انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 Theoretical Explanation of the Political Geography National Security Model تبیین نظری الگوی امنیت ملّی کشورها در جغرافیای سیاسی 1 40 209905 10.22034/igq.2024.477479.1948 FA محمود نورانی دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. محمدرضا حافظ نیا استاد جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-1099-6529 سید یحیی صفوی همامی استاد جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه جامع امام حسین(ع)، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-4067-8388 Journal Article 2024 09 08 Extended Abstract Introduction Political geography is the study of the political dimension of space, and one of the most important elements of this dimension is security in general and national security in particular. The essential position of the security of countries is evident in the national strategies of governments. For this purpose, it should be able to provide a comprehensive functional guide for the policy makers and security managers of the countries, using a structured system in which the relationships are standardized. Therefore, the establishment of the doctrine of national security requires the design of a suitable model to evaluate the degree of realization and its developments. The aim of the research is to develop a comprehensive theoretical model of national security policy. The research carried out on the background of the subject has not yet produced a comprehensive model for assessing national security, so the main focus of the research is on designing a comprehensive theoretical model or mechanism for national security policy-making based on effective factors and discovering the relationship between these factors. The desired model will explain the emergence of national security with the main features of the political geography approach. Methodology The cognitive style in this research has two complementary origins: a) rationalism, b) positivism, the process of research studies has been evaluated and analyzed with rational arguments. On the other hand, the approach to the category of national security and its factors in this research is empirical in order to show the quantification and concreteness of the concept of national security and its indicators. Based on the nature and descriptive method, it is analytical in terms of attitude and approach to the problem. The research is based on the basic theoretical objective. The method of collecting data and information is library and documentary research. The research approach is logical explanation with two methods of deductive and inductive reasoning. Finding The political geography approach to national security has four dimensions: 1. spatial (territorial) 2. governmental 3. historical 4. Citizen. 1. Spatial dimension: National security from the perspective of this dimension of political geography approach to it is often manifested in three characteristics; A. Territory (desire - expansion), (assertive) b. Border (delimitation) c. Geographical location (neighborhood). 2. The human dimension: The characteristics of this dimension can be observed in the geopolitical approach to national security in the form of the threefold interrelationship of the sense of spatial belonging, spirit and national identity, and national will. 3. National security from the perspective of the state dimension in the political geography approach is intertwined with the three characteristics of state nationalism, the interdependence of political organizations and the style of government selection. This means that the state apparatus, as the main guardian and policy maker in the field of national security, is confronted with different styles of selection by the political-military forces and the people. 4.National security from a historical perspective: Throughout history, human societies have experienced four levels of security. First, in order to continue to live in the context of geographical space alone, man had to protect himself from the surprise of current events and occurrences, often of natural and animal origin. The second level of security experience was formed when man became social and saw himself in small spatial units with cohesive social relationships. In the third stage, each of the social-spatial units became larger and began to create political structures because of the need to manage collective activities and responsibilities. At the fourth level, nations have approached their historical development in ecological-spatial contexts and have emerged as a nation based on their common historical origins and roots. Analysis The presented model of research in the form of a coherent and military whole of the structure of component relationships emphasizes the comprehensive dimensions of national security, it has general characteristics as follows: A) Being perceptive: This feature of the national security model shows the dependence of national ideas and ideologies on the basis of geographical space as the infrastructure and sociological and demographic characteristics as the superstructure based on space, which security theorists and leaders achieve their understanding at the level of thought. b) Flexibility: At the level of decision, while considering the two-way relationship between the functional needs of national security and paying attention to the balance in the dynamics of the political organization of national space, flexible consideration should be given to these two cases and should be flexible. c) Relativistic: Due to the different spatial allocations of countries, the implementation stage of the national security model for each country will be based on the spatial allocations, political, economic, socio-cultural considerations, etc. Conclusion In order to arrive at a comprehensive theoretical model that encompasses several elements, attention must be paid to its geographical-political origins, approach and dimensions. In such a model, what creates a sense of security in a place and a geographical space usually occurs at three levels. First, at the level of thinking, each dimension of political geography and its characteristics are conceived as the underlying and fundamental layer. At this level of national security, all the characteristics of the dimensions of the mentioned approach are considered from the point of view of political geography. The second level is the level of decision-making and political action, taking into account functional needs and the need to ensure the common life of the nation of a country. At this level, political action and decisions to ensure security are made by looking at the components of political management of the national space (country). The third level, which places national security in a reciprocal relationship with the four elements that are interrelated as the conceptual focus of the nation, space, threats and protection, and presents it with effective aggregate factors and indicators for the generalization of all countries. جغرافیای سیاسی علم مطالعه بُعد سیاسی فضاست و یکی از مهم‌ترین عناصر این بُعد، امنیت به طور عام و امنیت ملّی به طور خاص است. از آنجائی‌که جایگاه ضروری امنیت کشورها در استراتژیهای ملّی دولت‌ها مشهود است. از این‌رو بسترسازی رهنامهی امنیت ملّی نیازمند طراحی الگوی مناسب برای ارزیابی میزان تحقق و نیز تحولات آن میباشد. سوال اصلی پژوهش حاضر بدینگونه صورت‌بندی شده است: طراحی الگو نظری جامع یا سازوکاری برای سیاست‌گذاری امنیت ملّی مبتنی بر رویکرد جغرافیای سیاسی چه ویژگیهایی باید داشته باشد؟ هدف تحقیق به دنبال تبیین الگوی نظری جامع امنیت ملّی از منظر جغرافیای سیاسی است. روش تحقیق توصیفی–تحلیلی بوده و در ضمن آن تعداد نمونه از حجم جامعهی آماری مطلع 50 نفر انتخاب گردیده است که داده‌ها و اطلاعات گردآوری شده در مورد منطقیسازی رابطهی بین اجزاء الگوی نظری امنیت ملی با استفاده از نرمافزار لیزرل مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفته شد. در همین راستا به دو شیوهی قیاسی و استقرائی استنباط منطقی از الگو و روابط میان درون‌سطحی سهگانهی الگو اقدام شده است. یکی دیگر از منابع گردآوری دادهها و اطلاعات، به کارگیری اسناد علمی از مراجع کتابخانهای بود. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که یک نوع همبستگی و ارتباط منطقی و معنادار در ارتباط شاخص‌های امنیت ملی نسبت به همدیگر وجود دارد. نتایج پژوهش نشان میدهد الگوی مورد نظر بیانگر سه سطح بنیادین اندیشه، سطح دوّم واسط در مکانیسم تصمیم و سطح سوّم اجراء با عوامل و شاخص‌های تجمیعی در الگوی امنیت ملّی از منظر جغرافیای سیاسی است.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_209905_fb20a952376d4486517c82bf6ae052d1.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 Identifying and Explaining Key Drivers Influencing Israel's National Security Strategy in Middle East based on Scenario Planning شناسایی و تبیین پیشران‌های کلیدی تأثیرگذار بر راهبرد امنیت ملی اسراییل در غرب آسیا برپایه سناریونگاری 41 80 241617 10.22034/igq.2026.547983.2092 FA سیدجلال دهقانی فیروزآبادی استاد روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-1055-531X علیرضا صحرایی دانش‌آموخته دکترای علوم سیاسی و کاندیدای فوق دکترای روابط بین‌الملل دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-1330-0646 Journal Article 2025 11 14 Extended abstract Introduction The West Asian region is one of the most important strategic regions in the world due to its geopolitical location, and one of the common denominators of the threat to the Islamic world and the Middle East is Israel, which has created a security bottleneck in the region and is considered an important axis of conflict in the Middle East security complex. The main goal of this research is to identify and explain the key drivers affecting Israel's national security strategy in West Asia. The basic research question is formulated as follows: What are the most important key drivers affecting the Zionist regime's national security strategy in the West Asia region in the time horizon of 2035? Methodology This research, considering the multiple approaches adopted, and considering the purpose of the research, the necessity of pluralism in the method will be considered; the research method in this research is a mixed method with an exploratory approach, and the statistical population of the research purposefully includes 19 experts and scholars in the field of foreign policy and international relations from universities in the country. Information collection was carried out using the library method and holding expert panels and using the brainstorming technique and questionnaire tool. Through library studies and conducting interviews in the form of brainstorming and brainstorming sessions, a number of driving forces will be identified and defined as driving forces. In addition, among the identified driving forces, the most effective driving forces in the research field will be identified and counted using the future research software Mikmak and the application of the interaction matrix effect analysis. Accordingly, the methodological basis of the research was to use the most important variables affecting the Zionist regime's national security strategy in West Asia to determine the impact of each of the mentioned variables using a futures research method. To investigate this goal, the MiqMaq software, which is designed for cross-effect analysis, was used. Result and Discussion According to the data provided by the structural analysis with the Miqmac software, Israel’s strategy has a complex power and dependency structure that is categorized into four main quadrants. This analysis is based on the logic of structural analysis and complex systems theory, which is reflected in the Miqmac method (Godet, 1991; Arcade et al., 2003). The software output of the variables affecting Israel’s national security strategy in West Asia in the 2035 horizon indicates that among the sixteen selected variables, five variables are in the group of influential variables (textural or determinant), four variables are identified in the group of dichotomous variables (one risk variable, three variables as target variables), five variables are in the group of influenced variables, and one variable is in the group of independent (or leverage) variables. Ultimately, this system has a regulatory variable called "Creating a security platform and equipping military programs and purchasing from the West," and it is the only factor that has the greatest impact on other variables. Conclusion In conclusion, based on the future study of Israel’s national security strategy in the coming decade (until 2035), it should be said that the regime’s strategy revolves around managing an inherent paradox: as dependence on conflict-oriented drivers such as maintaining superiority through military containment (Palestine, Iran), control of vital resources (water), and ideological warfare (Zionism) continues as the traditional foundations of power and security; on the other hand, efforts to reduce dependence and achieve stability through the expansion of normalization to reduce isolation and simultaneous threats, strengthening the economy and energy security for domestic prosperity, and investing in technology to maintain military superiority and reduce dependence on the West continue. Therefore, the key strategic challenges include: 1. Inherent instability: The system is heavily dependent on factors that are inherently unstable (the ongoing conflict with Palestine, the existential threat of Iran, the fragility of the diaspora, fluctuations in Western support, geopolitical risks, and normalization). Any shock in these areas could plunge the entire system into crisis. 2. Fundamental contradiction: A strategy based on continuing the occupation and conflict with the Palestinians is the most important obstacle to the sustainable realization of other goals such as deepening normalization with the Arab world (especially Saudi Arabia), increasing international legitimacy, and reducing pressure on the diaspora. Resolving this contradiction (without changing the nature of the relationship with the Palestinians) seems almost impossible. 3.Resource pressure: The huge costs of maintaining security (military, cyber, technological), countering multi-layered threats, and investing in relative self-sufficiency will put increasing pressure on the economy, especially if global growth slows or sanctions increase. 4.Crisis of Legitimacy: The escalation of the Palestinian conflict and discriminatory policies erode Israel’s international legitimacy, strengthen movements like BDS, and deepen the gap with the diaspora and Western supporters, which in turn feeds a vicious cycle of increasing isolation and insecurity. 5.Multiple existential threats: Israel faces multiple existential threats, including; Iran’s nuclearization, a multi-front war of attrition, the collapse of the normalization process, a profound water and environmental crisis, and a break with the diaspora. Managing these threats simultaneously is very complex. Therefore, Israel’s national security strategy in the coming decade will be a defensive-offensive, technology-driven, and deeply Western-dependent strategy that seeks to manage chronic structural conflicts while simultaneously exploiting geopolitical opportunities (normalization) to reduce isolation and threats. The inherent fragility of this system, resulting from the interdependence of key variables, strategic contradictions (especially between occupation and normalization), and high sensitivity to external shocks, poses enormous challenges and existential risks to achieving sustainable security and stabilizing its geostrategic position. The continuation of the status quo is the most likely scenario, but this path traps Israel in a vicious cycle of insecurity, rising costs, and declining legitimacy. A fundamental change in the approach to the Palestinian issue is the only possible way to break this cycle and achieve long-term stability, but this change seems unlikely by 2035 and with the current mix of internal and external forces. Israel is therefore likely to face a turbulent, costly, and increasingly uncertain decade ahead. In the 2035 horizon, the Zionist regime’s national security strategy will depend more than ever on maintaining the flow of Western weapons, innovating and continuously upgrading its technology-based security platforms, and symbolically managing the Palestinian issue (including the display of negotiations with the PLO) to maintain the status quo and relative legitimacy. Failure in any of these areas could severely threaten the stability and security of this regime. Military power has a direct and decisive impact on deterrence, bargaining power in negotiations, border security, and even the stability of normalizing states. Disruption in this flow will undermine the foundation of the security strategy. It is predicted that Israel will move towards strengthening its hardware power (military-economic) and redefining its Zionist identity in the face of internal/external challenges. The analysis of the mik-mak and the scenarios extracted from it show that Israel’s national security strategy is built on a fragile foundation. On the threshold of 2035, the regime is at a crucial crossroads between “normalization in the region” and “alliance with the West.” The desirable scenario (strategic alliance) for the Zionist regime requires extraordinary diplomatic acumen and maintaining Western support. The disaster scenario (ruined dream) is a serious warning that relying solely on hard power and neglecting diplomacy can lead to irreparable consequences. The two middle scenarios (perfect storm and besieged fortress) indicate complex situations that force Israel to make difficult choices and reconsider its strategic priorities. The fragility of regulatory and bidirectional variables is the key to understanding the future. “Creating a security environment” and “normalization” are not only the goals, but also the vulnerable points of this complex system, any change in which will create a completely different future for the Zionist regime. منطقه خاورمیانه با توجه به جایگاه ژئوپلیتیکی خود، یکی از مناطق استراتژیک عمده در سطح جهانی محسوب می‌شود. در این چارچوب، دولت اسرائیل به‌عنوان عامل مشترک تهدیدآفرین برای جهان اسلام و خاورمیانه عمل نموده و علاوه بر ایجاد فضای امنیتی تشنج‌آمیز در منطقه، به مثابه کانون اصلی تعارض در این مجموعه امنیتی قلمداد می‌گردد. هدف اصلی پژوهش حاضر، تبیین و شناسایی پیشران‌های کلیدی مؤثر بر راهبرد امنیت ملی اسرائیل در محیط خاورمیانه می‌باشد. پرسمان اساسی پژوهش چنین صورت‌بندی می‌شود که مهم‌ترین پیشران‌های کلیدی تأثیرگذار بر راهبرد امنیت ملی رژیم صهیونیستی در منطقه خاورمیانه در افق زمانی 2035 کدام‌اند؟ جهت پاسخ به سؤال پژوهش، با رویکردی آینده‌پژوهانه از روش تحلیل اثرات متقاطع و سناریونویسی استفاده شده است. یافتههای پژوهش حاکی از آن است که از میان شانزده متغیر انتخابی، پنج متغیر در گروه متغیرهای بافتی قرار دارند، چهار متغیر در گروه متغیرهای دووجهی شناسایی شده است، پنج متغیر در گروه متغیرهای تأثیرپذیر هستند و یک متغیر نیز در گروه متغیرهای مستقل قرار گرفته‌اند. در نهایت این سیستم دارای یک متغیر تنظیمی به‌نام «ایجاد بستر امنیتی و تجهیز برنامه‌های نظامی و خرید از غرب» بوده و تنها عاملی است که صرفاً دارای بیشترین تأثیرگذاری بر سایر متغیرها را داراست.مبتنی بر یافته‌های پژوهش، دو پیشران «عادی‌سازی روابط اعراب و اسرائیل» و «تجهیز برنامه‌های نظامی و خرید از غرب» به‌عنوان محورهای اصلی با بیشترین عدم‌قطعیت انتخاب شده و چهار سناریوی «اتحاد استراتژیک»(مطلوب‌ترین حالت برای اسرائیل)، «طوفان کامل»(سناریوی پارادوکس‌آمیز)، «قلعه تحت محاصره»(تداوم وضع موجود در شدیدترین حالت) و «رؤیای تباه»(بدبینانه‌ترین و پرریسک‌ترین حالت) قابل‌ترسیم می‌باشند.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_241617_04641a74bc7a7eba455593a6d5d363ec.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 Theoretical Explanation of the Geopolitical Repercussions of Dam Construction Projects تبیین نظری بازتاب‌های ژئوپلیتیکی پروژه‌های سدسازی 81 110 242965 10.22034/igq.2026.544957.2084 FA رحیم شیوراک دانشجوی دکترای جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. مصطفی قادری حاجت دانشیار گروه جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-2012-7394 ابراهیم رومینا دانشیار گروه جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. 0000-0002-5372-9677 Journal Article 2025 09 06 Extended Abstract Contemporary developments in the field of water resources, especially in transboundary watersheds, show that dam projects can no longer be analyzed simply as technical and development-oriented tools, but have become geopolitical mechanisms for redefining power, identity, and diplomacy relations at different spatial levels. This study, with the aim of explaining and analyzing the geopolitical repercussions of dam construction at three levels of identity, security, and diplomacy, attempts to establish a theoretical and systematic link between the development-oriented policies of governments and their transnational consequences. In this regard, three key dam construction projects, including Turkey's Gap Project in the Tigris-Euphrates Basin, Ethiopia's Renaissance Dam on the Blue Nile, and China's Chain of Dams in the Mekong River Basin, are examined with an analytical-comparative approach. Drawing on critical geopolitics and structural hydropolitics, this study presents an integrated model that is based on three key concepts: “hydropolitical identity,” “fluid geopolitics,” and “reverse diplomacy.” In this model, dam projects act as structural inputs in areas such as climate change, population pressures, international water law, and regional regimes, and through identity, geopolitical, and diplomatic mechanisms, they lead to multilevel repercussions; in a way that they lead to identity and social crises on a micro scale, to intensification of interstate tensions on a medium scale, and to challenging the international legal and institutional order of water on a macro scale. The findings of the study show that the GAP project in Turkey has led to a redefinition of national identity and strengthening of the country’s structural power vis-à-vis its downstream neighbors. The Grand Renaissance Dam has challenged Egypt's historical and hegemonic position in the Nile Basin and has established a new pattern of geopolitical bargaining; and China's dam projects in the Mekong have strengthened its geopolitical influence in Southeast Asia by gradually making downstream countries dependent. Overall, the results of the study show that transboundary dams have multi-layered impacts that go beyond the logic of development, and the proposed conceptual model can be used as an efficient framework for analyzing hydropolitical projects at national, regional, and international scales. تحولات معاصر در حوزه منابع آب، به‌ویژه در حوضه‌های آبریز فرامرزی، نشان می‌دهد که پروژه‌های سدسازی دیگر صرفاً به‌عنوان ابزارهایی فنی و توسعه‌محور قابل تحلیل نیستند، بلکه به سازوکارهایی ژئوپلیتیکی برای بازتعریف روابط قدرت، هویت و دیپلماسی در سطوح مختلف فضایی تبدیل شده‌اند. این پژوهش با هدف تبیین و تحلیل بازتاب‌های ژئوپلیتیکی سدسازی در سه سطح هویتی، امنیتی و دیپلماتیک، می‌کوشد پیوندی نظری و نظام‌مند میان سیاست‌های توسعه‌محور دولت‌ها و پیامدهای فراملی آن‌ها برقرار سازد. در این راستا، سه پروژه شاخص سدسازی شامل پروژه گاپ ترکیه در حوضه دجله–فرات، سد النهضه اتیوپی بر نیل آبی و پروژه سدهای زنجیره‌ای چین در حوضه رود مکونگ، با رویکردی تحلیلی–تطبیقی مورد بررسی قرار گرفته‌اند. پژوهش حاضر با اتکا بر ژئوپلیتیک انتقادی و هیدروپلیتیک ساختاری، مدلی تلفیقی ارائه می‌دهد که بر سه مفهوم کلیدی «هویت ژئوپلیتیکی»، «ژئوپلیتیک سیال» و «دیپلماسی واژگون» استوار است. در این مدل، پروژه‌های سدسازی به‌مثابه ورودی‌های ساختاری در زمینه‌هایی نظیر تغییرات اقلیمی، فشارهای جمعیتی، حقوق بین‌الملل آب و رژیم‌های منطقه‌ای عمل می‌کنند و از طریق سازوکارهای هویتی، ژئوپلیتیکی و دیپلماتیک، به بازتاب‌هایی چندسطحی منجر می‌شوند؛ به‌گونه‌ای که در مقیاس خرد به بروز بحران‌های هویتی و اجتماعی، در مقیاس میانه به تشدید تنش‌های بین‌دولتی و در مقیاس کلان به چالش‌گری نظم حقوقی و نهادی بین‌المللی آب می‌انجامند. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد پروژه گاپ در ترکیه به بازتعریف هویت ملی و تقویت قدرت ساختاری این کشور در برابر همسایگان پایین‌دست منجر شده است؛ سد النهضه موقعیت تاریخی و هژمونیک مصر در حوضه نیل را به چالش کشیده و الگوی جدیدی از چانه‌زنی ژئوپلیتیکی را رقم زده است؛ و پروژه‌های سدسازی چین در مکونگ، با ایجاد وابستگی تدریجی کشورهای پایین‌دست، نفوذ ژئوپلیتیکی این کشور را در جنوب‌شرق آسیا تقویت کرده‌اند. در مجموع، نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد سدسازی‌های فرامرزی دارای تأثیراتی چندلایه و فراتر از منطق توسعه هستند و مدل مفهومی پیشنهادی می‌تواند به‌عنوان چارچوبی کارآمد برای تحلیل پروژه‌های هیدروپلیتیکی در مقیاس‌های ملی، منطقه‌ای و بین‌المللی مورد استفاده قرار گیرد.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_242965_58686ac7d042486bba62c0566e8f13c6.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 A Theoretical and Critical Study of the Causes and Consequences of State Failure: The African Experience رویکردی نظری و انتقادی به مطالعات علل و پیامدهای شکست ‌دولت؛ با تمرکز بر تجربه دولت‌ در آفریقا 111 141 242966 10.22034/igq.2026.546633.2085 FA نجمیه پوراسمعیلی استادیار، گروه مطالعات سیاسی، مرکز مطالعات آفریقا، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. 0000-0001-7211-0274 علی اسمعیلی اردکانی استادیار روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2025 09 12 Extended Abstract Introduction The literature on failed and fragile states suffers from a fundamental conceptual conflation between causes and consequences. This analytical ambiguity stems from the cyclical and deeply intertwined nature of state failure, wherein factors such as weak institutions or low legitimacy (causes) dynamically interact with outcomes like insecurity and the collapse of public service provision. Through mutually reinforcing feedback loops, these interactions blur causal boundaries and undermine linear explanations. As a result, prevailing descriptive approaches have struggled to generate precise theoretical frameworks and effective policy strategies. Breaking free from this vicious cycle therefore requires a shift toward dynamic and causal-analytical approaches capable of identifying initial driving forces and key leverage points within the cycle, thereby offering clearer explanations for the design of targeted and effective policy interventions. Methodology This study adopts a comparative–historical methodology and employs a meta-analytical approach to examine the interaction between the causes and consequences of state failure. Focusing on several selected African countries in the contemporary period, the research analyzes how these factors mutually shape and reinforce one another across different empirical contexts. Results and Discussion The Intertwined Dynamics of State Failure and the Blurring of Causal Boundaries This section advances a theoretical argument explaining why drawing a clear distinction between the causes and consequences of state failure—at least within the existing literature—faces a fundamental challenge. (a) Causal Chains and the Overlapping Roles of Causes and Consequences in State Failure This analysis demonstrates that in failed states, the distinction between causes and consequences becomes obscured due to their chain-like and reciprocal nature. In this process, each consequence in turn transforms into a factor that intensifies or reinforces subsequent crises, thereby replacing linear and unidirectional causality with a self-reinforcing vicious cycle. Within such a framework, each phenomenon simultaneously constitutes both the outcome of preceding factors and the cause of subsequent developments. This entanglement and the shifting roles of variables—depending on the chosen analytical stopping point—render any precise and absolute separation between causes and consequences highly problematic. Consequently, causal modeling of state failure encounters significant theoretical complexity, calling into question reductionist or static explanatory frameworks. Fig(1):The Causal Chain and the Overlap of Causes and Consequences in State Failure (b) Interdependence between Causes and Consequences One of the most significant challenges in delineating the boundary between the causes and consequences of state failure arises from the presence of mutual interdependence and bidirectional relationships between these two sets of factors. Within this framework, roots and outcomes do not operate independently; rather, they continuously interact within a dynamic system, generating cyclical and self-reinforcing patterns. This deep entanglement complicates the identification of linear causal directionality. A salient manifestation of this bidirectional relationship can be observed in the interaction between chronic economic decline and the expansion of violence in failed states, where each simultaneously functions as both cause and consequence of the other. (c) Feedback Loops and Cyclical Deterioration The consequences of state failure may, in turn, intensify and deepen the original causal factors, thereby producing a defective and self-sustaining cycle. This complexity stems from the presence of dynamic feedback loops in which causes and effects mutually reinforce one another. As illustrated conceptually, the cyclical and non-linear nature of state failure renders any sharp distinction between root causes and outcomes analytically untenable. Stages such as leadership failure, institutional decay, economic collapse, escalation of social conflict, and security breakdown emerge sequentially yet interact in a chain-like and self-amplifying manner, such that the outcome of each stage becomes a driving and intensifying force for the next. (d) State Failure as a Continuous and Multidimensional Process State failure should not be understood as an absolute or purely binary condition (functional versus collapsed). Rather, it is a phenomenon situated along a continuum ranging from strength to weakness. This continuum encompasses a spectrum of State forms, from strong and stable states to weak, failing, and ultimately collapsed states. Moreover, state failure is inherently multidimensional, meaning that levels of effectiveness and legitimacy may vary unevenly across different domains of State—ranging from security and economic management to service delivery and the rule of law. Security: the capacity to maintain order, control violence, and protect citizens; Economic development: the ability to manage the economy, develop infrastructure, and sustain livelihoods; Political representation: the legitimacy and capacity of the state to represent societal interests and ensure accountability. A state may demonstrate relative effectiveness in certain State domains—such as maintaining central security—while simultaneously exhibiting severe deficiencies in others, including public service provision or political legitimacy. For instance, security failure in peripheral regions may simultaneously constitute both a consequence of unequal power and resource distribution and a cause of further intensification of these inequalities. Consequently, the concept of state failure is fundamentally relative and multidimensional, requiring simultaneous attention to multiple layers of state performance. Weakness in one domain not only generates vulnerabilities in others but, through feedback mechanisms, reinforces them and further blurs causal boundaries. Providing a single, comprehensive definition accompanied by precise and universally applicable indicators for all forms of fragile State—from weak and bankrupt to fully collapsed states—remains analytically challenging. Nevertheless, for the purpose of evaluating state performance in terms of effectiveness and State capacity, it is possible to conceptualize a continuous spectrum, with strong and stable states at one end and fully collapsed states at the other. Within the space between these two poles lie diverse state forms exhibiting varying levels of functionality. The closer a state approximates the characteristics of a “strong state,” the more favorably it is positioned along this continuum; conversely, movement toward the “collapsed state” reflects increasing distance from these benchmarks. Key criteria for determining a state’s position along this spectrum include: · performance in core state functions (maintenance of order and stability, provision of public goods, and quality of policymaking); · the domestic, regional, and international consequences of State failure; · levels of internal legitimacy; · degrees of international legitimacy. This continuum-based model demonstrates that the distinction between causes and consequences of state failure is frequently ambiguous, as outcomes generated at one stage may become decisive drivers of further deterioration at subsequent stages. Given the dynamic movement of states along this spectrum and the transformation of consequences into new causal factors, drawing a definitive boundary between cause and effect becomes exceedingly difficult. Accordingly, the analysis of state failure should adopt a multi-stage, interactive, and non-linear perspective rather than a reductionist or linear one. In this context, the use of aggregate labels such as “failed” or “successful” risks oversimplifying the complex and dynamic realities of State. (e) The Expansive Network of Consequences of State Failure For reasons elaborated below, when a state fails, the scope and complexity of its consequences often extend far beyond the initial factors that precipitated the failure. This expansion makes a precise separation between “causes” and “consequences” increasingly difficult. The breadth of outcomes generates a dense network of interrelated problems that overlap with, reinforce, and in some cases transform the original causal factors. 1. Consequences as the Accumulation of New Causes The consequences of state failure are frequently the result of the intensification and accumulation of the same initial causal factors, such as systemic corruption, erosion of legitimacy, institutional breakdown, economic stagnation, and civil conflict. This cumulative dynamic causes crises to exceed the mere additive effect of the original drivers, acquiring a qualitatively new and more complex character. 2. Diffusion, Amplification and Multiplier Effects The collapse of State institutions triggers chain reactions across multiple sectors. Failure in basic service provision may generate large-scale humanitarian crises—such as famine and forced displacement—which in turn act as catalysts for further social unrest and economic deterioration. In this sense, consequences do not merely replicate earlier causes; they actively generate new and distinct problems. 3. Feedback Loops and Compound Outcomes Direct consequences such as intensified armed violence or economic collapse rapidly degrade conditions and generate self-reinforcing feedback loops. These vicious cycles accelerate the process of breakdown in a spiral-like manner, further obscuring the distinction between cause and effect. 4. Broader Regional and Global Spillover Effects The impact of state failure is not confined within national borders. Through transnational flows—including refugee movements, cross-border smuggling, the diffusion of terrorism, organized crime, and regional instability—state collapse affects regional security architectures and the global political economy. 5. Institutional Traps and Human Capital Flight Structural weakness and chronic instability undermine efforts at reform and sustainable development. Simultaneously, large-scale emigration of skilled professionals and elites (brain drain) severely erodes the remaining institutional capacity of the state, sharply reducing prospects for recovery. As a result, the state’s ability to exit the crisis diminishes progressively. 6. Erosion of the Monopoly of Violence and the Emergence of New Security Threats The state loses its monopoly over the legitimate use of force, creating power vacuums that enable the rise of non-state armed actors, warlords, and terrorist networks. This condition not only exacerbates domestic instability but also poses direct threats to regional and international security, as evidenced by the fragmented security landscapes of countries such as Somalia and Libya. 7. Territorial Fragmentation and the Erosion of Sovereignty Effective state authority often contracts to the capital or a limited number of core regions, while peripheral territories fall under the control of ethnic militias, local power brokers, or armed groups. 8. Widespread Institutional and Social Disintegration The shutdown of public services, the paralysis of judicial systems, and the collapse of the national economy ensure that the crisis is not merely political in nature, but one that permeates social structures and everyday life. 9.Large-Scale Humanitarian Crises Forced displacement, acute food insecurity, and the spread of disease affect millions of people. In terms of urgency and scale, these humanitarian crises frequently exceed the magnitude of the original causes and rapidly attract the attention of the international community. 10. Media Focus on Manifestations of Crisis Rather than Structural Roots Observable manifestations of crisis—such as armed conflict, famine, and population displacement—tend to receive disproportionate media coverage and, consequently, greater prominence in public opinion and international policymaking than structural and root causes, including entrenched corruption or gradual State erosion. This imbalance may lead to policy responses that prioritize symptom management over addressing underlying structural pathologies. Given the complexity outlined above, the interaction among political, institutional, security, economic, and social dimensions in weak to collapsed states can be analyzed through an interdependent, multidimensional, cyclical causal model. Within this framework, each State dimension may simultaneously function as both cause and consequence of others, dynamically assuming the roles of independent and dependent variables. A state’s condition—comprising varying degrees of weakness across multiple domains—can generate diverse configurations ranging from weak to fully collapsed states. This condition is inherently dynamic rather than static, capable of evolving either toward heightened fragility and systemic collapse or, conversely, toward stabilization and State recovery. The model thus underscores the necessity of moving beyond linear and single-cause analyses toward a systemic and dynamic understanding of state failure. This model explicitly recognizes the non-linear and dynamic nature of state fragility, a reality in which no dimension of State operates in isolation or as an autonomous variable. Instead, an intertwined network of feedback loops links political breakdown, institutional decay, economic collapse, social conflict, and security deterioration. The cyclical logic of the model underscores that states do not inevitably move along a linear trajectory toward collapse; rather, they frequently oscillate between periods of relative stability and deeper forms of fragility. This systemic interdependence implies that any intervention aimed at strengthening state capacity must be comprehensive, coordinated, and multi-level. Singular focus on one dimension—such as pursuing economic reforms without addressing political power redistribution, or prioritizing security provision without fostering institutional legitimacy—may not only fail to produce sustainable improvement but may also exacerbate instability by generating uneven and incoherent progress across State domains. Consequently, a context-sensitive understanding of specific causal pathways and their unique interactions within each national setting is essential for the design of effective strategies in peacebuilding, state-building, and sustainable development. Case Studies: A Critical Strategy for Distinguishing Causes from Consequences in Failed States Effective differentiation between the root causes and the resulting consequences of state failure is achievable primarily through in-depth and systematic case studies. This necessity arises from the complex, multidimensional, and context-dependent interaction of political, economic, and social factors within each state, a characteristic that renders simplistic generalizations analytically inadequate. By enabling close examination of causal processes in specific settings, case studies allow researchers to trace how initial causes translate into particular outcomes, and how those outcomes subsequently operate as feedback mechanisms that intensify and deepen the original crises. In this article, the analysis focuses on emblematic cases of state failure in Africa—the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, Sierra Leone, and Sudan—and, through careful examination of each country’s distinctive conditions, seeks to empirically demonstrate the structural distinction between foundational drivers (causes) and the cascading consequences of state failure. Conclusion The perspective advanced in this article functions as both an analytical and strategic tool for scholars and policymakers engaged with fragile and failed states. By conceptualizing state weakness as a multidimensional and cyclical process, this framework enables more nuanced analysis, anticipates potential escalation points of fragility, and identifies effective entry points for coordinated intervention. Such an approach enhances state resilience across political, institutional, security, economic, and social domains and provides a comprehensive framework for understanding and addressing the complex realities of state fragility and collapse—one that fully accounts for the inherent dynamism and complexity of the phenomenon. اگرچه تمایز بین چرایی شکست دولت‌ها (علل) و آنچه پس از شکست آن‌ها اتفاق می‌افتد(پیامدها)، برای درک و روشن شدن این پدیده، طراحی مداخلات مؤثر و اتخاذ رویکردهای سیاستی درباره شکنندگی و شکست دولت بسیار مهم است، اما ادبیات مربوط به دولت‌های ناکارآمد درواقع درهم‌تنیدگی چشمگیری بین عوامل علّی و پیامدها را نشان می‌دهد و جدایی دقیق را از نظر تحلیلی چالش‌برانگیز می‌کند. علی‌رغم این واقعیت و به نظر نگارندگان، نمی‌توان مرز روشنی بین ریشه‌ها و عواملی که باعث شکست دولت می‌شوند و پیامدهایی که درنتیجه شکست دولت به‌وجود می‌آیند، دست‌کم در ادبیات نظری، ترسیم کرد. ازاین‌رو، پرسش مقاله این است که چرا علل و پیامدهای دولت‌های ناکارآمد، مرزهای روشن میان خود را به چالش می‌کشند؟ پنج علت به‌عنوان فرضیه‌ای برای این پرسش تبیین می‌شود: زنجیره علّی و هم‌پوشانی نقش علل و پیامدها در شکست دولت؛ وابستگی متقابل علل و پیامدها؛ حلقه‌های بازخورد یا زوال چرخه‌ای؛ شکست دولت به‌عنوان فرایندی پیوستار و چندبُعدی و شبکه گسترده پیامدها. در نهایت، «مدل دَوَرانی چندبُعدی علّیِ به‌هم‌وابسته» ارائه می‌شود که گویای پیچیدگی میان ابعاد و حوزه‌های مختلف سیاسی، نهادی، امنیتی، اقتصادی و اجتماعی و وضعیت‌های متعدد و متنوع دولت‌های ضعیف تا فروپاشیده است. «این پژوهش با اتکا به روش تطبیقی‌ـ‌تاریخی و به‌کارگیری فراتحلیل، به بررسی تعامل پیچیده علل و پیامدهای شکست دولت در چندین کشور آفریقایی می‌پردازد. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که مرز میان علل و پیامدهای شکست دولت نه‌تنها مبهم است، بلکه در عمل پیامدها خود به علل جدید بدل می‌شوند؛ بنابراین سیاست‌گذاری‌های بین‌المللی باید از مدل‌های خطی فاصله بگیرند.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_242966_f09a7773b91e33b1e7f82668327d30ba.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 An Examination of the Tension-Causing Factors between Russia and Ukraine within the Framework of Russia's Security Documents بررسی عوامل تنش‌زا بین روسیه و اوکراین در چارچوب اسناد امنیتی روسیه 142 168 238097 10.22034/igq.2026.520192.2035 FA سیدمحسن میرحسینی استادیار روابط بین‌الملل دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران. سیدحسین عمران دانشجوی دکترای علوم سیاسی گرایش مسائل ایران، دانشکده حقوق، علوم سیاسی و تاریخ، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران. 0009-0006-2663-0512 Journal Article 2025 06 25 Extended Abstract Introduction The eruption of the Russia-Ukraine war on February 24, 2022, signified a critical inflection point in post-Cold War international relations. While some observers have interpreted the conflict as a sudden and unjustified act of aggression by the Russian Federation, a more nuanced and historically grounded analysis reveals a complex web of motivations rooted in strategic thought, security concerns, and geopolitical rivalry. This study takes a causality-based approach, drawing upon the logic that no major geopolitical shift occurs without underlying catalysts. It argues that the Russian invasion should be interpreted not as a spontaneous maneuver, but as the culmination of a series of structural tensions, doctrinal changes, and regional dynamics shaped over the past two decades. Within this framework, Russian strategic and national security documents serve as vital instruments for understanding the Kremlin’s worldview. These texts not only articulate Russia’s threat perceptions but also serve as policy roadmaps that reflect evolving national priorities and foreign policy ambitions. This research examines three key strategic documents—the National Security Strategy, the Military Doctrine, and the Maritime Doctrine—to elucidate how Russia perceives its geopolitical environment and justifies actions in its so-called "near abroad," particularly toward Ukraine. These documents provide the discursive and doctrinal foundations for understanding the causes of the ongoing conflict. Methodology The methodology of this study is based on qualitative content analysis, with a primary focus on official strategic documents issued by the Russian government between 2000 and 2023. A document analysis framework is employed to trace recurrent themes, linguistic cues, and strategic narratives embedded in these policy texts. In addition to primary sources, the research engages with secondary academic literature in international relations and security studies to contextualize and interpret the findings. This dual-layered approach—combining empirical document review with theoretical interpretation—enables the identification of consistent patterns in Russian strategic thought. Analytical emphasis is placed on concepts such as sovereignty, multipolarity, geopolitical influence, and national identity. The study also considers Russia’s diplomatic history, security treaties, and reactions to NATO’s institutional behavior. This methodological approach facilitates a multi-dimensional exploration of how textual narratives in official documents translate into foreign policy actions on the ground. Results and Discussion The study identifies three principal factors as the core of Russia’s strategic hostility toward Ukraine: the ideological ambition to restore the “Russian World,” the broader objective of establishing a multipolar world order, and persistent opposition to NATO’s eastward expansion. 1. The Revival of the Russian World (Russkiy Mir) The concept of the Russian World is rooted in civilizational identity and shared cultural, religious, and linguistic bonds among ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking communities in the former Soviet space. It envisions a transnational Russian civilization that transcends current political boundaries. According to official narratives, Russia assumes a moral and strategic obligation to protect these populations, even through extraterritorial intervention. Russian strategic documents, particularly the 2021 National Security Strategy, explicitly stress the protection of Russian cultural identity abroad. This ideology has justified various interventions in the post-Soviet space, with Ukraine—a country central to the Slavic Orthodox tradition and historical roots of the Russian state—being a key focus. 2. The Quest for a Multipolar World Order Russia’s strategic thinking reveals a deep dissatisfaction with the unipolar world system dominated by the United States. The National Security Strategy (2009 and 2015 versions) and subsequent updates consistently highlight Russia’s aspiration to serve as an independent pole of power in a decentralized international system. This entails reducing Western dominance, particularly in Eurasia. Ukraine’s growing alignment with Western institutions—be it NATO, the EU, or bilateral cooperation with the United States—is perceived by Moscow as a direct threat to its strategic autonomy and sphere of influence. Russia’s interventions in Georgia (2008), Crimea (2014), and Syria (2015) can be interpreted as manifestations of its desire to assert itself as a great power in a multipolar world. 3. NATO’s Eastward Expansion Perhaps the most frequently cited threat in Russian security discourse is the continued enlargement of NATO. Since the late 1990s, Russia has voiced consistent opposition to NATO's expansion into Eastern Europe, viewing it as a violation of verbal agreements made during the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Strategic documents, such as the Military Doctrine of 2014 and the National Security Strategy of 2021, explicitly list NATO’s military infrastructure near Russia’s borders as a national security threat. Ukraine’s potential membership in NATO represents a red line for the Kremlin, not merely because of geographic proximity, but because it undermines the strategic buffer zone Moscow believes is essential for its survival. The study also emphasizes Russia’s failed diplomatic efforts in the lead-up to the 2022 war, including proposals for security guarantees from the West, which were ultimately rejected. This rejection intensified Russia’s perception of encirclement and justified, in its own doctrine, a pre-emptive strike to neutralize what it saw as imminent strategic threats. Conclusion The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is best understood through the lens of long-term strategic planning and security doctrine, rather than short-term political motivations. The findings indicate that the invasion of Ukraine was a calculated move rooted in doctrinal principles articulated over two decades of strategic discourse. Russian national security documents reveal that Moscow had repeatedly expressed its concerns about NATO, Western interference, and the cultural separation of Ukraine from the Russian orbit. The war can therefore be seen as a response—albeit a violent and controversial one—to the erosion of Russia’s regional influence and its failed attempts to resolve the security dilemma through diplomacy. A thorough reading of Russian strategic texts offers a deeper understanding of the structural logic behind its actions, and suggests that similar flashpoints could arise in other parts of the former Soviet space if current trends persist. بحران اوکراین و حمله نظامی روسیه در ۲۴ فوریه ۲۰۲۲ یکی از چالش‌های کلیدی ژئوپلیتیک معاصر است. این پژوهش به دنبال شناسایی و تبیین عوامل تنش‌زا میان روسیه و اوکراین از منظر اسناد امنیتی کلیدی فدراسیون روسیه، شامل راهبرد امنیت ملی،[1] آیین‌نامه نظامی[2] و مفهوم سیاست خارجی[3] است. روش تحقیق مبتنی بر تحلیل محتوای کیفی اسناد رسمی و منابع کتابخانه‌ای است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که تنش‌ها ریشه در سه عامل اصلی دارند: تمایل روسیه به احیای مفهوم «جهان روسی» برای حفظ نفوذ فرهنگی و قومی در مناطق هم‌جوار، تلاش برای برقراری نظم چندقطبی جهانی به‌منظور کاهش سلطه غرب و نگرانی فزاینده از گسترش ناتو به شرق که امنیت مرزهای روسیه را تهدید می‌کند. این پژوهش نتیجه می‌گیرد که این تنش‌ها از نگرش ساختاری امنیتی روسیه نشأت می‌گیرند و تداوم آن‌ها به تحول در سیاست‌های کلان این کشور وابسته است.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_238097_69f5a1e8be5aa9ef14249f5ab1b47a17.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 The Role of National Values in Iran's Soft Power and National Security: A Case Study of Iran-Türkiye Geopolitical Competition نقش ارزش‌های ملی در قدرت نرم و امنیت ملی ایران)مطالعه موردی: رقابت ژئوپلیتیک ایران و ترکیه( 169 198 232447 10.22034/igq.2025.512008.2024 FA امیررهام شجاعی دانشجوی دکتری روابط بین‌الملل،گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران. 0009-0001-8788-2522 رضا سیمبر استاد روابط بین‌الملل،گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران. 0000-0001-5111-1075 سید حسین موسوی کردمیری دانشجوی دکتری مطالعات منطقه‌ای، گروه روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران. 0009-0006-9891-8021 Journal Article 2025 05 27 Extended Abstract Introduction The Islamic Republic of Iran, as one of the most significant regional actors in the Middle East, has consistently faced numerous multidimensional threats due to its unique geopolitical, geoeconomic, demographic, and geocultural characteristics. Turkey stands out as one of Iran’s primary competitors, presenting substantial challenges across regions such as the Middle East, Central Asia, and the South Caucasus, particularly in recent years. Turkey’s influence in Iran’s peripheral regions is characterized by a combination of soft and hard power strategies, with a notable emphasis on the strategic deployment of soft power. Given Ankara’s extensive and active investment in the domain of soft power, the central research question is: To what extent does Iran’s utilization of its national soft-power components—such as the Persian language and literature, along with its historical and civilizational heritage—affect its national security, particularly in the context of geopolitical rivalry with Turkey? The hypothesis under examination posits that the strategic and intelligent deployment of these identity-based resources can not only enhance Iran’s competitive and balancing position in the cultural and civilizational spheres of critical regions such as the Caucasus and Central Asia, but also, by generating attractiveness and legitimacy, contribute to expanding Iran’s geopolitical influence and consolidating the foundations of its national security vis-à-vis regional rivals like Turkey. This research adopts an analytical-explanatory approach and relies on library and documentary sources. Its findings are expected to provide a conceptual framework for formulating more effective strategies in Iran’s foreign policy and cultural diplomacy in its competition with regional actors. Methodology This study is a qualitative research conducted using an analytical-explanatory approach. Its primary objective is applied in nature, aiming to provide practical strategies for enhancing Iran’s soft power in its geopolitical competition with Turkey. The research findings are organized into three main sections, which also guided the data collection and analysis process. In the first section, the sources of Iran’s soft power were examined. In the second section, by integrating the findings from the first section with theoretical literature, the causal relationship between the utilization of soft power and national security was elucidated, thereby establishing a framework for analyzing this relationship. In the third and final section, the findings from the previous sections regarding Iran were combined with the collected data on Turkey to conduct a systematic comparative analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the two countries in the realm of soft power within the context of geopolitical competition. This comparison was carried out in a comparative framework specifically grounded in soft power. Result and Discussion This study, by examining the pivotal role of national values in strengthening soft power and ensuring Iran’s national security, highlights several components of Iran’s national soft power that are primarily rooted in its historical and civilizational resources, and seeks to explain how these resources can be utilized to enhance security and expand Iran’s sphere of influence in its surrounding regions, particularly within the broader civilizational sphere of the Persianate world. The structure of the article, following the presentation of the theoretical framework and a review of the literature, is divided into three main sections. The first section examines Iran’s sources of soft power with a focus on national and civilizational resources. While the indicators of soft power extend far beyond the cases discussed, the present article is specifically centered on these elements. The second section addresses the relationship between soft power and national security, and evaluates Iran’s capacity to employ its national sources of soft power. The final section undertakes a case study of Iran and Turkey’s policies in the use of soft power, analyzing Turkey’s soft-power initiatives aimed at advancing its hard-power objectives in the shared peripheral sphere with Iran and in its intense competition with Tehran. Neglecting these dynamics, the article argues, could expose Iran’s national security to potential and serious risks. Despite Iran’s possession of unparalleled and deeply rooted identity-based and civilizational assets, the Islamic Republic’s approach to utilizing these resources has largely been superficial, lacking comprehensiveness, strategic planning, and structured implementation. By contrast, Turkey—despite its shallower and historically less comparable cultural and civilizational background—has managed, through the strategic, coordinated, and operational deployment of its soft-power elements, including language, ethnicity, Ottoman heritage, and public diplomacy, to establish an effective presence and expanding influence in Iran’s critical neighboring regions, particularly the Caucasus and Central Asia. Accordingly, the utilization of Iran’s historical and civilizational soft power resources constitutes a security imperative that will directly impact Iran’s national security and the broader security arrangements of its surrounding environment. Conclusion Following the transformation in the nature and forms of power and the increasing significance of its new dimensions, threats arising from the actions of actors have moved beyond their previously purely military character and have acquired a multidimensional and composite nature. From an identity-based and cognitive perspective, Iran’s surrounding security environment is complex: in certain regions, such as the Middle East, the influence of religious and Islamic components is more pronounced, whereas in other areas, such as Central Asia and the Caucasus, conditions are more favorable for leveraging national values and historical and civilizational resources of soft power. Turkey is one of the most significant actors challenging Iran from an identity standpoint. By strategically maximizing its soft power resources, Turkey has gained substantial influence in Iran’s peripheral environment and has generated challenges to Iran’s national security, particularly in the South Caucasus and Central Asia. As is evident, soft power can serve as an effective complement to national security only when it is grounded in a coherent strategy that reflects geopolitical and cultural realities. In this context, Turkey’s activities and its competition with Iran across various domains are not merely cultural endeavors; rather, they create conditions whose outcomes can directly influence strategic depth, spheres of influence, and ultimately, national security. A clear example of such activities can be observed in Turkey’s policies toward the Turkic world. Through redefining identity, history, and culture for Turkic-speaking countries, these policies have directly targeted key components of Iran’s soft power—such as its history, civilization, culture, and literature. By appropriating Iran’s tangible and intangible cultural assets, Turkey seeks to construct a cultural narrative for itself while simultaneously shaping the identity of smaller, aligned actors. Accordingly, and in light of the discussions presented in this article, Iran’s full utilization of its soft power resources should be regarded not merely as a policy recommendation, but as a security imperative for maintaining balance and safeguarding its national security. در منظومه پیچیده روابط بین‌الملل، قدرت نرم به‌عنوان یکی از شاخه‌های مهم مفهوم قدرت، به‌مثابه مؤلفه‌ای تعیین‌کننده در تعمیق نفوذ راهبردی، ژئوپلیتیک و تأمین امنیت ملی کشورها از اهمیت ویژه‌ای برخوردار است. این مقاله با تمرکز بر ارزش‌های ملی به‌عنوان متغیر مستقل محوری، به واکاوی نقش این ارزش‌ها در تقویت قدرت نرم و در نتیجه، ارتقای امنیت ملی ایران می‌پردازد. پژوهش حاضر، این نقش را در چارچوب رقابت ژئوپلیتیک ایران با ترکیه به‌عنوان یک مطالعه موردی بررسی می‌کند. با توجه به سرمایه‌گذاری گسترده و فعال آنکارا در عرصه قدرت نرم، پرسش اصلی این است که استفاده ایران از مؤلفة‌های ملیِ قدرت ‌نرم خود از جمله زبان و ادبیات فارسی و میراث تاریخی و تمدنی، به‌عنوان بخشی از منابع راهبردی غیرمادی برای تولید و قدرت نرم، چه تأثیری بر امنیت‌ ملی ایران و به‌ویژه در رقابت‌های ژئوپلیتیک آن با ترکیه خواهد داشت؟ فرضیه مورد سنجش به این شرح است که استفاده هوشمندانه از این سرمایه‌های هویتی، نه تنها می‌تواند جایگاه رقابتی و موازنه‌ای ایران را در عرصه فرهنگی و تمدنی در مناطق حیاتی مانند قفقاز و آسیای مرکزی ارتقا بخشد، بلکه می‌تواند از طریق ایجاد جذابیت و مشروعیت، به افزایش نفوذ ژئوپلیتیکی و تحکیم پایه‌های امنیت‌ ملی در برابر رقبای منطقه‌ای مانند ترکیه منجر شود. این تحقیق با اتخاذ روشی تحلیلی-تبیینی و با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای و اسنادی انجام شده است. یافته‌های آن می‌تواند چارچوبی مفهومی برای تدوین راهبردهای هوشمندانه‌تر در سیاست خارجی و دیپلماسی فرهنگی ایران در رقابت با بازیگران منطقه‌ای فراهم آورد.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_232447_44a15982a715a2cc9e097edb8c4af35f.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 The Turkey-Israel Conflict in Post-Assad Syria: From Geopolitical Competition to Clash of Interests منازعه ترکیه و اسرائیل در سوریه پسا اسد: از رقابت ژئوپلیتیکی تا برخورد منافع 199 230 239746 10.22034/igq.2026.534496.2052 FA ایوب منتی استادیار مطالعات منطقه‌ای، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه ایلام، ایلام، ایران. 0009-0005-2798-4614 حامد کاظمی دانش آموخته دکتری علوم سیاسی و استاد مدعو دانشگاه ایلام، ایلام، ایران. 0000-0001-9490-784x Journal Article 2025 07 28 Extended Abstract Introduction The contradictory behavioral patterns and the existence of conflicting regimes in the Middle East have, for many years, subjected the geopolitical map of the region to significant changes. These changes, exacerbated by the intervention of extra-regional political entities, have escalated tensions, creating a tangible reality marked by geopolitical crises, which culminated in internal revolutions and regional confrontations. The outbreak of the “Al-Aqsa Storm” by Palestinian forces introduced a new and impactful shockwave to the region’s geopolitical transformations, which ultimately led to the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria. This development thrust the region into a state of uncertainty and new fluctuations. Post-Assad Syria emerged as a new arena for regional competition between Israel and Turkey, both striving to redraw the regional order. This study aims to examine the level of conflict and divergence of interests between Turkey and Israel in the new Syria following the recent developments, and to demonstrate how these two regional powers have found themselves in conflict across various domains. Research Methodology The primary goal of this study is to gain an in-depth understanding of the geopolitical actions of Israel and Turkey in the evolving post-Assad Syrian landscape and to explain the logic of their behaviors within the framework of the balance of power theory. Accordingly, this research adopts a qualitative approach and is descriptive-analytical in nature. The data for this study were collected through the review of primary and secondary sources, including academic articles, books, scientific reports, credible news sources, and official government statements. The research focuses on qualitative content analysis of political-strategic concepts based on the declared and practiced policies of the two actors under study, aiming to extract behavioral patterns, strategic preferences, and structural developments in the regional balance of power. The selection of this method is grounded in the complexity and multilayered nature of Syria’s developments and power struggles at the regional level. Furthermore, employing the balance of power theory as the theoretical framework provides a coherent and systematic context for analyzing the actors’ behaviors, allowing the researcher to uncover causal relationships between geopolitical transformations and competitive strategies. Findings The new dynamics shaping the regional environment and the fragile state of post-Assad Syria reveal that changes in the regional balance of power have weakened and, in some cases, dismantled many alliances and coalition networks. Turkey and Israel, which once aligned in weakening Iran’s power and the axis of resistance, have become two new regional rivals following the fall of Bashar al-Assad. The shifting balance of power in the region has introduced new fears and concerns for Turkish and Israeli elites, as the leaders of both countries perceive each other as the primary regional rival for the future. This perception has elevated the issue of survival and self-preservation to a strategic priority, prompting both countries to design political strategies aimed at weakening and countering one another. The new realities in Syria have created novel dynamics, demonstrating that Turkey and Israel are in conflict and have diverging interests across multiple dimensions and domains. The future political system in Syria, its structure and nature, the power of ethnic and religious groups such as the Kurds and Druze in the new Syria, trade routes and corridors through Syria, and a strong military presence in Syria’s political-security sphere are among the areas that highlight the levels of conflict and divergence between Turkey and Israel. Conclusion Geopolitical changes in the region, triggered by the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government, have also led to significant shifts in the regional balance of power. Turkey and Israel, driven by the need to maintain regional dominance and fearing the rise of the other, are actively engaging in the new Syria to establish themselves as the region’s new hegemon. The clash of interests between these two political entities indicates that the shifting balance of power in Syria and the region shapes their interventionist objectives in Syria. To achieve this, Israel has pursued policies such as advocating for a decentralized and weakened Syrian state, supporting ethnic and religious minorities, maintaining a strong military presence, and establishing land corridors to secure future power. In contrast, Turkey has prioritized strengthening the central government, weakening Kurdish power, establishing an energy corridor from Qatar through Syria to Turkey, and expanding its military influence through the establishment of various bases. These objectives have created a conflict and divergence of interests between the two countries in Syria, making the future of Syria and its developments contingent upon the ebb and flow of this rivalry. چشم‌انداز ژئوپلیتیکی خاورمیانه از منظر تاریخی، بیانگر اتحادهایی موقتی، سیال و معامله‌ای بوده است. واقعیت‌های حاکم بر نظام خاورمیانه غالباً تصویری از اتحادهای تاکتیکی را به نمایش می‌گذارد. بحران سوریه، از آغاز شعله‌ور شدن تا سقوط دولت بشار اسد، آزمونی جامع و روزآمد از ماهیت موقتی و مقطعی اتحادها در خاورمیانه را نشان می‌دهد. اسرائیل و ترکیه که در دوران دولت پیشین به‌ظاهر یک محور منطقه‌ای را برای تضعیف قدرت ایران و سرنگونی رژیم اسد شکل داده بودند، با سقوط رژیم در سال 2024 و به دلیل چشم‌اندازهای استراتژیک، جاه‌طلبی‌های متفاوت، الزامات سیاسی داخلی و محاسبات استراتژیک جدید، به محور تضاد و تقابل تبدیل شدند. هدف این مقاله، نمایش ماهیت تعارض‌آمیز منافع و ترجیحات ترکیه و اسرائیل در پرتو تحولات سوریه پسا اسد و تغییرات شکل‌گرفته در موازنه ژئوپلیتیکی منطقه است. سوال اصلی این است که چه عاملی ترکیه و اسرائیل را به سمت اتخاذ راهبردهای تعارض‌آمیز در سوریه پسا اسد سوق داده است؟ بر اساس فرضیه مطرح‌شده، تلاش ترکیه و اسرائیل برای تغییر موازنه قدرت در منطقه، ناشی از تغییرات ژئوپلیتیکی به‌وجود آمده از سقوط دولت بشار اسد، عامل اصلی در اتخاذ راهبردهای تعارض‌آمیز دو کشور در سوریه بوده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که تغییرات ژئوپلیتیکی منطقه، اتخاذ راهبردهای متضادی را از سوی ترکیه و اسرائیل در سوریه به‌وجود آورده است که در دیدگاه‌های متضاد نسبت به ماهیت و شکل نظام سیاسی آینده، برخورد با اقلیت‌های سوری، حضور نظامی و رقابت‌های کریدوری خود را نشان می‌دهد.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_239746_9b1c1ea1e8c434b2836437d0b08eb8db.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 Decision-Making Pattern of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Foreign Policy Crises: A Comparative Study of the Acceptance of Resolution 598 and the JCPOA الگوی تصمیم‌گیری جمهوری اسلامی ایران در بحران‌های سیاست خارجی: مطالعه تطبیقی پذیرش قطعنامه 598 و توافق برجام 231 259 242967 10.22034/igq.2026.572350.2157 FA محمد جواد ظریف دانشیار گروه مطالعات فرامنطقه‌ای و جهانی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-0712-405X محمد سمیعی دانشیار گروه مطالعات ایران و جهان، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0000-0002-1704-5091 آترین اسکندری دانشجوی کارشناسی‌ارشد رشته نظام قدرت جهانی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0009-0003-2397-1141 Journal Article 2026 01 30 Extended Abstract Introduction Since its establishment, the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran has been shaped within a complex interplay of ideological, institutional, and environmental factors, and has consistently been influenced by domestic, regional, and international conditions. One of the most salient features of this policy concerns how the political system responds to strategic crises and makes decisions under circumstances in which the continuation of the status quo entails escalating costs and policy options become progressively constrained. In such situations, high-level foreign policy decision-making reflects not only objective and material considerations, but also the perceptions, interpretations, and cognitive frameworks of political elites. The acceptance of United Nations Security Council Resolution 598 in 1988 and the nuclear agreement (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA) in 2015 represent two historical and strategic turning points in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Both cases constitute paradigmatic instances of crisis situations in which comparative analysis can provide deeper insight into the logic of Iranian decision-making under pressure. Although the acceptance of Resolution 598 and the JCPOA occurred in distinct temporal, political, and institutional contexts-and despite fundamental differences in the nature of the crises, the actors involved, and the structure of the international system-both cases unfolded under conditions of intense external pressure, severe domestic economic challenges, growing security threats, and a narrowing of strategic options. In both instances, the political system, following a period of resistance and steadfast opposition to external pressures and a reluctance to negotiate, ultimately consented to an agreement that was officially portrayed as a relative and emergency retreat from previously declared positions. This raises a central question: how did the decision-making pattern of the Islamic Republic of Iran take shape in confronting these two crises, and which variables played a decisive role in its formation? The study advances the hypothesis that Iran’s decision-making in accepting Resolution 598 and the JCPOA follows a coherent and recurring pattern that can be conceptualized as a three-stage model. This model consists of: (1) an initial phase of resistance and emphasis on a discourse of steadfastness; (2) a phase of delayed and insufficiently realistic cost–benefit assessment; and (3) a final phase marked by the acceptance of negotiation and agreement under conditions of maximum pressure and strategic urgency. Within this process, political elites tend to avoid strategic reassessment as long as dominant ideological and discursive narratives are capable of justifying the status quo. However, as pressures accumulate and the cost balance shifts, they are compelled to revise their positions and opt for a diplomatic course. Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework of the study is grounded in Robert Jervis’s elite perceptions approach, which underscores the role of perceptions, beliefs, misperceptions, and the interpretation of the international environment by decision-makers. From this perspective, foreign policy outcomes are not merely the result of rational responses to objective stimuli, but rather the product of interaction between structural realities and the ways in which political elites perceive and interpret those realities. Accordingly, delays in decision-making, the persistence of resistance, and the eventual acceptance of agreements under emergency conditions can be analyzed through the gradual transformation of elite perceptions regarding costs, threats, and opportunities. Methodology Methodologically, the article employs a combination of comparative case study analysis and process tracing. The comparative case study method enables a systematic comparison of the two historical cases within a shared theoretical framework, allowing for the examination of similarities and differences in decision-making across distinct structural, institutional, and temporal contexts. At the same time, process tracing focuses on the step-by-step reconstruction of the sequence of events, decisions, and perceptual shifts, thereby revealing the causal mechanisms influencing elite decision-making. This approach moves beyond reductionist explanations centered solely on material variables and highlights the significance of internal decision-making processes. Findings The findings indicate that in both cases, extensive international sanctions, the formation of a global consensus against the Islamic Republic of Iran, escalating security threats, domestic economic pressures, declining financial resources and foreign exchange revenues, and disruptions in the performance of key economic sectors played a decisive role in reshaping elite perceptions. In the case of Resolution 598, the continuation of a war of attrition, the loss of strategic territories-most notably the Faw Peninsula-the expansion of Iraq’s chemical attacks, declining oil revenues, and the risk of direct U.S. intervention gradually magnified the perceived costs of continuing the war among decision-makers. In the case of the JCPOA, the intensification of financial and oil sanctions, a sharp decline in oil exports, severe currency depreciation, and rising social discontent contributed to a reassessment of the feasibility of maintaining the status quo. Nevertheless, in both cases, this perceptual shift did not occur in a preemptive manner, but rather under conditions in which policy options had become severely constrained and the costs of all available choices had increased substantially. Consequently, the acceptance of Resolution 598 and the nuclear agreement can be understood as emergency decisions aimed at exiting a deadlock, involving a relative retreat from ideological positions in order to preserve the overall system and manage the crisis. This suggests that the logic of decision-making in these two cases was shaped less by continuous and forward-looking assessments of environmental change than by dominant discourses and the gradual transformation of elite perceptions in response to accumulated pressures. Conclousion Overall, the study demonstrates that any analysis of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran that neglects the role of elite perceptions risks offering an incomplete and reductionist account. Decision-making in the acceptance of Resolution 598 and the JCPOA was not solely the result of objective shifts in the balance of power, but rather the outcome of the interaction between on-the-ground realities, structural pressures, and the ways in which these realities were interpreted by political elites. While the findings of this article are limited to two specific cases and cannot be generalized to all foreign policy crises of the Islamic Republic of Iran, they nonetheless provide an analytical framework that can be applied to the understanding of similar crises and to the analysis of Iran’s future behavior under conditions of pressure. این پژوهش به تحلیل الگوی تصمیم‌گیری جمهوری اسلامی ایران در مواجهه با دو بحران مهم سیاست خارجی، یعنی پذیرش قطعنامه ۵۹۸ شورای امنیت و توافق هسته‌ای(برجام)، از طریق مطالعه تطبیقی این دو پرونده می‌پردازد. هدف اصلی پژوهش، شناسایی مراحل و عوامل مؤثر بر فرایند تصمیم‌گیری نخبگان سیاسی ایران در این دو پرونده است. با استفاده از روش تطبیقی موردی و ردیابی فرایند و بهره‌گیری از مبانی نظری ادراکات نخبگان رابرت جرویس تلاش شده است به این پرسش پاسخ داده شود که الگوی تصمیم‌گیری جمهوری اسلامی ایران در دو پرونده قطعنامه ۵۹۸ و برجام چگونه شکل گرفته و چه متغیرهایی در تکوین آن نقش تعیین‌کننده داشته‌اند؟ فرضیه پژوهش نیز بدین صورت تدوین شده است که تصمیم‌گیری جمهوری اسلامی ایران در پذیرش قطعنامه ۵۹۸ و برجام، از الگویی منسجم و تکرارپذیر تبعیت می‌کند که شامل مراحل مقاومت اولیه، ارزیابی دیرهنگام هزینه - فایده و پذیرش مذاکره در شرایط فشار حداکثری است. این فرایند مبتنی بر تحلیل راهبردی نخبگان سیاسی در مواجهه با تحولات داخلی، منطقه‌ای و بین‌المللی است که منجر به عقب‌نشینی نسبی و در حد اضطرار از مواضع ایدئولوژیک و انتخاب راهبرد دیپلماتیک می‌شود. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که تحریم‌های بین‌المللی، اجماع بین‌المللی و تهدیدات امنیتی، فشارهای اقتصادی و به‌تبع آن محدودشدن منابع مالی، کاهش درآمدهای ارزی و اختلال در عملکرد بخش‌های اقتصادی، در پذیرش قطعنامه ۵۹۸ و توافق هسته‌ای نقش تعیین‌کننده‌ای در تغییر ادراک نخبگان و سوق‌دادن آنان به بازنگری در موضع اولیه خود داشته است.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_242967_c017c5e764e58fb307004ad23d3d7817.pdf

انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران فصلنامه بین المللی ژئوپلیتیک 1735-4331 22 1 2026 04 21 Germany’s Foreign Policy toward Hezbollah سیاست خارجی جمهوری فدرال آلمان در قبال حزب‌الله لبنان 260 298 242968 10.22034/igq.2026.558716.2126 FA بهزاد احمدی استادیار گروه مطالعات اروپا، دانشکده مطالعات جهان، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. حامد کاظمی کارشناسی‌ارشد مطالعات کشورهای آلمانی زبان، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. سید هادی برهانی استادیار گروه مطالعات غرب آسیا، دانشکده مطالعات جهان، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2025 12 06 Extended Abstract Introduction As the largest economic power and the driving engine of integration within the EU, the Federal Republic of Germany is considered one of the influential countries in the international system due to its decisive role in global political and security dynamics. Israel has consistently occupied a special place in German foreign policy. Germany has long sought to erase the legacy of Nazi-era racism and the atrocities of World War II through supportive policies toward Jews and the State of Israel. From this perspective, Lebanon finds a prominent position in the German Middle East policy. After the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon in 1982, Hezbollah was formed as a new resistance force in this country, which gradually became the main enemy of Israel and has created security challenges against it especially in the years 1996 and 2006. The conflict, particularly in the 2006 war, has established Hezbollah’s capacity as an actor with the ability to create deterrence against Israel, and the fact has strengthened the importance of Lebanon and the Hezbollah in German policy. From the domestic policy perspective, from the 1980s, Lebanese immigrants, many of whom were from the south of Lebanon, settled in various German cities, including Berlin, Hamburg, and Cologne. The migration provided opportunities for Hezbollah to establish a base in Germany by building relations with these communities. Over time, the presence and scope of activities of Hezbollah have challenged German government and led to a set of measures against it. Accordingly, understanding Germany’s foreign policy toward Hezbollah can provide deeper insight into Berlin’s decision-making and strategies regarding the Axis of Resistance—including the Islamic Republic of Iran—and offer a better understanding of Germany’s position within the diplomatic and security equations of the Middle East, particularly in the Levant, and its relations with other regional actors such as Israel. This study seeks to answer the question: What foreign policy does Germany pursue toward Hezbollah in the period 1982 - 2024? The central hypothesis posits that "Germany's policy towards Hezbollah during the past decades is heavily under the influence of internalized and deep Identity–Centered and Norm-Consistent factors and has gradually moved from a cautious, limited and informal engagement with the group to a strategy of containment and rejection, expressed through political opposition to the organization and support for international efforts to impose pressure and sanctions—largely influenced by Germany’s historical, emotional, and strategic commitment to Israel. Furthermore, the argumentative foundation rests on hypothesis testing; in this regard, a prominent theory in foreign policy studies— Norm-Consistent and Identity–Centered Constructivism —is applied to Germany's foreign policy towards Hezbollah. Methodology This research adopts a qualitative, descriptive–analytical approach. Data were collected primarily from documentary and library sources in German, English, and Persian. Due to the scarcity of equivalent primary materials and the relative novelty of the topic, data collection required extensive cross-field investigation, drawing on political, academic, and media sources. The collected data fall into three main categories: - Official and international documents: strategies, resolutions, and materials published by the German Federal Government, the European Union, NATO, and other international organizations; - Academic studies and policy papers: analyses by reputable institutions such as the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), the German Institute for Defense and Strategic Studies, and relevant peer-reviewed journals; - News and analytical sources: reports and analyses from leading European and Middle Eastern media, along with official statements by German officials reflecting the political and practical dimensions of current developments. Result and Discussion Germany’s relationship with Hezbollah encompasses complex layers of occasional cooperation and increasing tension. While Germany has traditionally maintained friendly relations with Lebanon and has played an active role in regional affairs for decades, its direct relations with Hezbollah have been shaped by political, security, and international constraints. According to the identity- and normative pattern, the following factors are important regarding the foreign policy of Germany towards Hezbollah: Israel's security and survival: Germany’s policy toward Hezbollah is primarily shaped by the imperative of protecting Israel’s security. The historic responsibility of Germany for the nazi crimes, especially the Holocaust, has created a deep political and moral obligation and commitment to security and the existence of the Israeli state. Germany considers Hezbollah’s continuing armed confrontation with Israel, contradictory with its normative commitment, which has led to the recognition of Hezbollah as a vital threat. Adding this threat perception to the identity element of historic responsibility for the Holocaust and the Nazi legacy, makes the Israeli variable a pivotal element in forming of Germany’s policy towards Hezbollah. Countering terrorism and the extremist ideology: Identifying Hezbollah as a terrorist organization on one hand and countering its ideology as an extremist ideology on the other hand, are influencing the German policy towards Hezbollah. In December 2019, the Bundestag passed a nonbinding draft, which urged the government to ban all activities of Hezbollah (including both political and military wings) .In March 2020, the federal government officially banned all of Hezbollah activities according to its normative values including stability of Germany in supporting a rules – based order. Internal political Dynamics: Domestically, despite differences between Germany’s right- and left-wing parties regarding the two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, strong media and political pressures—combined with pro-Israel lobbying and the legacy of Germany’s historical responsibility toward Jews—have produced a near-consensus among German political parties in support of Israel’s right to exist and to self-defense, fighting instances of antisemitism, and securing the Jew’s life in Germany. European Integration: The descriptive dimensions of the German government 's identity, sees its interests in close political and economic integration into EU and the transatlantic community. At the European level, cooperation between Germany and the European Union in countering Hezbollah’s activities has become a core component of the bloc’s foreign and security policy. The EU has pursued a multifaceted and relatively complex policy toward Hezbollah, aimed at preserving regional stability, strengthening pro-Western forces in Lebanon, and countering the organization’s influence. In July 2013, the EU designated Hezbollah’s military wing as a terrorist entity, leading to extensive sanctions against the group. Germany, as one of the EU’s leading members, has not only followed but also shaped and reinforced the Union’s tougher stance toward Hezbollah, particularly in recent years. Rules-based Order and the bilateral relations with the Lebanese government: In practice, Germany has been actively involved in Lebanese affairs, seeking to influence the country’s internal balance of power through development assistance, support for anti-Hezbollah political factions, and diplomatic engagement aligned with its national interests. The operational dimensions of Germany’s policy toward Hezbollah—reflected in its humanitarian aid, participation in the UNIFIL mission, and role in prisoner exchange negotiations—demonstrate limited but sustained engagement designed to safeguard Germany’s political and security interests in Lebanon. Conclusion The German policy towards Hezbollah is constructed based on norms such as counter-terrorism, security and survival of Israel, antisemitism, European integration, and the rules- based order, which has led to an identity understanding Hezbollah as increasing threat over time. This threat perception has brought Berlin to try to maintain consistency between its normative commitments deeply internalized in the form of actions such as implementation of criminal law, freezing of assets, and organizational bans that due to normative and identity nature, is the case of high political consensus among different parties. According to this, Hezbollah poses a challenge to the Jew’s life in Germany, to the liberal democratic order, and is inconsistent with the German normative commitments. These findings yield two major conclusions: First, Germany’s stance has undergone a significant transformation—from a mediator and soft critic to a firm opponent. This shift culminated in the designation of both Hezbollah’s political and military branches as terrorist organizations and the prohibition of all its activities in Germany. Second, especially after October 7, 2023, Berlin’s foreign policy has become noticeably harsher and more aligned with that of Israel and the United States—setting Germany apart from other European partners, particularly France and the United Kingdom, and even from the broader EU consensus. Germany’s foreign policy toward Hezbollah over the past four decades thus reflects a combination of normative constraints rooted in its historical responsibility toward Israel and pragmatic flexibility aimed at protecting national interests. Findings based on the identity- and norm-centered constructivist approach indicate that Germany’s postwar identity as a “civilian power” committed to human rights, alongside its deeply institutionalized norm of responsibility for Israel’s security and existence, has sharply limited policymakers’ room for maneuver. آلمان در سیاست جهانی به‌عنوان یکی از کشورهای موثر در اتحادیه اروپا نقش‌آفرینی‌ می‌کند و به دلیل رشد اهمیت و قدرت آن در سطح منطقه‌ای و بین‌المللی، منافع این کشور در خاورمیانه و همچنین تهدیدات آن از این منطقه افزایش یافته و سبب شده تا این کشور حضور جدی‌تری در منطقه و تعامل با بازیگران مختلف آن داشته باشد. از سوی دیگر، اسرائیل همواره در سیاست خارجی آلمان جایگاه ویژه‌ای را به خود اختصاص داده است. از این چشم انداز، کشور کوچک لبنان در سیاست خاورمیانه‌ای آلمان جایگاه برجسته‌ای می‌یابد. بزرگ‌ترین بحران‌های امنیتی اسرائیل در دهه‌های اخیر و در دوران پیشا ۷ اکتبر در مرزهای لبنان، به‌ویژه در سال‌های ۱۹۹۶ و ۲۰۰۶، رخ داده است. این درگیری‌ها، به‌ویژه جنگ ۲۰۰۶، ظرفیت حزب‌الله را به‌عنوان یک بازیگر غیردولتی با توانایی ایجاد بازدارندگی در برابر اسرائیل تثبیت کرده و واقعیت مزبور اهمیت لبنان و حزب‌الله را از چشم انداز سیاست خاورمیانه‌ای آلمان قوت بخشیده است. از منظر سیاست داخلی نیز حضور و گستره فعالیت حزب‌الله در آلمان مورد چالش قرار گرفته و به مجموعه ای از اقدامات دولت آلمان علیه فعالیت‌های آن در این کشور انجامیده است. لذا مطالعه منظم سیاست آلمان در قبال حزب‌الله حائز اهمیت پژوهشی است.براین اساس، مقاله حاضر به بررسی این پرسش می‌پردازد که «سیاست آلمان در قبال حزب‌الله لبنان در بازه زمانی ۱۹۸۲ تا ۲۰۲۴ چه تحولاتی را تجربه کرده و این تحولات تحت تأثیر کدام عوامل شکل گرفته است؟» در پاسخ به سوال مذکور، این فرضیه مطرح است که «سیاست آلمان در قبال حزب‌الله لبنان در طول دهه‌های گذشته تحت تاثیر عوامل هنجاری و هویتی درونی شده و عمیق، به تدریج از سیاستی محتاطانه و مداراجویانه به سوی سیاستی سخت و طردکننده میل نموده است». برای آزمون این فرضیه از نظریه سازه انگاری هویت و هنجارمحور و از روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی برای تحلیل داده‌های حاصل از ارزیابی اسناد رسمی و منابع مکتوب کتابخانه‌ای و اینترنتی استفاده شده است.

https://journal.iag.ir/article_242968_4ede48d6a702fdcb2f5f7fb7c20463f5.pdf