عنوان مقاله [English]
Superpowers write the international dramatics, stage manager and carry out it but they ignore whenever these principles and normative do not provide their interests. Superpowers try to ally with regional states for provision of national interests and dominate on geopolitics and geostrategic region of the world. The united states of America as an international power and Israel as a regional have "unique relationships" and insist on these relations in international system. US-Israel as strategic alliances, in maximizing of their national interests utilize soft, hard and smart Powers that are confrontation of Middle East states.
In this Article for answering of the question addressed is: what explains US-Israel special relationship? Three variables are distinguished as affecting these relations. Accordingly three hypotheses are proposed: Common history, shared values and cultural similarities; and The penetration of Jewish lobbies in US decision making institutions, that are examined as rival hypotheses. The "Common strategic interests" is proposed as the main hypothesis in political and military aspects.
Among international theories, realism and neo-realism are important for the explanation of relationships between US as a "super power" and Israel as a "Regional Power" . According to the theory of "Balance of Threat" (Stephen Walt), states allied against the states that are the source of most threat and try to lead them toward "status qu policy" or (Bandwagoning). So, the systemic theory of Kenneth Waltz on a new model was studied that is important for the investigating of US-Israel common strategic interests and their relationships vis-à-vis other Middle East states.
Results and Discussion
Generally, in creating an international phenomenon certainly has been participated different factors. Anybody cannot claim that international phenomena are single-cause. In this case, in shaping unique relationship between America and Israel as "integrated" relationships are participated factors such as common history, shared values and cultural similarities, the penetration of Jewish lobbies and common strategic interests.
Lobbies are effective in giving preference to posed subjects in foreign policy, but this effect is not accounted determiner factor in most political decision. Opposite of thoughts that have extremely posed about lobbies’ members, America’s function in The Middle East from World War Two shows that White House, National Security Council, Pentagon and ministry of Foreign Affairs act in drawing foreign policy strategy of America based on national interests preference. Therefore, in foreign policy making theories, if it is less the importance of subject, it will be more interest groups’ the possibility of influence, but contrary, whatever the decision making problem in foreign policy of a country is more important, interested groups’ influence possibility are less. Therefore, since Congress and White House have important role in foreign policies making, it does not seem that Jewish lobbies can enforce the members of these institutions to approve a law and or buy them by finance richening in an especial subject.
On common strategic interests, U.S and Israel are cooperating In Combat Against Terrorism, Mass Destruction Weapons and etc. The cooperation of arms between US and Israel in Middle East region caused the greatest "arms race" of the world. So, "strategic alliance between US-Israel" and "separation among Islamic states" has meaningful relationship in the region.
Every one of the hypothesis in this Article has especial importance for explaining the relationships or alliance between America and Israel. Our purpose is not rejection or disaffirmation of them; rather we believe, none of these theories cannot justify alliance between America and Israel lonely and as a total cause. First hypothesis in respect of making valued link between two nation- State plays important role; second hypothesis is effective in America’s decision making also, but its axial importance is more in "Domestic Policies" dimension. And third theory based on variable "common strategic interests", addition to maintain the importance of first and second hypothesis, is accounted their complementary. Also, this hypothesis is consistent with logic and literature of international relationships field and also realism and neorealist theories.
Finally, on the basis of this research, the Middle East states can form the strategy of "Balance of Treat" to create security in the region. The role of Iran in forming of this approach is explicated.