پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 Hydropolitical Self-Organization: A Dynamic Approach to Iran's Water Diplomacy in Patterns of Interaction and Conflict -A Case Study of the Transboundary Aras River Basin خودسازماندهی هیدروپلیتیک؛ نگرشی پویا به دیپلماسی آب ایران در الگوهای تعامل و تعارض: مطالعه موردی: حوضه رودخانه فرامرزی ارس 7 36 241361 10.22034/fr.2026.485396.1594 FA یاشار ذکی دانشیار گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکده جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-7117-0360 محمد یوسفی شاتوری دانشجوی دکتری، جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکده علوم جغرافیایی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-7440-5700 Journal Article 2024 10 26 Given the increasing complexity of hydropolitical interactions in shared and transboundary watersheds, water issues have become increasingly significant in Iran’s relations with the countries surrounding the Aras River. Using the framework of hydropolitical self-organization, this study employs a dynamic approach to explain how the actions, unilateral decisions, and institutional mechanisms of upstream countries (Turkey and Armenia) reproduce patterns of conflict, competition, or cooperation within this basin, and how Iran’s water diplomacy can play an effective role in this self-organizing system. The research method is descriptive-analytical, based on official documents, reports from the Majlis Research Center, and data from the Ministry of Energy. The findings indicate that the quantitative and qualitative reduction of water, alterations to the river’s natural course, numerous dam constructions, and extensive upstream exploitation have acted as “self-organized drivers,” fostering competition-oriented patterns in the basin. A historical review of interactions also reveals that since 2016, Iran’s water diplomacy has lacked sufficient initiative, exacerbating conflictual self-organizing forces in the basin. Consequently, As a result, activating Iran's water diplomacy in the areas of fair distribution, water quality management, and regulation of upstream interventions is an urgent necessity; otherwise, the self-organized hydropolitical structure of the Aras Basin will move towards further hydropolitical tensions and challenges. Keywords: Interaction and Conflict Patterns, Iran and Its Neighbors, Transboundary Aras Basin, Water Diplomacy, Hydropolitical Self-Organization Extended Abstract Introduction Transboundary water becomes a strategic and political issue as it crosses national borders, and upstream countries’ unilateral actions can generate significant tensions. In Asia-and in Iran in particular-limited water resources and unbalanced exploitation have made the management of shared rivers increasingly complex. The Aras Basin, where Iran lies mostly downstream, is especially vulnerable due to expanding dam construction in upstream states. This article, using a hydro-political self-organization approach, analyzes the dynamics of conflict and cooperation in the Aras Basin and assesses Iran’s water diplomacy capacities. Research Question How do the interactions, unilateral decisions, and institutional mechanisms of upstream countries in the Aras Basin reproduce patterns of conflict, competition, or cooperation, and how can Iran’s water diplomacy effectively operate within a self-organizing hydropolitical structure to manage these dynamics? Research Hypothesis It appears that the unilateral decisions, extensive dam construction, and intensive upstream water exploitation by Turkey and Armenia-acting as self-organizing drivers-have reinforced conflict-oriented patterns in the Aras Basin. The lack of sufficient initiative in Iran’s water diplomacy since 2016 has further intensified these dynamics. Therefore, activating Iran’s water diplomacy in areas such as equitable water allocation, water quality management, and regulation of upstream interventions can redirect the basin’s self-organizing hydropolitical structure from conflict toward cooperation. Methodology (and Theoretical Framework if there are) The conceptual framework of this study is based on the “hydropolitical self-organization” approach, which views transboundary basins as dynamic, non-centralized systems that reproduce patterns of cooperation, competition, or conflict through the interaction of structural, institutional, and actor-based drivers. In the Aras Basin, upstream dam construction, weak joint institutions, and unilateral actions by riparian states have pushed the system toward competitive and conflict-oriented patterns. Alongside this perspective, the concepts of hydro-hegemony and water diplomacy further clarify how power asymmetries, institutional arrangements, and discursive dynamics shape inter-state water relations. The research employs a descriptive-analytical method and relies on documentary and library data. Using qualitative content analysis, the study reconstructs hydropolitical dynamics and evaluates the role of Iran’s water diplomacy in the basin. Results and discussion The Aras Basin, due to its transboundary structure, inherently generates self-organizing patterns of hydropolitical conflict driven by upstream dam construction, flow alteration, and pollution by Turkey and Armenia. Weak institutional frameworks and outdated treaties—ranging from the 1828 Turkmenchay Treaty to late-Soviet and post-2014 agreements—lack adaptive, data-driven, and enforceable mechanisms to regulate new structural pressures. The partial inactivity of joint commissions, poor data exchange, and the absence of continuous monitoring have reduced the basin’s institutional resilience. Since the mid-2010s, Iran’s decline in active water diplomacy has removed a key stabilizing force in negotiations, monitoring, and operational coordination. This passivity has allowed upstream actors to unilaterally reshape flow regimes and redefine water-use narratives without Iranian counter-balancing. Consequently, the basin’s hydropolitical system self-organizes toward instability, reinforcing competition, asymmetry, and downstream vulnerability. Conclusion The analysis of the Aras Basin shows that upstream unilateral actions and dam construction by Turkey and Armenia—combined with weak institutional mechanisms—have reinforced conflict-oriented dynamics and placed Iran in a passive position. Reduced river flow, increasing pollution, and the absence of joint monitoring have further intensified environmental and competitive pressures. However, revitalizing institutional cooperation—such as reactivating the Aras Joint Commission, establishing a monitoring system, and engaging Iran more actively in upstream negotiations—can help curb these tensions. Strengthening water diplomacy and joint mechanisms is essential for shifting the basin from conflict toward sustainable cooperation. با توجه به افزایش پیچیدگی تعاملات هیدروپلیتیکی در حوضه‌های آبریز مشترک و فرامرزی، مسئله آب در روابط ایران با کشورهای پیرامونی رودخانه ارس اهمیتی فزاینده یافته است. این پژوهش با بهره‌گیری از چهارچوب خودسازماندهی هیدروپلیتیک، با رویکردی پویا به دنبال تبیین این موضوع است که چگونه کنش‌ها، تصمیمات یک‌جانبه و سازوکارهای نهادی کشورهای بالادست (ترکیه و ارمنستان) الگوهای تعارض، رقابت یا همکاری را در این حوضه بازتولید می‌کنند و دیپلماسی آب ایران چگونه می‌تواند در این ساختار خودسازمان‌گر نقش مؤثری ایفا کند. روش تحقیق توصیفی-تحلیلی بوده و مبتنی بر اسناد رسمی، گزارش‌های مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس و داده‌های وزارت نیرو است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که کاهش کمی و کیفی آب، تغییر مسیر طبیعی رودخانه، سدسازی‌های متعدد و بهره‌برداری سنگین بالادست، به‌مثابه «محرک‌های خودسازمانده» باعث شکل‌گیری الگوهای رقابت‌محور در حوضه شده‌اند. بررسی تاریخی تعاملات نیز نشان می‌دهد که از سال ۱۳۹۵ به بعد، دیپلماسی آب ایران فاقد ابتکار عمل کافی بوده و همین امر موجب تشدید نیروهای خودسازمانگر تعارضی در حوضه شده است. درنتیجه، فعال‌سازی دیپلماسی آب ایران در حوزه تقسیم منصفانه، مدیریت کیفیت آب و تنظیم مداخلات بالادست، ضرورتی فوری دارد؛ در غیر این صورت، ساختار خودسازمانده هیدروپلیتیک حوضه ارس به سمت تنش و چالش‌های هیدروپلیتیکی بیشتر حرکت خواهد کرد.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_241361_00005d011db80a956aab176cc94d1d37.pdf

پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 The Emerging Architecture of the Geopolitics of Technology: A Comparative Analysis of the Balance of Technological Power between the United States and China معماری نوظهور ژئوپلیتیک فناوری؛ تحلیل تطبیقی توازن قدرت فناورانه میان ایالات متحده و چین 37 72 244924 10.22034/fr.2026.560142.1732 FA مصطفی اسماعیلی استادیار روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه عالی دفاع ملی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-3215-5256 امیرعباس رکنی دانشجوی دکتری امنیت ملی، دانشگاه عالی دفاع ملی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-0700-4624 Journal Article 2025 11 16 Technological rivalry between the United States and China has become one of the principal arenas for the redistribution of power in the international system. The central problem of this study concerns the relationship between this rivalry and the continuity or relative decline of American technological hegemony, and how it may affect the trajectory of transformation in the global balance of power. The research question is formulated as follows: has China’s technological rise been able to narrow the scope of the United States’ historical superiority in strategic domains of technology, and what implications does this transformation hold for the emerging global order? The article hypothesizes that the United States continues to retain an effective advantage in the foundational layers of innovation, including advanced semiconductor design, influential scientific production, venture capital, cloud infrastructure, and global rule making capacity. China, however, has developed independent capacities for generating technological power by relying on centralized industrial policy, the development of indigenous supply chains, the expansion of digital infrastructure, industrial applications of artificial intelligence, and data governance, thereby reducing part of its historical gap with the United States. The conceptual framework of the study is grounded in the interconnection between structural power, international political economy, and structural realism, and analyzes technology as a mechanism for producing, consolidating, and redistributing power. The research method is qualitative, descriptive, and analytical. Using a comparative case study approach, the study compares the positions of the two countries across four domains: semiconductors, artificial intelligence, digital infrastructure and telecommunications standards, and data governance and the innovation ecosystem.The data are collected from official reports, policy documents, peer reviewed academic sources, data from international organizations, and patent databases. The findings indicate that the technological rivalry between the two countries has not resulted in the full replacement of one power by another, yet it has led to the relative erosion of certain American advantages and to the emergence of new centers of technological rule making, production, and dependency formation. The outcome of this transformation is the emergence of the geopolitics of technology. In this condition, control over supply chains, technical standards, data flows, digital infrastructure, and technological alliances becomes one of the most important mechanisms for the redistribution of power in the international system. Extended Abstract Introduction Technological rivalry between the United States and China has become one of the principal arenas through which power is being redistributed in the contemporary international system. Over the twentieth century, the United States consolidated its technological hegemony through dominance in semiconductors, computing, the internet, aerospace, research universities, venture capital, and global standard setting. This accumulated technological advantage helped sustain American structural power across economic, military, institutional, and normative domains. China’s rise has introduced a new structural challenge to this configuration. Through long term industrial policy, large scale state investment, the mobilization of a vast domestic market, the expansion of digital infrastructure, and the development of indigenous innovation capacities, China has gradually narrowed parts of the technological gap with the United States. The resulting rivalry extends beyond market competition and industrial upgrading. It increasingly involves control over supply chains, access to critical technologies, data governance, technical standards, export controls, innovation ecosystems, and the institutional rules that shape the global circulation of technology. The article therefore examines technological competition as a structural process that affects the balance of power and the emerging architecture of global order. Research Question The central research question of the article is as follows: to what extent has China’s technological rise narrowed the historical technological superiority of the United States in strategic domains of technology, and what implications does this transformation hold for the emerging global order? This question is situated at the intersection of international political economy, security studies, and technology governance. It asks whether the United States is experiencing a relative decline in technological hegemony, whether China has developed independent sources of technological power, and how these developments affect the distribution of power in the international system. The article also investigates whether technological competition between the two powers should be understood as a simple replacement of one hegemon by another or as a more complex, gradual, and multidimensional redistribution of technological advantages across different layers of the global innovation system. Research Hypothesis The article advances the hypothesis that the United States continues to retain an effective advantage in the foundational layers of technological power, including advanced semiconductor design, high impact scientific production, venture capital networks, cloud infrastructure, platform based innovation, and global rule making capacity. At the same time, China has developed independent capacities for generating technological power by relying on centralized industrial policy, the localization of supply chains, the expansion of digital infrastructure, industrial applications of artificial intelligence, large scale data resources, and an increasingly active role in technical standard setting. The hypothesis therefore does not assume a complete displacement of American technological hegemony by China. It argues instead that the balance of technological power is being reconfigured through the relative erosion of certain American advantages, the rise of Chinese capacities in specific domains, and the emergence of new centers of technological production, rule making, dependency formation, and infrastructural control. Methodology (and Theoretical Framework if there are) The study adopts a qualitative, descriptive, and analytical methodology based on a comparative case study of the United States and China. The unit of analysis is the set of national technological policies, capabilities, institutional arrangements, and strategic achievements of the two countries between 2000 and 2025. The data are drawn from official reports, policy documents, peer reviewed academic literature, international organization datasets, patent repositories, and institutional studies on technology, economic security, innovation, and global governance. The comparative analysis focuses on four core domains: semiconductors and technology supply chains, artificial intelligence, digital infrastructure and telecommunications standards, and data governance and the innovation ecosystem. These domains were selected because they represent different layers of technological power, from hardware and computing foundations to data regulation, infrastructural control, and institutionalized innovation. The conceptual framework of the article is grounded in the interconnection between structural power, international political economy, and structural realism. From the perspective of structural power, technological dominance is not limited to the production of advanced tools. It becomes politically significant when a state can shape innovation pathways, intellectual property regimes, data infrastructures, technical standards, access rules, supply chains, and governance models. International political economy explains technology as part of the global structures of production, capital, trade, and knowledge. Structural realism clarifies why states treat sensitive technologies as strategic assets linked to relative power, military capability, economic security, industrial resilience, and deterrence. The article also draws on geoeconomics and economic statecraft to explain how export controls, investment restrictions, industrial subsidies, sanctions, intellectual property rules, and standard setting have become instruments of strategic competition. Within this framework, the geopolitics of technology is not treated as a prior assumption. It emerges as the analytical outcome of the comparative findings. Results and discussion The findings show that the United States retains significant advantages in the most foundational layers of technological power. In semiconductors, American firms and allied partners continue to dominate crucial parts of the value chain, including advanced chip design, electronic design automation software, high end manufacturing equipment, intellectual property, and the alliance networks that support the global semiconductor ecosystem. The United States has also used export controls and coordination with allies such as the Netherlands and Japan to restrict China’s access to advanced chips and manufacturing equipment. China, however, has responded by treating semiconductors as a central pillar of technological self reliance. It has expanded national funding mechanisms, supported domestic firms, pursued supply chain localization, and used its leverage over critical materials such as gallium and germanium as part of a broader strategy of technological resilience. The semiconductor sector therefore illustrates how supply chain chokepoints have become instruments of power. In artificial intelligence, the United States remains the leader in frontier innovation, large language models, advanced computing infrastructure, venture capital, and globally influential platforms. American firms such as Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, Meta, and Nvidia occupy central positions in the ecosystem that supports advanced artificial intelligence. China’s strength lies in a different configuration of technological power. It benefits from large scale data resources, rapid deployment capacity, state supported industrial strategy, smart city applications, and the integration of artificial intelligence into manufacturing, governance, and security related domains. The main constraint on China remains its dependence on advanced chips and certain elements of the global software and research ecosystem. This makes artificial intelligence competition inseparable from semiconductor competition. In digital infrastructure and telecommunications standards, the rivalry is centered on connectivity, data flows, technical standards, and long term infrastructural dependence. The United States has historically shaped the foundational architecture of the internet through its firms, universities, platforms, cloud infrastructure, satellite systems, and technical institutions. China has challenged parts of this dominance through telecommunications equipment, fifth generation mobile networks, smart cities, and future oriented infrastructure projects. Huawei’s rise and China’s large domestic deployment of fifth generation networks have strengthened Beijing’s position in global telecommunications markets and standard setting debates. The competition over sixth generation networks and satellite internet shows that the struggle over digital infrastructure increasingly extends from terrestrial networks to space based systems. In data governance and innovation ecosystems, the United States and China represent two distinct models. The American model relies heavily on private sector leadership, platform capitalism, venture capital, open innovation networks, and relatively decentralized data governance. China’s model emphasizes state authority over data, cyber sovereignty, data localization, algorithmic governance, and the integration of digital infrastructure with national security and industrial strategy. The comparison shows that technological power is also produced through legal rules, regulatory authority, platform governance, and the ability to define how data are collected, stored, transferred, and used. The article also finds that technological rivalry is not confined to the bilateral relationship between Washington and Beijing. The European Union, India, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and other specialized actors influence the direction of this rivalry. The European Union shapes the regulatory environment through data protection, platform regulation, digital market rules, and industrial initiatives such as the European Chips Act. India offers a distinct model of digital public infrastructure and seeks to benefit from supply chain reconfiguration while preserving strategic autonomy. South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan control crucial nodes in semiconductor production, materials, equipment, and manufacturing capacity. These actors make the emerging technological order more multicentric and asymmetric. Conclusion The article concludes that technological rivalry between the United States and China has become a structural mechanism of power redistribution in the international system. The findings do not support a simple narrative of American decline or Chinese replacement. They instead point to a more complex pattern in which the United States retains major advantages in foundational innovation, advanced computing, semiconductor design, venture capital, platforms, and global alliances, while China has strengthened its position in industrial scaling, digital infrastructure, data driven applications, supply chain localization, and state directed technological mobilization. The central theoretical contribution of the article is the formulation of the geopolitics of technology as an emergent condition in which control over supply chains, standards, data flows, digital infrastructure, innovation systems, and technological alliances becomes a key mechanism for shaping global power. The future of international order will therefore be shaped by the tension between interdependence and control, cooperation and rivalry, technological openness and strategic autonomy. Technology has moved from the margins of international political economy to the center of great power competition. رقابت فناورانه میان ایالات‌متحده و چین به یکی از کانون‌های اصلی بازتوزیع قدرت در نظام بین‌الملل تبدیل شده است. مسئله اصلی این پژوهش آن است که این رقابت چه نسبتی با تداوم یا افول نسبی هژمونی فناورانه آمریکا دارد و چگونه می‌تواند مسیر تحول توازن قدرت جهانی را تحت تأثیر قرار دهد. پرسش پژوهش چنین صورت‌بندی می‌شود که آیا خیزش فناورانه چین توانسته است دامنه برتری تاریخی ایالات‌متحده را در حوزه‌های راهبردی فناوری محدود کند و این تحول چه دلالتی برای نظم جهانی در حال شکل‌گیری دارد؟ فرضیه مقاله آن است که ایالات‌متحده همچنان در لایه‌های بنیادین نوآوری، ازجمله طراحی نیمه‌رساناهای پیشرفته، تولید علم اثرگذار، سرمایه‌گذاری خطرپذیر، زیرساخت‌های ابری و توان قاعده‌گذاری جهانی مزیت مؤثر دارد؛ اما چین با اتکا به سیاست صنعتی متمرکز، توسعه زنجیره‌های تأمین بومی، گسترش زیرساخت‌های دیجیتال، کاربرد‌های صنعتی هوش مصنوعی و حکمرانی داده، ظرفیت‌های مستقلی برای تولید قدرت فناورانه ایجاد کرده و بخشی از شکاف تاریخی خود با آمریکا را کاهش داده است. چهارچوب مفهومی پژوهش بر پیوند قدرت ساختاری، اقتصاد سیاسی بین‌الملل و واقع‌گرایی ساختاری استوار است و فناوری را به‌منزلۀ سازوکاری برای تولید، تثبیت و بازتوزیع قدرت تحلیل می‌کند. روش پژوهش کیفی، توصیفی و تحلیلی است و با رویکرد مطالعه موردی تطبیقی، موقعیت دو کشور را در چهار حوزه نیمه‌رساناها، هوش مصنوعی، زیرساخت‌های دیجیتال و استانداردهای مخابراتی و حکمرانی داده و اکوسیستم نوآوری مقایسه می‌کند. داده‌ها از گزارش‌های رسمی، اسناد سیاستی، منابع دانشگاهی داوری‌شده، داده‌های سازمان‌های بین‌المللی و پایگاه‌های ثبت اختراع گردآوری شده‌اند. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که رقابت فناورانه دو کشور به جانشینی کامل یک قدرت با قدرت دیگر منتهی نشده است؛ اما به فرسایش نسبی برخی مزیت‌های آمریکا و ظهور مراکز جدید قاعده‌گذاری، تولید و وابستگی فناورانه انجامیده است. برآیند این تحول، ظهور ژئوپلیتیک فناوری است. در این وضعیت، کنترل زنجیره‌های تأمین، استانداردهای فنی، جریان داده، زیرساخت‌های دیجیتال و ائتلاف‌های فناورانه، به مهم‌ترین سازوکارهای بازتوزیع قدرت در نظام بین‌الملل تبدیل می‌شوند.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_244924_caa3078447338a730a7c1bfbe039acfc.pdf

پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 Investigating the Impact of Transit Corridors on the Balance of Communication and Reducing the Impact of Sanctions; A Case Study of the Persian Gulf-Black Sea Corridor بررسی تأثیر کریدورهای ترانزیتی بر موازنه ارتباطی و کاهش اثر تحریم؛ مطالعه موردی کریدور خلیج‌فارس- دریای سیاه 73 114 235338 10.22034/fr.2025.495381.1617 FA فاطمه محروق استادیار روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران 0000-0003-3336-8074 ابوالقاسم شهریاری استاد مدعو علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه بجنورد، بجنورد، ایران 0000-0002-3193-7344 مهلا مقنی بیلندی دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، ایران 0009-0007-0152-2627 Journal Article 2024 12 26 The conflicts in the South Caucasus, which ultimately led to restrictions on Armenia via the Zangezur Corridor, coinciding with the imposition of sanctions on Iran, created an opportunity. Iran, as the only country capable of supporting Armenia along their shared border, could mitigate the impact of sanctions by designing corridors through Armenia toward Europe. This approach would maintain the geopolitical status quo in its surrounding region while facilitating new transit routes. Theoretical foundations of international transit emphasize that countries can improve their standing by assuming the role of a transit hub. This research aims to examine the potential of the Persian Gulf-Black Sea Corridor to enhance Iran's geopolitical position as an international transit center. The study addresses the following questions: What is the significance of the Persian Gulf-Black Sea Corridor, and how does it impact the enhancement of Iran's geopolitical standing? The research hypothesis posits that the Persian Gulf-Black Sea Corridor significantly facilitates global trade exchanges and holds the potential to transform Iran into a transit hub within the framework of a multi-neighborhood foreign policy. Employing a time-series methodology, the study analyzes the corridor's impact on trade exchanges. The findings indicate that the Persian Gulf-Black Sea Corridor not only improves Iran's trade conditions and elevates its role in international exchanges—thereby helping to overcome geopolitical constraints and reduce the effects of sanctions—but also provides a viable route for trade between India, the Persian Gulf states, and the Black Sea region. Consequently, beyond enhancing Iran's economic diplomacy and preventing adverse geopolitical shifts in the South Caucasus, the Persian Gulf-Black Sea Corridor possesses significant potential to upgrade Iran's transit role. Extended Abstract Introduction In the contemporary international system, the significance of international transport corridors transcends mere trade facilitation. They have emerged as instruments of geoeconomic development, geopolitical competition, and even security management. For countries such as Iran, which have been subjected to prolonged economic sanctions and geopolitical containment, the creation and maintenance of alternative transport routes is not only an economic necessity but also a strategic imperative. The Persian Gulf–Black Sea Corridor, proposed in Tehran in 2016, represents one such initiative. It aims to connect the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean to the Black Sea through Iran, Armenia, and Georgia, thereby linking the Middle East to Southeast Europe. Unlike other competing projects, such as the Zangezur Corridor promoted by Turkey and Azerbaijan, this corridor highlights the importance of preserving territorial integrity, maintaining regional balance in the South Caucasus, and reinforcing Iran’s centrality in Eurasian connectivity. This extended abstract presents a comprehensive overview of the study on the Persian Gulf–Black Sea Corridor, analyzing its theoretical foundations, geo-economics implications, security and geopolitical impacts, as well as the challenges and policy recommendations for its realization. Theoretical Framework From a theoretical standpoint, transport corridors are understood within the framework of transit hubs and network connectivity. International trade networks rely heavily on secure and efficient corridors that reduce costs, shorten delivery times, and provide stability to global supply chains. Countries that successfully position themselves as transit hubs not only accrue economic gains but also elevate their geopolitical status. Corridors also embody security functions. According to theories of complex interdependence, greater connectivity between states reduces the likelihood of conflict and fosters cooperative security frameworks. At the same time, transit hubs act as geopolitical levers: control over key passages such as the Suez Canal or the Strait of Hormuz demonstrates the extent to which corridors can shape international security dynamics. Thus, the Persian Gulf–Black Sea Corridor must be evaluated not only as a geo-economics opportunity but also as a security–geopolitical asset with implications for Iran’s foreign policy, sanctions resilience, and regional balancing strategies. Methodology The research adopts a quantitative approach using time-series analysis (ARIMA models) to assess trade flows among countries along the prospective corridor. Data were collected from the World Bank and the Observatory of Economic Complexity for the period 2000–2022. The analysis examined three dimensions: Iran’s trade with Black Sea countries; Persian Gulf states’ trade with Black Sea countries; India’s trade with the Black Sea region. The aggregated results were then compared to highlight the potential trade volume that could be channeled through the Persian Gulf–Black Sea route. Findings The findings underscore the significant potential of the corridor Iran–Black Sea trade: Despite sanctions, Iran’s exports and imports with Black Sea countries have demonstrated resilience. Notably, exports to Bulgaria increased more than 80-fold during the study period, while imports from Romania and Bulgaria rose sharply after 2018. Persian Gulf–Black Sea trade Exports from Gulf countries to the Black Sea region expanded substantially, with most destinations experiencing tenfold growth since 2000. Imports also followed an upward trajectory, highlighting mutual dependence. India–Black Sea trade: Both exports and imports rose significantly, with Greece, Romania, and Bulgaria serving as major partners. By 2022, India’s trade with the Black Sea countries had multiplied several times over, confirming the region’s attractiveness as a market. Aggregate potential: The total trade volume among countries that could utilize the corridor reached over USD 23 billion by 2022—six times higher than in 2000. This underscores the corridor’s potential to serve as a major artery of Eurasian trade. Geoeconomic Analysis: From a geo-economics perspective, the corridor presents several advantages: Cost and time reduction: Compared to the Suez Canal route, the corridor shortens the distance by 55% and reduces transport costs by approximately 30%. Transit time falls from 42–60 days via Suez to 16–25 days. Diversification of routes: By reducing dependence on the Suez Canal and Turkey, the corridor lowers risks associated with geopolitical crises and monopolistic control. Investment opportunities: Infrastructure development in Iran (roads, railways, ports) and Armenia (Southern Armenia Railway) can attract foreign investment and create new logistics hubs. Regional integration: The corridor fosters “overlapping regionalism,” linking multiple regional clusters (South Asia, the Persian Gulf, the Caucasus, and Southeast Europe) around Iran. Sanctions resilience: By providing multiple trade pathways, the corridor acts as a structural mechanism to mitigate the impact of sanctions on Iran and its partners. Security and Geopolitical Analysis: The corridor’s security and geopolitical Implications are equally profound: Sanctions mitigation: The corridor allows Iran to bypass chokepoints vulnerable to Western monitoring and sanctions, such as the Turkish and Suez routes. This diversification makes it harder for sanctions to isolate Iran completely. South Caucasus balance: Supporting the Armenia–Georgia route strengthens Armenia’s territorial integrity against pressures from Turkey and Azerbaijan, preventing Iran’s isolation through the Zangezur project. Regional balancing: The corridor counters the Turkish-led Middle Corridor, enabling Iran to maintain strategic relevance in Eurasian connectivity. Complex interdependence: By linking over 20 countries, the corridor creates economic ties that enhance regional stability and reduce the likelihood of armed conflict. Diplomatic leverage: Iran’s control over this corridor elevates its bargaining power with the EU, Russia, and even the United States, as excluding Iran would impose higher costs on global trade flows. Policy Recommendations To overcome these challenges and realize the corridor, the study proposes: Infrastructure development: Prioritize the modernization of Iran–Armenia border roads, expansion of Iranian southern ports, and construction of the Armenia–Iran railway. Multilateral cooperation: Forge agreements among corridor countries for customs harmonization, digital trade facilitation, and security coordination. Attracting investment: Engage the EU, India, and development banks (e.g., Eurasian Development Bank, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank) to co-finance projects. Active diplomacy: Employ “corridor diplomacy” to ensure political support from Armenia, Georgia, and the EU while counterbalancing rival initiatives. Security collaboration: Establish joint mechanisms with Armenia and Georgia to safeguard the corridor against regional instability. Conclusion The Persian Gulf–Black Sea Corridor is more than a transport initiative; it is a strategic project that intertwines geoeconomics with geopolitics. For Iran, the corridor represents an opportunity to: v Enhance trade flows and attract investment. v Mitigate the effects of sanctions by diversifying trade routes. v Strengthen its strategic position in the South Caucasus. v Serve as a regional balancer against competing initiatives. v Transform its geography from a liability into a geo-economics asset. v By implementing coordinated infrastructural, diplomatic, and institutional measures, Iran can convert the Persian Gulf–Black Sea Corridor into both an economic lifeline and a security buffer. Ultimately, the corridor exemplifies how geo-economics projects can serve as instruments of national resilience and geopolitical influence in an era of sanctions and great-power competition. تضادهای موجود در قفقاز جنوبی که در نهایت به ایجاد محدودیت برای ارمنستان از طریق کریدور زنگزور منتهی شده است، هم‌زمان با اعمال تحریم بر ایران، این فرصت را مهیا کرد که ایران به‌عنوان تنها کشوری که توانایی حمایت از ارمنستان در مرز مشترک را داراست از طریق طراحی کریدورهایی از مسیر ارمنستان به‌سوی اروپا ضمن حفظ وضعیت ژئوپلیتیک منطقه پیرامون خود، کاهش اثر تحریم را نیز محقق سازد. مبانی نظری ترانزیت بین‌المللی بر این نکته تأکید دارد که کشورها از طریق ایفای نقش مرکزیت ترانزیتی می‌توانند نسبت به بهبود وضعیت خود اقدام نمایند. هدف پژوهش، بررسی توانایی کریدور خلیج‌فارس-دریای سیاه در ارتقاء موقعیت ژئوپلیتیکی ایران به‌عنوان مرکز ترانزیت بین‌المللی است و این سؤال مطرح شده است که اهمیت کریدور خلیج‌فارس-دریای سیاه چیست؟ و چه تأثیری بر ارتقاء موقعیت ژئوپلیتیکی ایران دارد؟ فرضیه تحقیق آن است که کریدور خلیج‌فارس-دریای سیاه تأثیر بسزایی در تسهیل مبادلات تجاری جهانی دارا بوده و پتانسیل تبدیل ایران به هاب ترانزیتی در چارچوب سیاست‌خارجی چندهمسایگی را داراست. روش پژوهش سری زمانی است و اثر کریدور خلیج‌فارس-دریای سیاه بر مبادلات تجاری بررسی شده است. یافته‌های پژوهش حاکی از آن است که کریدور خلیج‌فارس-دریای سیاه علاوه‌بر بهبود شرایط مبادلاتی ایران و ارتقاء جایگاه آن در مبادلات بین‌المللی که موجب خروج از تنگنای ژئوپلیتیکی و کاهش اثر تحریم می‌گردد، مسیر مناسبی جهت مبادلات هند و کشورهای حوزه خلیج‌فارس به حوزه دریای سیاه است؛ بنابراین کریدور خلیج‌فارس-دریای سیاه علاوه بر ارتقاء دیپلماسی اقتصادی ایران و ممانعت از تغییرات ژئوپلیتیکی در قفقاز جنوبی، از پتانسیل لازم جهت ارتقاء نقش ترانزیتی ایران نیز برخوردار است.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_235338_598475b47ddfa9d5ee70c9c27031bb59.pdf

پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 Artificial Intelligence and the Transformation of Global Geopolitics: Opportunities and Challenges هوش مصنوعی و تحول ژئوپلیتیک جهانی: فرصت‌ها و چالش‌ها 115 146 238545 10.22034/fr.2026.523721.1664 FA ابراهیم احمدی دکترای جغرافیای سیاسی، گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-3619-8464 حمیدرضا محمدی دانشیار جغرافیای سیاسی، گروه جغرافیای انسانی و برنامه‌ریزی فضایی، دانشکده علوم زمین، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-6550-4897 Journal Article 2025 05 15 Since its inception, geopolitics has gone through four main stages: traditional, classical, modern, and postmodern geopolitics. Each of these periods has been a reflection of the historical, technological, and political developments of its era. Today, with the emergence of artificial intelligence as a supertechnology within the framework of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, we can speak of entering the fifth stage of geopolitical transformation. This new stage has overshadowed all aspects of human life and has left profound effects on power, security, economics, and international relations. This analytical-descriptive research, by examining reliable library sources and international documents, shows that artificial intelligence has transformed from a tool into a key factor in redefining the nature of geopolitics and global power equations. In fact, AI has profoundly transformed geopolitics and the international balance of power by transforming the structure of power, security, and governance. Although this technology has provided opportunities such as improved governance, enhanced transnational cooperation, and economic growth, it has also exacerbated challenges such as the digital divide, emerging security threats, and ethical-legal dilemmas. Finally, this article offers practical solutions aimed at globally managing the impacts of AI on the geopolitical system and international relations, as well as reducing the technological gap between developed and developing countries. Extended Abstract In recent years, the expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) technology and its profound impacts on various dimensions of human life have captured the attention of researchers and scholars across diverse scientific fields. While numerous studies have examined the political, security, economic, and cultural dimensions of AI, few have analyzed the effects of this technology on the nature of geopolitics, its structures, and global geopolitical transformations from a specialized geopolitical perspective. This study adopts a descriptive-analytical approach, relying on a library-documentary research method, to investigate the fundamental impacts of artificial intelligence on the nature, structure, and processes of global geopolitics. The findings indicate that AI, as the beating heart of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, is steering geopolitics toward a fifth stage, termed "smart geopolitics." This historical transition is occurring through four key transformations, each deeply redefining the traditional international order: the mechanization and Algorithmization of governance processes, the decentralization and networking of power structures, the emergence of dataism as a new dominant paradigm, and the transformation of the very nature of power from overt and physical to covert and informational. These structural shifts have, at the operational level, simultaneously ushered in a wave of complex and intertwined opportunities and threats for the international system. In the realm of opportunities, AI holds unprecedented potential for enhancing governance efficiency and transparency through process automation, real-time big data analytics, and the delivery of personalized services to citizens. This can make the policy cycle more agile and responsive. On the international front, by providing advanced analytical tools, this technology enables the strengthening of transnational cooperation to address shared global challenges such as climate change, pandemics, and terrorism. In the social sphere, AI facilitates greater democratic access to information and knowledge and provides new platforms for expression and participation, thereby contributing to societal empowerment and the reinforcement of civic activism. From an economic standpoint, by boosting productivity, creating entirely new industries, and transforming business models, AI serves as a global engine for economic growth and innovation, promising the creation of broader wealth and welfare. However, in the domain of threats and challenges, the picture is equally, if not more, concerning. In the realms of national and international security, artificial intelligence places unprecedented offensive tools at the disposal of both state and non-state actors. This includes sophisticated cyber-attacks against critical infrastructure, the development and use of lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS), and extensive information warfare and public opinion manipulation operations through the production and dissemination of fake news and digital influence campaigns. From an economic perspective, artificial intelligence has the potential to dangerously exacerbate the global competitive divide. Countries with robust digital infrastructure, specialized human capital, and substantial investment in research and development (such as the United States and China) can accumulate the greatest benefits, while nations lacking these advantages face the risk of permanent economic and technological marginalization and a deepening digital divide. Furthermore, this technology, by accelerating the automation and replacement of jobs across a wide range of sectors, could lead to labor market instability, increased income inequality, and social tensions. In the political and social sphere, the analytical and predictive power of artificial intelligence can be employed by authoritarian regimes for comprehensive and repressive surveillance, targeted censorship, and population control. In democracies, there is also the potential for undermining democratic foundations through micro-targeting and sophisticated manipulation of voter preferences. Ethical and legal challenges remain vast and unresolved. Industrial-scale privacy violations, systemic bias and institutionalized discrimination within algorithms, a lack of transparency and accountability in automated decision-making (the black box conundrum), and the absence of comprehensive international legal frameworks for accountability are among these fundamental problems. Finally, the concentration of technological power in the hands of a few giant transnational corporations and several states has emerged as an independent geopolitical threat, capable of limiting the digital sovereignty of other countries and creating new patterns of dependency. To manage these complex geopolitical shifts and steer them in a direction that serves the interests of all humanity, a set of multi-level operational solutions is proposed. At the global governance level, it is imperative to establish an international regulatory body under the United Nations to set common ethical and security standards and oversee AI development, and to adopt treaties limiting its offensive-military applications. To reduce the technological gap, establishing a global AI development fund and facilitating the transfer of foundational technologies to developing countries under the supervision of bodies such as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is essential. At the regional level, forming technological alliances and collaborations, particularly in the form of South-South cooperation and within frameworks like the Non-Aligned Movement, can facilitate knowledge sharing, the development of appropriate governance frameworks, and increase the collective bargaining power of developing countries. Complementarily, promoting inclusive digital governance models that possess the necessary flexibility to adapt to cultural values and national development needs, encouraging private sector investment in local ecosystems, and establishing networks for exchanging best governance practices are other key measures. A final analysis of these findings reveals that artificial intelligence is becoming a central axis in the realignment of the global balance of power. This technology has not only transformed the instruments of power but has itself become a primary arena of geopolitical competition. The future of the international order will depend heavily on the global community's ability to manage this inherent duality—as both an engine of progress and a source of instability. Overcoming the challenges and harnessing the opportunities necessitates the creation of new, multilateral, and equitable governance frameworks at national, regional, and global levels. These frameworks must be capable of guaranteeing security and stability, protecting privacy and human rights, reducing the digital divide through cooperation and technology transfer, and promoting responsible innovation. Without collective resolve and cooperation, artificial intelligence could become a factor exacerbating inequality, instability, and the further polarization of global geopolitics. Conversely, if guided wisely, foresightedly, and with a firm prioritization of the common interests of humanity, it can provide an unparalleled platform for enhancing cooperation, achieving sustainable development, and shaping a fairer and more inclusive order in the digital age. ژئوپلیتیک از آغاز شکل‌گیری تاکنون چهار مرحله اصلی را پشت سر گذاشته است؛ ژئوپلیتیک سنتی، کلاسیک، مدرن و پست‌مدرن. هر یک از این دوره‌ها بازتابی از تحولات تاریخی، فناورانه و سیاسی عصر خود بوده‌اند. امروزه، با ظهور هوش مصنوعی به‌عنوان یک ابرفناوری در چهارچوب انقلاب صنعتی چهارم، می‌توان از ورود به مرحله پنجم تحول ژئوپلیتیک سخن گفت. این مرحله نوین، بر تمامی ابعاد حیات بشری سایه افکنده و تأثیراتی ژرف بر قدرت، امنیت، اقتصاد و روابط بین‌الملل برجای گذاشته است. این پژوهش تحلیلی- توصیفی با بررسی منابع معتبر کتابخانه‌ای و اسناد بین‌المللی نشان می‌دهد که هوش مصنوعی از یک ابزار به عامل کلیدی در بازتعریف ماهیت ژئوپلیتیک و معادلات قدرت جهانی تبدیل شده است. درواقع، هوش مصنوعی با دگرگون ‌ساختن ساختار قدرت، امنیت و حاکمیت، تحولی عمیق در ژئوپلیتیک و توازن قوای بین‌المللی ایجاد کرده است. اگرچه این فناوری فرصت‌هایی مانند بهبود حکمرانی، تقویت همکاری‌های فراملی و رشد اقتصادی را فراهم آورده؛ اما هم‌زمان چالش‌هایی همچون شکاف دیجیتالی، تهدید‌های امنیتی نوظهور و معضلات اخلاقی- حقوقی را نیز تشدید کرده است. در پایان، این مقاله با هدف مدیریت جهانی تأثیرات هوش مصنوعی بر نظام ژئوپلیتیک و روابط بین‌الملل و نیز کاهش شکاف فناورانه بین کشورهای توسعه‌یافته و درحالِ‌توسعه، راهکار‌های عملیاتی ارائه می‌دهد.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_238545_c5a1fcdb9fafd77630db2a8c70ebe102.pdf

پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 China's Global Role and Its Implications for Iran: An Analysis Based on Rosecrance's Cycle of Power Theory نقش‌آفرینی جهانی چین و پیامدهای آن برای ایران: تحلیلی بر مبنای نظریه‌ی چرخه قدرت رزکرانس 147 178 235337 10.22034/fr.2025.504211.1638 FA علیرضا محرابی دانشیار جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-2475-8567 قاسم عباسیان فرد دانشجوی دکترای جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران 0009-0008-1071-3940 Journal Article 2025 02 02 The East Asian region, consisting of two geopolitical areas, North East (China, Japan, Korean Peninsula) and South East Asia, is one of the most important strategic regions in the international system. In the meantime, China, which has a communist political structure in the East Asian region and is an emerging power, is considered to be the most prominent country in the competition with world powers. In the 21st century, China's policy makers, based on the theory of Rosecrance, seek to adopt strategic opportunities in the country's development, remove external obstacles and promote a new role in the international system in order to aintain the ruling ideology and pursue their domestic and foreign political intentions. Currently, China, as an active activist and an emerging power, has challenged the new world order and is trying to play an active role in the world.The emerging structure is expanded in two parts and has political, security, and economic dimensions as twins, and the said dimensions are complementary to each other. From the geographical point of view, the main core of the emerging structure is applied to the northern part of the northern hemisphere of the earth (north-north) and its geographical direction is east-west. A precise understanding of the aforementioned impact requires a two-way understanding from the geostrategic point of view between China and Iran on the role of both countries. In the process of conducting the research, among the 30 interviews conducted with experts, 21 indicators were calculated in the form of 5 components of China's global role-making with 92 themes in explaining the effectiveness of Iran in China's global role-making and 78 themes in explaining the possible effects of competitors in China's global role-making. Extended Abstract The East Asian region, consisting of two geopolitical areas, North East (China, Japan, Korean Peninsula) and South East Asia, is one of the most important strategic regions in the international system. In the meantime, China, which has a communist political structure in the East Asian region and is an emerging power, is considered to be the most prominent country in the competition with world powers. In the 21st century, China's policy makers, based on the theory of Rosecrance, seek to adopt strategic opportunities in the country's development, remove external obstacles and promote a new role in the international system in order to aintain the ruling ideology and pursue their domestic and foreign political intentions. Currently, China, as an active activist and an emerging power, has challenged the new world order and is trying to play an active role in the world.The emerging structure is expanded in two parts and has political, security, and economic dimensions as twins, and the said dimensions are complementary to each other. From the geographical point of view, the main core of the emerging structure is applied to the northern part of the northern hemisphere of the earth (north-north) and its geographical direction is east-west. This research seeks to analyze China's political role-playing towards global competitors by relying on Iran's structural and functional effectiveness. Using documentary studies and exploratory interviews, the researcher collected qualitative data and extracted the research model through content analysis and coding, and using a questionnaire, the factors obtained from the exploratory interviews were judged by the statistical community and their importance. It is specified. In this research, the researcher seeks to provide an answer to the main research question, which is China's political role-playing in the geostrategic future of the international system, Iran's effectiveness of this role-playing and the direction of its competitors? By studying and examining the environment, it is concluded that a kind of power distribution has formed among global powers in which existential threats are the driving force behind multilateral cooperation that endures in a multipolar world. Fundamental shifts in spheres of influence have led to competition, divergence, and deglobalization. Eventually, gradual instability has led to a new network order that is influenced by shocks, developments, and reactions of global actors. The new multilateral order, shaped by new agreements, has brought about a balance of interests between the West, China, and especially the global South. Thus, a pragmatic approach and willingness to compromise have emerged to attract neutral actors, as well as flexible cooperation with opposing powers where appropriate. Despite its shift from insularity to greater flexibility in terms of multilateralism, China remains a pragmatic actor and is gradually trying to define its level of international engagement.This country simultaneously pursues both revisionist policies and global-regional governance policies of the status quo.This is reflected in China's willingness to invite cooperation on climate protection, foreign development, trade, and security, and its reluctance to participate in binding international agreements. In general, in international relations, as a governance system and due to its specific geopolitical and geostrategic position, Iran must seek resilience, prosperity, and sustainable development for itself, while supporting multilateral policies to advance common interests in the form of institutional cooperation. On the other hand, by acknowledging that all major players in international relations have no permanent friends or permanent enemies in their dealings with other countries and are only seeking to maximize their national interests action must be taken in such a way that the behavior of international actors does not cause surprises and pose a vital threat to national interests. Leading global powers that have a strong desire to influence emerging middle powers in different regions of the world They pursue their influence by building appropriate capacities, employing a wide range of influential actors, creating regional cooperation initiatives, and building a network of coalitions and partnerships. A precise understanding of the aforementioned impact requires a two-way understanding from the geostrategic point of view between China and Iran on the role of both countries. In the process of conducting the research, among the 30 interviews conducted with experts, 21 indicators were calculated in the form of 5 components of China's global role-making with 92 themes in explaining the effectiveness of Iran in China's global role-making and 78 themes in explaining the possible effects of competitors in China's global role-making. منطقه شرق آسیا متشکل از دو حوزه ژئوپلیتیک شمال شرق (چین، ژاپن، شبه‌جزیره کره) و جنوب شرق آسیا، از مهم‌ترین مناطق استراتژیک اثرگذار در نظام بین‌الملل است. در این بین چین که دارای ساختار سیاسی کمونیستی در منطقه شرق آسیا و قدرتی نوظهور، محسوب می‌شود به‌عنوان شاخص‌ترین کشور در رقابت با قدرت‌های جهانی به حساب می‌آید. در قرن بیست‌ویکم، سیاست‌گذاران چین برپایه نظریه رزکرانس، به دنبال اتخاذ فرصت‌های راهبردی در توسعه کشور، رفع موانع خارجی و ارتقای نقش‌آفرینی جدید در نظام بین‌الملل جهت حفظ ایدئولوژی حاکم و پیگیری نیات سیاسی داخلی و خارجی خود هستند. در حال حاضر چین به‌عنوان کنشگری فعال و قدرتی در حال ظهور، نظم نوین جهانی را به چالش کشیده و درصدد نقش‌آفرینی فعال در جهان گردیده است. ساختار در حال ظهور، به‌صورت دوبخشی بسط یافته و دارای ابعاد سیاسی، امنیتی و اقتصادی به‌صورت توأمان است و ابعاد مزبور مکمل یکدیگرند. از نظر جغرافیایی، هسته اصلی ساختار در حال ظهور بر بخش شمالی نیمکره شمالی کره زمین (شمال-شمال) تطبیق داشته و جهت جغرافیایی آن شرقی-غربی است. این پژوهش به دنبال واکاوی نقش‌آفرینی سیاسی چین در قبال رقبای جهانی با تکیه بر اثرپذیری ساختاری و کارکردی ایران است. محقق با استفاده از مطالعات اسنادی و انجام مصاحبه‌های اکتشافی، داده‌های کیفی را جمع‌آوری و از طریق تحلیل محتوا و کدگذاری، مدل تحقیق را استخراج و با استفاده از پرسش‌نامه، عوامل به‌دست‌آمده از مصاحبه‌های اکتشافی، مورد قضاوت جامعه آماری قرار گرفته و اهمیت آن‌ها، مشخص شده است (روش تحقیق). در این تحقیق، محقق به دنبال ارائه پاسخ به سؤال اصلی تحقیق است که نقش‌آفرینی سیاسی چین در آینده ژئواستراتژیک نظام بین‌الملل، اثرپذیری ایران از این نقش‌آفرینی و جهت‌گیری رقبا چگونه است؟ یافته‌های تحقیق حاکی از آن است که شناخت دقیق اثرگذاری یاد شده، نیازمند ادراک دوسویه از منظر ژئواستراتژیک مابین چین و ایران بر نقش‌آفرینی هر دو کشور است. در فرایند انجام پژوهش، از میان 30 مصاحبه انجام شده با خبرگان، 21 شاخص در قالب 5 مؤلفه نقش‌آفرینی جهانی چین با 92 مضمون در توضیح اثرپذیری ایران از نقش‌آفرینی جهانی چین و 78 مضمون در توضیح اثرات احتمالی رقبا از نقش‌آفرینی جهانی چین، احصا شده است.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_235337_cc4df0247cb04eed3aa4dc2b519e99ed.pdf

پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 Analyzing the Position of South Africa in the Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran (Based on Iran's Seventh Development Plan 2024-2028) تحلیل جایگاه آفریقای جنوبی در سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران (براساس برنامه هفتم توسعه 1407-1403) 179 206 237498 10.22034/fr.2025.515250.1656 FA احمد بخشی دانشیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند، ایران 0000-0002-5443-5574 عباس عطایی خواه دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد روابط بین الملل، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران 0000-0001-6105-0755 یاسر نبی لو دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران 0009-0008-8457-5368 محمد بهزادی دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران 0009-0001-8328-5181 Journal Article 2025 04 07 The Seventh National Development Plan of the Islamic Republic of Iran, as one of the country’s overarching policy documents, delineates five-year objectives and visions and sets forth the roadmap for national development. As the first policy framework formulated in the context of the Second Phase of the Islamic Revolution, this plan—through the prioritization and selection of key strategic axes—has the potential to contribute to long-term and applied policymaking in the field of foreign policy. Within this context, Iran–South Africa relations, which have long attracted attention, have entered a new phase following Iran’s accession to the BRICS group. Iran can strengthen its relations with South Africa within the framework of the Seventh Development Plan; however, this necessitates addressing the question of what role and significance South Africa plays in Iran’s foreign and economic policy under this plan. In response, the research hypothesis posits that establishing a deep and strategic relationship with South Africa, as an emerging power with independent political positions and significant regional and international influence, can provide an excellent opportunity for the expansion of trade, investment, and industrial and technological cooperation for the Islamic Republic of Iran. The findings of this study are analyzed using the SWOT matrix method within the theoretical framework of regional integration. This research examines the opportunities, threats, strengths, and weaknesses of both Iran and South Africa and, ultimately, proposes a strategic cooperation model to elevate bilateral relations from conventional cooperation to a strategic partnership. Extended Abstract The Seventh Development Plan of the Islamic Republic of Iran represents the fourth part of the country’s 20-Year Vision Document and the first plan aligned with the realization of the "Second Step of the Islamic Revolution" statement. With a justice-oriented and problem-focused approach, it emphasizes the country's fundamental and crucial issues. Based on upstream documents, including the Transformation Document of the People's Government, this plan identifies priority programs based on developmental drivers and sets the foundation for sustainable and stable development within society. According to the plan, various articles address the development, enhancement, and outlook of Iran’s regional and international relations in fields such as science and technology, economy, energy, health, etc. It emphasizes the need to establish and develop relations with other countries. One of the countries ripe for strengthened cooperation is South Africa — one of the most advanced and important nations in Africa with broad economic, commercial, and industrial capacities. South Africa is considered a developing and emerging economic power during the current transition in the international system. In this context, the present article seeks to answer the question: What role and significance does South Africa hold in Iran’s foreign and economic policy within the framework of the Seventh Development Plan? It aims to explore South Africa’s position in Iran’s foreign policy and examine the opportunities and challenges this country may pose in achieving the objectives of the Seventh Development Plan — especially in areas such as trade, energy, and technology. The research hypothesis is that establishing a deep and strategic connection with South Africa, as a regional and emerging power, can offer an excellent opportunity for the Islamic Republic of Iran to expand trade, investment, and industrial and technological cooperation. South Africa should be considered one of Iran’s target countries. However, until now, this country’s potential has not been prioritized or systematically exploited in Iran’s foreign policy. This study uses regional integration theory as its general theoretical framework and employs the SWOT method with sources from libraries, documents, and online data to analyze the subject. Despite ups and downs before and after the Islamic Revolution, Iran-South Africa relations have held a special position in the post-apartheid era for several reasons. South Africa’s active foreign policy on the African continent and within the international system gives it significant weight and influence. Today, South Africa is recognized as a regional power in Africa and an emerging actor in the global system. Bilateral relations between Iran and South Africa resemble Iran’s relations with other emerging powers such as China, Russia, Brazil, and India. The formation of political and economic blocs like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), IBSA (India, Brazil, and South Africa), BRICS, and others can shift the balance of international power from the Western Hemisphere to other global regions. Iran’s membership in such blocs not only enhances bilateral ties but also allows it to benefit in dealing with international challenges like the nuclear crisis, sanctions, and multilateralism. In recent years, factors like emerging regional rivals, international sanctions, negative propaganda against Iran, and insufficient attention from Iranian policymakers have weakened ties between the two countries. Nonetheless, South Africa continues to support Iran in international forums and, under suitable conditions, has sought to boost foreign trade with Iran. Iran’s membership in BRICS has opened a new avenue for closer alignment between the two countries. Similar policy orientations in regional and international affairs have fostered multilateralism, anti-interventionist stances, and stronger South-South relations. One major outcome of such cooperation is the creation of a geopolitical link between Southwest Asia and South/East Africa. This connection, through regional organizations and the development of transit routes, can enhance political and economic cooperation. The inclusion of Iran in BRICS has opened a new chapter in bilateral relations. Reviewing Iran-South Africa trade in recent years underlines the significance of this membership and its impact on advancing bilateral ties. South Africa’s memberships in the G20, G77, IAEA Board of Governors, past non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council, the African Union, and other international bodies have allowed it to actively support Iran and positively influence Africa’s perception of Iran. The Seventh Development Plan also refers to the development of the Makran region and transit routes, making this another area of convergence between Iran and South Africa. South Africa, through Iran, can access East Asia and Eurasia. Utilizing Iran as a corridor can activate Iran’s transit diplomacy. Additionally, South Africa can significantly support Iran’s scientific development, given its advanced scientific infrastructure and standing as a strategic competition zone between China and the US. South Africa enjoys robust trade with both powers, enabling Iran to attract South African investments (e.g., MTN) and facilitate the entry of modern technology and industrial equipment into the country. Beyond investment, South Africa could act as a third-party channel to help Iran circumvent unjust international sanctions. Other strengths of the relationship include: Iran’s strategic geographic position and rich natural resources (oil, gas, etc.), Capabilities in defense industries, a favorable healthcare system, a rich cultural heritage and stable governance, Membership in key organizations like BRICS and SCO, South Africa’s international support for Iran, South Africa’s positive economic growth, tax exemptions, and customs union benefits, Potential to influence other African countries to develop ties with Iran. Other shared strengths such as: Transit geography, Population and market potential, South-South discourse, Support for liberation movements, Advocacy for multilateralism However, existing challenges such as lack of trade diversity, absence of a coherent foreign policy strategy, undefined roadmaps, regional rivals, unimplemented agreements, and geographic distance must be addressed to deepen bilateral cooperation. Iran-South Africa relations have entered a new phase with Iran’s BRICS membership. Both countries aim to reshape the international system toward a more multilateral order, and their cooperation within BRICS can deepen and expand bilateral ties. However, realizing this potential requires a shift in Iran’s approach to South Africa — from routine diplomatic relations to advanced strategic cooperation. To elevate relations from ordinary to strategic levels, three main steps must be considered, each with several essential actions: Step 1: Laying the Institutional Foundation v Establish a dedicated body to identify and prioritize Iran's target countries. v Develop a comprehensive strategic document, categorizing countries based on priorities. v Designate a specific official body for managing bilateral relations with each target country to reduce inefficiencies and improve effectiveness. Step 2: Building Communication Bridges v Redefine the role of Iranian consulates worldwide, turning them into active trade centers. v Utilize experienced diplomats and experts by establishing a “Council of Economic Advisors.” v Develop independent economic infrastructures, avoiding traditional systems like Bretton Woods. Use BRICS financial capacities, create joint investment funds, and initiate innovative financial frameworks to reduce dependency and foster multilateral economic collaboration. Step 3: Operationalizing Strategic Cooperation This step involves implementing strategic partnerships based on the groundwork from steps one and two. It focuses on leveraging mutual capacities for economic, political, and cultural collaboration. Based on these three steps and aligned with the Seventh Development Plan, the following policy suggestions are made: v Launch overseas farming initiatives to produce and export agricultural goods to other African nations v Supply South Africa’s energy needs v Leverage relations with African nations via South Africa to boost Iran's national power and ties with non-hostile countries v Strengthen African-Islamic world relations to counter unilateral global order v Produce rich films to shape public perception of each other v Support tourism and promote cultural, artistic, and handicraft exchanges v Establish international universities, provide scholarships, and facilitate academic exchanges v Support medical tours and medical-scientific collaborations v Expand Iranian diplomatic staff across all essential sectors It's important to note that successful implementation of Step Three depends on the groundwork laid in Steps One and Two. Step Three provides examples of actionable strategies, but many more possibilities for planning and executing strategic cooperation remain open for in-depth development. برنامه هفتم توسعه جمهوری اسلامی ایران به‌عنوان یکی از اسناد بالادستی کشور، اهداف و چشم‌اندازهای پنج‌ساله را ترسیم و نقشه راه توسعه ملی را تعیین می‌نماید. این برنامه که اولین چهارچوب سیاست‌گذاری در گام دوم انقلاب اسلامی به شمار می‌رود، می‌تواند با توجه به اولویت‌ها و انتخاب محورهای اصلی، به سیاست‌گذاری‌های بلندمدت و کاربردی در عرصه سیاست خارجی بپردازد. در این میان روابط ایران و آفریقای جنوبی که از دیرباز مورد توجه بوده است، با پیوستن ایران به گروه بریکس وارد مرحله جدیدی شده است. ایران می‌تواند در چهارچوب برنامه هفتم توسعه به تقویت روابط خود با آفریقای جنوبی بپردازد؛ اما پیش از آن باید به این پرسش پرداخت که آفریقای جنوبی چه نقش و اهمیتی در سیاست خارجی و اقتصادی ایران در چهارچوب برنامه هفتم توسعه ایفا می‌کند؟ در پاسخ به این سؤال، فرضیه پژوهش این است که برقراری ارتباط و پیوند عمیق و راهبُردی با کشور آفریقای جنوبی به‌عنوان یک کشور در حال ظهور، مواضع سیاسی مستقل، نقش منطقه‌ای و بین‌المللی، می‌تواند برای گسترش تجارت، سرمایه‌گذاری و همکاری‌های صنعتی و فناوری برای جمهوری اسلامی ایران یک موقعیت عالی فراهم آورد. یافته‌های این تحقیق با استفاده از روش ماتریس سوات، در چهارچوب نظری هم‌گرایی منطقه‌ای مورد تحلیل و بررسی قرار گرفته است. در این پژوهش فرصت‌ها، تهدید‌ها و نقاط قوت و ضعف ایران و آفریقای جنوبی مورد مطالعه قرار گرفته است و در نهایت با ترسیم الگوی همکاری راهبردی، مسیر ارتقای سطح روابط ایران با آفریقای جنوبی از همکاری‌های عادی به راهبردی پیشنهاد گردیده است.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_237498_9aa2add613f9ff4884ce6eaca38fce08.pdf

پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 An Analysis of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s East-Oriented Foreign Policy: The Role of Russia in Nuclear Balancing against Western Powers تحلیل سیاست شرق محور جمهوری اسلامی ایران: نقش روسیه در موازنه‌سازی هسته‌ای در برابر قدرت‌های غربی 207 236 233961 10.22034/fr.2025.522105.1662 FA سعید کاویان نژاد دانشجوی دکترای اندیشه سیاسی واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران 0009-0004-7104-6038 مصطفی ابطحی دانشیار جامعه‌شناسی سیاسی واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2025 05 07 This study examines the Islamic Republic of Iran’s East-oriented policy and the role of Russia in nuclear balancing against Western powers. The central research question is how the Eastward orientation has been reflected in Iran’s foreign policy, particularly in the nuclear domain, and what position Russia has occupied within this process. To address this question, the study employs a qualitative methodology and a descriptive–analytical approach to elucidate the various dimensions of Iran–Russia interactions in the fields of foreign policy and the nuclear issue. The study hypothesizes that Iran’s rapprochement with Russia has been predominantly tactical in nature, driven by situational interests, international pressures, and political-discursive perceptions rather than by a long-term strategic alliance. Furthermore, Russia has acted as a pragmatic actor at critical diplomatic junctures, prioritizing its own national interests and strategic calculations. The findings indicate that Iran’s nuclear policy has been shaped by considerations of security, identity, and resistance to Western hegemony. Within this framework, Russia has become established as a significant and potentially influential partner in Iran’s strategic outlook. The study concludes that the success of Iran’s East-oriented policy depends on the dynamic redefinition of power, the construction and reproduction of meaning, and the effective management of multilayered diplomacy. Consequently, the realization of this policy requires more than reliance on temporary alignments and tactical partnerships, demanding instead a flexible and comprehensive strategic approach. Extended Abstract This study offers a comprehensive and theory-driven analysis of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s east-oriented foreign policy, with a particular emphasis on the evolving role of the Russian Federation in nuclear balancing against Western powers. Situated within the framework of structural realism, the research explores how Iran’s strategic pivot toward Eastern powers—especially Russia—reflects a recalibration of its foreign policy doctrine in response to systemic pressures, shifting alliances, and intensifying geopolitical rivalries. The inquiry is guided by the central question: How has Iran’s eastward orientation manifested in its nuclear strategy, and what role does Russia play in shaping this trajectory? To address this question, the study employs a qualitative methodology grounded in descriptive-analytical techniques. This approach enables a nuanced exploration of the multifaceted dimensions of Iran-Russia interactions, encompassing diplomatic engagements, military cooperation, energy partnerships, and strategic signaling within the broader framework of nuclear diplomacy. The analysis draws on primary sources, official statements, and recent developments—including the January 2025 strategic partnership agreement signed in Moscow—to illuminate the structural logic and tactical fluidity underpinning Iran’s eastward turn. Historically, Iran’s foreign policy has oscillated between ideological posturing and pragmatic adaptation. Following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran adopted a posture of non-alignment, encapsulated in the slogan “Neither East nor West.” However, over the past two decades, this principle has eroded in practice, giving way to a more interest-driven orientation toward Eastern powers. The intensification of Western sanctions—particularly after the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018—has accelerated Iran’s strategic outreach to Russia and China. This pivot reflects both a response to external constraints and an internal recalibration of Iran’s geopolitical priorities. Russia’s role in Iran’s nuclear trajectory is particularly salient. As a signatory to the JCPOA and a member of the P5+1 negotiating bloc, Russia has historically positioned itself as a mediator and technical facilitator in Iran’s nuclear program. It has provided nuclear fuel for Iran’s Bushehr reactor, managed surplus enriched uranium, and offered diplomatic cover in multilateral forums. However, Russia’s engagement with Iran is not merely transactional; it is embedded within a broader strategic framework aimed at counterbalancing U.S. influence in the Middle East and leveraging Iran as a partner in its own contest with the West. The hypothesis underpinning this study posits that Iran’s rapprochement with Russia is primarily tactical rather than strategic. It is driven by situational interests, international isolation, and politico-semantic interpretations of sovereignty and resistance. Iran views Russia as a useful counterweight to Western hegemony, particularly in the nuclear domain, but remains cautious about overdependence. Conversely, Russia’s behavior reflects a pragmatic actor that prioritizes its national interests and maintains flexibility in its alliances. Moscow’s engagement with Iran is shaped by its desire to expand influence in the Middle East, secure energy and defense partnerships, and navigate its own isolation following the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The findings of this study reveal that Iran’s nuclear policy is deeply intertwined with its broader security doctrine, which emphasizes deterrence, resistance, and strategic autonomy. The nuclear file is not merely a technical issue but a symbolic arena where Iran asserts its identity and challenges Western norms. Within this framework, Russia emerges as a potentially influential partner, offering diplomatic support, technological cooperation, and strategic depth. However, this partnership is fraught with asymmetries and contradictions. Russia’s simultaneous engagement with Iran’s regional rivals, such as Israel and Saudi Arabia, underscores its balancing act and limits the depth of the Iran-Russia alliance. Recent developments have further complicated this dynamic. In January 2025, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian visited Moscow to sign a comprehensive strategic partnership agreement with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The accord, which outlines cooperation in defense, nuclear energy, finance, and cybersecurity, marks a new phase in bilateral relations. It reflects a shared desire to counter NATO influence and solidify authoritarian power structures. However, the absence of a mutual defense clause and the lack of transparency surrounding the agreement raise questions about its long-term viability and strategic depth2. Simultaneously, the reactivation of the JCPOA’s snapback mechanism by European powers and the United States—triggered by Iran’s alleged violations of enrichment thresholds—has reignited tensions. The return of UN sanctions, coupled with targeted strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities during the 12-day conflict with Israel in mid-2025, has exposed the fragility of Iran’s deterrence posture and the limits of Russian support. While Moscow condemned the strikes and reaffirmed its commitment to peaceful nuclear cooperation, it refrained from direct intervention, underscoring the transactional nature of its alliance with Tehran. The study also explores the domestic drivers of Iran’s east-oriented policy. The growing influence of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the securitization of foreign policy, and the consolidation of authoritarian governance have reinforced a preference for Eastern partnerships. These dynamics are particularly evident under the Raisi administration and its successor, which have prioritized strategic ties with Russia and China while downplaying engagement with the West. The “Look East” policy, while offering short-term relief from sanctions and diplomatic isolation, has also constrained Iran’s foreign policy options and exposed it to new dependencies. In examining the nuclear dimension, the study highlights the evolution of Iran-Russia cooperation from technical facilitation to strategic alignment. Russia’s shifting stance on the JCPOA—from a stabilizing presence to a geopolitical actor leveraging its role for sanctions relief—illustrates the fluidity of its engagement. The strategic partnership agreement signed in 2025 includes provisions for expanded nuclear collaboration, joint energy infrastructure, and coordinated diplomatic efforts in international forums. However, the asymmetry of power and interests between the two states remains a persistent challenge. Moreover, the study situates Iran’s east-oriented policy within the broader context of global power transitions. The decline of U.S. hegemony, the rise of multipolarity, and the resurgence of regional powers have created new opportunities and challenges for Iran. By aligning with Russia, Iran seeks to navigate this shifting landscape and assert its role as a regional power. However, the success of this strategy depends on Iran’s ability to manage multi-layered diplomacy, redefine power relations, and produce meaning in a contested international order. The research concludes that Iran’s east-oriented foreign policy is a dynamic and evolving strategy that reflects both structural constraints and agency. While Russia plays a critical role in nuclear balancing, the partnership remains tactical and contingent. Iran must move beyond reliance on temporary alliances and develop a more sophisticated approach to diplomacy that integrates security, identity, and strategic pragmatism. This requires a redefinition of power that transcends traditional binaries and embraces complexity, adaptability, and resilience. In sum, this study contributes to the understanding of Iran’s foreign policy by illuminating the strategic logic of its eastward orientation and the role of Russia in nuclear diplomacy. It underscores the importance of context, agency, and pragmatism in shaping international relations and offers insights into the future trajectory of Iran-Russia cooperation in a rapidly changing world. این پژوهش به بررسی سیاست شرق‌گرای جمهوری اسلامی ایران و نقش روسیه در موازنه‌سازی هسته‌ای در برابر قدرت‌های غربی می‌پردازد. پرسش اصلی آن است که جهت‌گیری شرق‌گرایانه چگونه در سیاست خارجی ایران، به‌ویژه در حوزه هسته‌ای، بازتاب یافته و روسیه چه جایگاهی در این روند ایفا کرده است. در راستای پاسخ به این پرسش، پژوهش حاضر از روش کیفی و رویکرد توصیفی–تحلیلی بهره می‌برد تا ابعاد مختلف تعاملات ایران و روسیه در زمینۀ سیاست خارجی و پرونده هسته‌ای را روشن سازد. براساس فرضیه پژوهش، نزدیکی ایران با روسیه بیشتر جنبه تاکتیکی داشته و برخاسته از منافع مقطعی، فشارهای بین‌المللی و برداشت‌های سیاسی–معنایی است؛ نه یک اتحاد استراتژیک بلندمدت. همچنین روسیه در بزنگاه‌های دیپلماتیک، با توجه به اولویت‌های ملی خود، نقش کنشگر عمل‌گرا را ایفا کرده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که سیاست هسته‌ای ایران در چهارچوب مفاهیم امنیتی، هویتی و مقابله با هژمونی غرب شکل گرفته و در این فرایند، روسیه به‌عنوان شریک بالقوه و اثرگذار در ذهنیت راهبردی ایران تثبیت شده است. نتیجه پژوهش حاکی از آن است که موفقیت سیاست شرق‌گرایانه ایران مستلزم بازتعریف پویای قدرت، تولید معنا و مدیریت دیپلماسی چندلایه بوده و فراتر از اتکای صرف بر اتحادهای موقتی قابل تحقق است.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_233961_640e4c6ab1a1a9d3f59a6080496ceba1.pdf

پژوهشـکده تحقیقـات راهبردی مجمـع تشخیـص مصلـحت نظـام فصلنامه روابط خارجی 2008-5419 17 4 2026 02 20 Trump's Maximum Pressure Strategy Against Iran: Foundations, Scenarios, and Potential Reactions (with an Emphasis on the 2025-2026 Timeframe) راهبرد فشار حداکثری ترامپ در مقابل ایران: مبادی، سناریوها و واکنش‌های احتمالی (با تأکید بر بازۀ زمانی 2025-2026) 237 270 235879 10.22034/fr.2025.525079.1667 FA مرتضی اسمعیلی استادیار علوم سیاسی، گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران 0000-0002-2438-1763 مظفر حسنوند دانش‌آموخته دکتری علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران 0000-0002-4122-1577 سجاد کریمیان دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران 0000-0002-4122-1577 Journal Article 2025 05 21 The year 2025 has been profoundly influenced by Donald Trump's reelection victory, confronting the international system with a new chapter in relations and patterns of alliances and enmities. The 12-day war waged by Israel and the United States against Iran marked a new phase in the regional order with global ramifications, minimizing the prospects for achieving a nuclear agreement more than ever before. In this context, the following question has been evaluated: Considering the 12-day war, how can the foreign policy and strategy of the United States toward Iran—particularly with emphasis on the nuclear program—be characterized, and what are the relevant scenarios and reactions (With an emphasis on the 2025-2026 timeframe? In response, the proposed hypothesis posits that the Trump administration's policy toward Iran is based on a hybrid approach grounded in two principles: offensive realism, extreme nationalism, and it appears unlikely to undergo further revision without achieving a significant breakthrough. The theoretical foundations of the research are based the theory “peace through strength, and the methodology for explicating the logic of the hybrid "maximum pressure" strategy includes analysis of historical trends and multilayered scenario planning. The findings indicate that Trump's approach is a peace through strength, based on predicated on structural sanctions, indirect military pressure, and tactical crisis management. Furthermore, based on the proposed potential scenarios, in the event of sustained tensions, the option of crisis escalation within the framework of geopolitical competition in West Asia is highly probable, and the preemptive military operation scenario, along with the hybrid scenario (limited warfare, sanctions, conditional diplomacy, and support for internal opponents), can be posited as key strategies. Keywords: Foreign policy, United States, Iran, Trump, Nuclear issue, 12-day war. Extended Abstract Introduction and Objectives The current era in the global system should be regarded as the age of the "liberal international order" and the "return of nationalist powers," the overall outcome of which has been the United States' withdrawal from international agreements, pressure on Iran, and the reactions of Europe and China to Trump's policies. Examining the transformation of the global order following Trump's return indicates the decline of liberal hegemony and the emergence of nationalist powers on a global scale in a novel form. In this context, the rise of the Trump administration, the war involving attacks by Israel and the United States on Iran, on one hand, and the United States government's conviction regarding the rise of authoritarian states (Iran, Russia, and China), on the other, heightens the need for scrutiny of the foundations of Trump's American foreign policy. Accordingly, this text aims to examine the foreign policy of the Trump administration during its second presidential term, particularly after the 12-day war, along with potential scenarios and Iran's responses in this regard. The necessity for the country to prepare for any conditions constitutes one of the evident essentials of the forthcoming research. Methodology The present research possesses a theoretical and theoretical-applied nature, which examines the topic based on trend analysis in futures studies. Drawing on this method and with reference to the theory of peace through strength—which has roots in American foreign policy schools—it enumerates six potential scenarios for the second Trump administration. On the other hand, and in light of the U.S. government's scenarios, six scenarios for Iran's reactions are also derived. Findings In accordance with the futures-oriented methodology, the scenarios for the Trump administration's confrontation with Iran can be identified within the set of definitive and inevitable change trends (hard core), dominant trends with high probability of realization and uncertainty (middle shell), and trends of sudden transformations or alternative scenarios (outer shell). Under these layers of change, six scenarios are derived, including: 1- The "maximum pressure" scenario; 2- Negotiation and flexible deterrence; 3- Preemptive military action and Support for internal forces and centrifugal movements within Iran; 4- Regional cooperation and the formation of multilateral coalitions; 5- A hybrid approach. Although each of the proposed scenarios carries its own specific challenges and risks, the adoption of a multifaceted and hybrid approach—in which economic, diplomatic, and military tools are utilized in a coordinated manner—represents the most probable option for U.S. foreign policy toward Iran during the second Trump administration. Accordingly, Iran's reactions to these scenarios are also categorized into six groups, aligned with the same tripartite division of hard core, middle shell, and outer shell. Iran's reactions include: 1- Active resistance and strengthening conventional military deterrence; 2- Inclination toward negotiation and flexible deterrence; 3- Military-strategic action (response to limited attack) and coalition-building in this regard 4- Regional and international coalition-building; 5- Movement toward nuclear weapons – maximum deterrence strategy; 6- Hybrid. Conclusion The foreign policy of the Trump administration serves as a reflection of the "peace through strength" theory, as a realist approach grounded in Jacksonian principles, which emphasizes the revival of hardware-based deterrence traditions at the international level. Trump's "maximum pressure" policies—through withdrawal from the JCPOA nuclear agreement, the 12-day war, and the imposition of unilateral sanctions—have not only impacted Iran's economic and military capabilities but have also redefined the United States' position in the international system as a superpower. Based on the proposed potential scenarios, in the event of continued tensions following the 12-day war, the option of crisis escalation and the likelihood of sustained limited wars within the framework of geopolitical competition in West Asia is highly probable. The preemptive military operation scenario (with low probability but high consequences) and the hybrid scenario (sanctions, conditional diplomacy, and support for internal opponents)—despite complexities and unpredictable reactions—can be posited as key strategies. سال 2025 بیش از هر چیز تحت تأثیر پیروزی مجدد دونالد ترامپ قرار گرفته است و نظام بین‌الملل با فصل جدیدی از مناسبات و الگوهای دوستی و دشمنی روبه‌رو شده است. جنگ 12 روزه اسرائیل و ایالات‌متحده علیه ایران، فصل جدیدی در نظم منطقه‌ای با پیامدهای جهانی بود و زمینه‌ها برای دستیابی به توافقی هسته‌ای را بیش از هر زمانی به حداقل رساند. در این راستا، این پرسش مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفته است که با توجه به جنگ 12 روزه، سیاست خارجی و راهبرد ایالات‌متحده در مقابل ایران -با تأکید بر برنامه هسته‌ای- چگونه است و سناریوها و واکنش‌های مطرح در این زمینه (با تأکید بر بازۀ زمانی 2025-2026) کدام‌اند؟ در پاسخ فرضیه مطروح عبارت است از این‌که، سیاست دولت ترامپ در مقابل ایران مبتنی بر رویکردی ترکیبی بر دو اصل واقع‌گرایی تهاجمی و ملی‌گرایی افراطی است و بعید به نظر می‌رسد که بدون کسب دستاوردی چشمگیر تجدیدنظر دیگری داشته باشد. مبادی تئوریک پژوهش مبتنی بر تئوری «صلح از طریق قدرت» و روش‌شناسی جهت تبیین منطق راهبرد «فشار حداکثری» ترکیبی، شامل تحلیل روندهای تاریخی و سناریونویسی چندلایه است. یافته‌ها نشانگر آن است که رویکرد ترامپ، صلح از طریق و مبتنی بر تحریم‌های ساختاری، فشار نظامی غیرمستقیم و مدیریت تاکتیکی بحران است. همچنین، براساس سناریوهای احتمالی مطرح، در صورت تداوم تنش، گزینه تشدید بحران در چهارچوب رقابت ژئوپلیتیکی در غرب آسیا بسیار محتمل است و سناریوی عملیات نظامی پیشگیرانه و سناریوی ترکیبی (جنگ محدود، تحریم، دیپلماسی مشروط و حمایت از مخالفان داخلی) به‌مثابۀ استراتژی‌های کلیدی قابل طرح هستند.

https://frqjournal.csr.ir/article_235879_6b700e19093aeed75ea92dba66392147.pdf