Javad Arabameri; Mohsen Eslami; Seyed Masoud Mousavi Shafaee; Mohammad Hossein Jamshidi
Abstract
Benyamin Netanyahu with more than fifteen years of experience as prime minister has been a major role in shaping the Israeli foreign policy. Knowledge about his central beliefs and cognitive approaches can play an important role in understanding Israeli foreign policy. The question is, what cognitive ...
Read More
Benyamin Netanyahu with more than fifteen years of experience as prime minister has been a major role in shaping the Israeli foreign policy. Knowledge about his central beliefs and cognitive approaches can play an important role in understanding Israeli foreign policy. The question is, what cognitive approach does Netanyahu have in foreign policy? Have these cognitive approaches been constant or changed over time? The aim is to explore Netanyahu's central beliefs as one of the main factors influencing Israeli foreign policy. In this regard, Netanyahu's verbal materials in foreign policy were examined between 2009 and 2019, using the conceptual framework of operational code analysis and the “verbs in context system” method in comparing to a norming group average of world leaders. The results of the quantitative analysis of Netanyahu’s speeches by Profiler Plus software show that there is a significant difference between Netanyahu's philosophical and instrumental beliefs in the second & third terms (2009-2015) on the one hand, and his beliefs in the fourth term (2015-2019), on the other hand. In the first round, Netanyahu saw the nature of the political universe in harmony with Israel's interests. Moreover, he realized political values in adopting a cooperative strategy, and the usefulness of utilizing cooperative tools with regards to other actors. In the second round, he considered the nature of the political universe in conflict with Israel's interests, realizing values in pursuing a limited cooperative strategy, and the usefulness of employing cooperative and conflictual tools versus other political actors.
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.
Mohammad Hossein Jamshidi; Afshin Shamiri
Abstract
Related to the conceptual transformations of power and culture and the impact of these two phenomena, extensive studies have been done in international relations. But less research has been done on the interaction of these two concept in the field of international relations. While today, the importance ...
Read More
Related to the conceptual transformations of power and culture and the impact of these two phenomena, extensive studies have been done in international relations. But less research has been done on the interaction of these two concept in the field of international relations. While today, the importance of this connection has become more prominent, especially with the rising of the smart power theory. Therefore, the present research seeks to explain the relation between culture and power in three critical, post structuralism and constructivism approaches, with the help of the conceptual framework of power and comparative method. Each approach of the Critical, Post-Structuralism and Structuralism respectively consider instrumental, discursive, and evolved role for culture toward power. In this regard, the question posed in this research is that how three critical approaches, post-structuralism and constructivism explain the relationship between culture and power in the field of international relations? The results shows that by comparing the viewpoint of the three approaches about relationship between power and culture in international relations, we find that these two phenomena are mutually reinforcing each other in a fluid and dynamic environment compound from cultural concepts such as ideology, meaning, identity, and norms, and in this mutual and interminable relation, the interaction of power and culture in the forms of security, order, and stability emerges.
