on the principle of self-determination, is reasonable and is in accordance with international law? Are these two principles which are called by the international lawyers as jus cogens, in conflict with each other or the two sides of the Karabakh conflict are having a unidirectional concept of the issue? A provisional answer to this question as an assumption is that after the end of the colonial period, as per international law, for ethnic minorities within the country, the right of self-determination is excluding the territorial separatism and decomposition but including the right of participation in the election of executive, legislative authorities and other aspects of civic and political contribution, as well as to preserve the cultural heritage.
The crisis of Ukraine although derived from some regional roots, has involved the trans-regional powers in the events of Russian borders. As a regional power, Russia wants to protect ...
Read More
The crisis of Ukraine although derived from some regional roots, has involved the trans-regional powers in the events of Russian borders. As a regional power, Russia wants to protect and enhance its role in the former Soviet Union realm, but this aim is opposed and resisted by some actors such as Ukraine. On the other perspective we are witnessing that the west could not interfere in the region and could not challenge the role of Russia without national and regional backgrounds.
However, the reaction of the west to the Russian actions in Ukraine has imposed some costs on Moscow. With continuing instability in Ukraine, Moscow pursues bargaining with the west and emphasizes on its important role in other crisis regions. This article addresses the question that whether the current tension between Russia and the west would lead to an international confrontation or would the crisis of Ukraine lead to a trans-regional crisis? This article argues that in spite of trans-regional consequences of disagreement on Ukraine, the Ukrainian crisis is essentially a regional issue and that the dimensions of this crisis are regionally manageable.
Furthermore in spite of clash of interests between Russia and the west over Ukraine because of Russia's need to west for establishing the conditions of revitalizing its great power position and thanks to pragmatism of Moscow, a longstanding tension and a new cold war between Russia and the west can be prevented and the conversion of a regional crisis to a trans-regional conflict can be avoided.
This article tries to examine and explain the international sources of Russian Federation national security ...
Read More
This article tries to examine and explain the international sources of Russian Federation national security strategy to 2020. Power distribution from the international system, international organizations and globalization, as international sources, are the factors that have an impact on Russian Federation national security strategy to 2020.
Therefore, the authors aim to examine that how the international sources Influence on this strategy. In fact, we attempt to answer this question that how the international sources impact on Russian approach in this strategy? Temporary answer to this question as a hypothesis, that the pressure of international sources has caused adoption of a dual strategy of confrontation and cooperation by Russian Federation in the design and development of the national security strategy to 2020.
After the evolution of the Geo-strategic discourse to a geo-economic discourse in the last decades and the superior role of economy in the global arena, the following issues are settled ...
Read More
After the evolution of the Geo-strategic discourse to a geo-economic discourse in the last decades and the superior role of economy in the global arena, the following issues are settled in an upper level of status: energy geopolitics, energy corridors and energy security. The present article attempts to answer the following question: What has been the impact of the geo-economic position of the Caspian Sea and the energy pipelines on the interests and the security of the Islamic Republic of Iran? The hypothesis of this article is that after the collapse of the bipolar system, due to its neighborhood with this important region in the energy heartland, the Islamic Republic of Iran is considered as the best, shortest and the most convenience way for energy transfer from this region to other parts of the world.
The United States has been one of the most dynamic and influential actors in Central Asia during the past two decades. In fact, the imperatives of the US hegemony in the post-cold war ...
Read More
The United States has been one of the most dynamic and influential actors in Central Asia during the past two decades. In fact, the imperatives of the US hegemony in the post-cold war world, in different terms such as colonialism and imperialism, caused the United States to be present in a far distant region on the basis of the three principles of promotion, expansion and interventionism. The existence of three US rivals; Russia, China and Iran in the neighborhood of this region and interaction or opposition of these three regional powers with the US goals, policies and approaches has shaped a large part of the New Great Game.
The above circumstances raise the following question: What approaches are taken by Russia, China and Iran to oppose or reduce the US influence in Central Asia? Have these approaches or reactions been the same or they have different natures? To answer these questions, a hypothesis is advanced that the behavioral models of Russia, China and Iran have not been the same and they have had some different experiences based on their relative advantages in geographical, geopolitical, political, defensive, security, cultural and civilizational fields of Central Asia as well as their respective bilateral relations with the US.
This article tries to test this hypothesis and to provide a convincing, comprehensive and logical answer to the mentioned question by applying the theory of hegemony and some concepts such as counter- hegemonic as well as hard and soft balance
In the multipolar system with the supremacy of a single pole, international agendas are usually determined by the hegemonic power. The hegemonic power has also more freedom of act in ...
Read More
In the multipolar system with the supremacy of a single pole, international agendas are usually determined by the hegemonic power. The hegemonic power has also more freedom of act in determination of goals, interests and countering with its oppositions in a comparison with bipolar and multipolar structures. An example of the mentioned composition of international agendas can be seen in the area of determining energy corridors. TAPI pipeline is a good instance. This pipeline has been proposed as an alternative of the peace pipeline. Despite its strategic and geo-economic situation of Iran, this project tries to exclude Iran from regional and international political equations. This literature addresses the following main question: Which factors lead to the suspension of the executive trend of the peace pipeline and its being replaced by TAPI pipeline? In order to answer the mentioned question, the following hypothesis is used: Structural pressures of the international system through “socialization” and “competition”, and their impact on decisions and policy makings of those countries that participated in the TAPI gas pipeline project, are the main cause for the suspension of the executive trend of peace pipeline and its being replaced by TAPI pipeline.
