Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies

Abstract The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris brought together 195 countries to reach an agreement. Regardless of the environmental issues discussed and agreed in the conference, what seems significant is the global role that France played as the conference hosting nation. The country managed to promote itself as "the" eligible place among many European cities to host the conference, creating a diplomatic prestige for itself, provoking new environmental ambitions worldwide and presenting Paris as the home city, whose name is attached to the agreement forever. Yet, environmental issues have not always been a driving force for diplomatic efforts and public policy initiatives in France. Indeed, environmental protection grew to appear in the national agenda throughout decades and developed as a notion worthy of political and diplomatic attention in a long-term process, the study of which is noticeable in the European context. Utilizing Issue Ownership and Green Soft Power theories, the research employs Theory-Testing Process Tracing method to analyze France’s environmental contributions resulting in its leader role in the Paris Agreement. Ultimately, this study seeks to illuminate how environmental concerns gained public and political attention in the French society and politics, leading to the country's position in the agreement process. The author argues that an interplay of domestic and external factors let France present itself as a responsible actor in environmental affairs, strengthen its soft power on the international stage, and reinforce both national policy and international influence on the issue of the agreement.

Abstract EU has developed a plethora of initiatives to deal with the southern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. From Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) and the so-called Barcelona Process to European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) and Union for the Mediterranean (UfM), different regional programs have been implemented in the Mediterranean region. The diversity and increasing number of countries involved have led to a feel of Mediterranean bazaar with diverging directions. Thus, one question appears to remain unanswered: In what ways have ideational foundations affected the EU initiatives in the Southern shores of the Mediterranean Sea? The research hypothesis states that differences in ideational foundations of the Mediterranean powers, namely, France, Italy and Spain, in moments of crisis have led to the multiplication of initiatives and brought in at times conflicting arrangements between the north and the south of the Mediterranean Sea. The research question was answered under the Constructivist Institutionalism using the qualitative methodology of content analysis.  Research findings reveal that when confronted with moments of self-doubt (crisis), each of the Mediterranean powers has effectuated an institutional change according to its established ideas and cognitive filters.

Abstract One of the most critical issues in Iran's foreign policy is European countries' foreign policy toward the Iran-US crisis. The hostage crisis in Tehran on November 4, 1979 (Aban 13, 1358 SH) was the first Iran-US crisis to affect Iran's relations with Western countries. This study aims to investigate the following question: "What were the French policies toward the hostage crisis, and how were they formed?" To answer this question, the “strategic autonomy” framework was utilized to comprehend France's foreign policy. This research employs a "historical case study" methodology, which critically analyzes historical documents, such as press documents, official reactions, and diplomatic documents. The findings of this study indicate that the French foreign policy of this period can be analyzed using the concept of "strategic autonomy." In its relations with Iran, France adopted the policy of "independently regulating relations with a third country," "independence in foreign policy decision-making," and "ensuring the well-being of citizens," whereas in its relations with the US, it followed the policy of non-interference in the US's reciprocal crisis with the third party and maintaining economic interests.

Abstract One of the most important economic topics in every country is considering tax issues as a way of increasing the government's income through attracting public confidence by observing the principles of proceeding in the tax system of the country which might likely cause a national production boom, increase economic growth rate, reduce unemployment and the fair distribution of wealth. In this regard, since the majority of taxpayers in a country pay taxes and at the same time their rights might be threatened, it is therefore necessary to establish courts and tribunals for settlement of rights and resolving hostility, and because of the close connection of individuals with the issue of tax, they may refer to these authorities more than others. Accordingly, references must be made in accordance with a fair proceeding in order to best determine the rights of the modalities, which will not be achieved except through the adoption of fair trial principles that are endorsed and supported by international legal institutions and are accepted as the principles for the implementation of fair results in the global prosecution system. Today, there are several systems of tax proceedings in different countries, each of which has weaknesses and strengths in terms of affinity and fairness of fair proceeding principles. In this paper, by examining the tax jurisdiction of Iran, the United States, Britain, Germany and France, as well as the patterns of exploitation of each of these systems and comparing the tax systems of these countries with the accepted principles of fair proceeding, the degree of proximity or the distortion of the above tax systems into the principle of the implementation of justice, which should be the ultimate goal for lawmakers, will be studied.