najmiyeh poresmaili; Ali Ali Esmaeili Ardakani
Abstract
Perceptions and misperceptions frequently affect government relations, subsequently impeding regional relationships. The present state of affairs in the Middle East is a perfect instance of how influential actors' perceptions and misperceptions affect the area, which remains a debated topic. Since the ...
Read More
Perceptions and misperceptions frequently affect government relations, subsequently impeding regional relationships. The present state of affairs in the Middle East is a perfect instance of how influential actors' perceptions and misperceptions affect the area, which remains a debated topic. Since the leaders of Turkey and Saudi Arabia have distinct personalities and mentalities, they take different approaches in terms of perspectives, analyses, judgments, and foreign policies on a variety of topics in the Middle East, particularly in relation to Iranian foreign policy goals and priorities. Therefore, it is crucial to examine how these varying mentalities have impacted their approaches to different regional and international issues. The article examines the differing perspectives of Turkish and Saudi Arabian leaders regarding the nature and goals of the Axis of Resistance, a crucial element of the regional political and security structure. The authors present a three-part series of propositions to clarify the reasoning behind these leaders' views on the Axis of Resistance. The differences in policies and actions among these leaders show that their varying mentalities, influenced by the three aforementioned propositions, have affected strategies and actions related to important matters like regional security, interactions with Western nations, the Axis of Resistance, and resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Mohammad Salami Ostad; Mohammad Hossain Jamshidi; Sahar Bahrami Khorshid; Mohsen Eslami
Abstract
Since assuming office in 2015, King Salman, Saudi Arabia’s approach toward Iran has shifted from a conservative defense policy to an aggressive conservative policy. The Saudi officials have frequently attempted to define Iran as an international threat in their meetings and interviews. The current ...
Read More
Since assuming office in 2015, King Salman, Saudi Arabia’s approach toward Iran has shifted from a conservative defense policy to an aggressive conservative policy. The Saudi officials have frequently attempted to define Iran as an international threat in their meetings and interviews. The current research investigates King Salman's speech at the Riyadh meeting to show how Saudi officials, particularly King Salman, have used the concepts of "security maker" and the use of "language" as tools of "verbal action" to portray the Islamic Republic of Iran as a "security threat" in the Middle East region. The research method in this article is Norman Fairclough’s " of Critical Discourse Analysis", and Ole Weaver’s theory of "securitization". Findings of the article show that King Salman condemned the Islamic Republic of Iran at the summit by using the words in international law and the delicate basis of his theological power on current issues in the international community as well as the general demands of international conventions. And in this way, it will convince the audience about the security of Iran with the content of its words.
