Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies

Abstract This paper reexamines the economic security dynamics of the Persian Gulf by applying a neoliberal institutionalist framework to the evolving relationship between Iran and the United States, with particular attention to recent geopolitical shocks, including the 12-day war between Iran and Israel and the US's direct involvement in that conflict. The study explores how shifting patterns of sanctions, trade disruptions, and maritime security risks affect regional economies, particularly those of Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states. Using process tracing, the analysis identifies causal pathways linking US policy changes to Iran’s economic resilience and the adaptive strategies of Persian Gulf actors. Special emphasis is placed on the mediating and stabilizing role of Qatar, whose neutral diplomacy has grown in importance amid heightened tensions. Findings suggest that economic interdependence, institutional cooperation, and pragmatic mediation—especially by Persian Gulf states like Qatar and Oman—offer pathways to mitigate conflict and preserve economic stability in a region increasingly shaped by sanctions, oil market volatility, and asymmetric warfare. The paper concludes with actionable policy recommendations for Iran to improve regional integration, crisis response, and economic diversification under ongoing US pressure.

Abstract Regionalism, a phenomenon much older than globalization, has long promoted the individual and collective interests of countries. Accordingly, American and Middle Eastern nations have sought to advance their interests within integration frameworks such as the Organization of American States (OAS) and the League of Arab States (LAS). In this context, Ernst Haas’s neofunctionalist theory provides a useful lens to examine these blocs, focusing on four key categories: supranationality, the shift in elite loyalties, the collective decision-making process, and most importantly, the spillover effect. This study applies the neofunctionalist approach and uses qualitative content analysis to examine collected data from both above-mentioned organizations. By reviewing internal regulations, resolutions, and the contemporary political contexts of member countries, the research compares the OAS and LAS to highlight their similarities and differences. The study finds that while the LAS struggles with foreign interference and internal rivalries among members competing for leadership in Arabism, the OAS is shaped by the hegemonic dominance of the United States and the ideological polarization across the Americas, where conservative and progressive governments alternate in power. The dynamic traps the continent in a vicious cycle that must be broken.

Abstract This study assesses the political challenges that hinder the implementation of a proposed referendum on Palestine, framed within Hegemonic Stability Theory (HST), which underscores the significance of a dominant global power in sustaining international order. The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran has suggested this referendum as a means to determine Palestine's political system. From an HST perspective, the United States significantly impacts the international arena, including policies regarding Palestine. Its support for Israel complicates the political landscape and undermines alternative peace proposals, including those from Iran. This article seeks to answer the main question: what political obstacles prevent holding a referendum in Palestine, and what methods can be used to overcome those obstacles? The findings of the article indicate several political dynamics and factors that impede the referendum: political divisions within Israel regarding peace with the Palestinians, lack of consensus among Palestinian factions, differing approaches among Arab states, and conflicting positions of both Islamic and non-Arab countries. Additionally, the stances of the permanent members of the UN Security Council exacerbate these challenges. The author finds that Iran’s proposal has overlooked the international framework of a two-state solution.

Abstract Regional trends strongly influence and are influenced by global power flows. For decades, international politics have been shaped and reshaped by a bipolar and, after the break down of the USSR, a unipolar world order. Both orders played a significant role in shaping and directing Middle Eastern politics. Yet the unipolar order is no longer at play. And since the global flow of power is ongoing, a new world order is being shaped in what seems to be a lengthy transitional period. This article focuses on the effects of the global transition of power in the Middle East and the region’s efforts and mechanisms to cope with it. I argue that the spill-over of international volatility into the Middle East creates a less stable regional politics, and that efforts for balancing are pursued by regional powers to increase their maneuverability as well as their coping capabilities in a volatile era by distancing their policies from global actors’ priorities and standoffs. The article is structured such that after an introduction, I delve into the meaning and nature of the global transition of power, which serves as the paper’s the conceptual framework. In the ensuing four sections, I discuss the imbalanced nature of regional politics as well as the way in which the region is interpreting and thereupon coping with the global change.

Abstract This article analyzes the transformation of Turkish foreign policy towards the Middle East during the turbulent years initiated with the Arab Spring. In due course, Turkish policy considerably shifted from proactive engagement with the region in the early 2000s to a bid to leading regional transformation, particularly in the initial years of the Arab Spring. However, the reversal of the Arab Spring increasingly presented a blowback for Türkiye’s regional engagements. The ensuing regional insecurity resulted in a realist turn in Turkish foreign policy, with frequent resort to military instruments and coercive diplomacy. Eventually, regional policies of Türkiye corresponded to the search for de-escalation and normalization within the emerging Middle Eastern order since 2020. The article argues that changing regional dynamics corresponding with domestic conditions influenced and shaped Türkiye’s policies towards the Middle East. Recently, under the impact of the regional-systemic pressures coupled with changing domestic conditions, recalibrating its regional engagement, Türkiye has prioritized the normalization agenda. It argues that while normalization agenda will remain an important objective for Türkiye’s regional policies, it will evolve in a partial manner, and case-by-case, conditional on the unfolding regional order and Ankara’s strategic priorities.

Abstract In the post-2020 security environment of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, marked by the easing of Iranian-Saudi tensions, intra-Sunni reconciliation, the resolution of the Qatar blockade, and the signing of the Abraham Accords, the European Union (EU) sought to capitalize on the détente to advance its strategic interests. Compared to the other members of the so-called Western camp, the EU, which appears particularly vulnerable to its neighbouring region's instability, responded poorly to the emerging challenges and opportunities. Which factors explain the inefficiency of the EU to benefit from a permissive strategic environment and become more impactful in its broader neighbourhood? This article attempts to promote our understanding of EU’s foreign policy towards the MENA region through a Neoclassical Realist theoretical approach. Structural changes alone cannot explain the EU's failure to have a more prominent role in the region. Intervening variables, such as the role of institutions, state-society relations, and strategic culture, can shed light on the lack of policy cohesiveness and the overall inability of the EU to promote its influence abroad.  

Abstract The examination and scrutiny of the protracted Syrian crisis, recently the longest of its kind marked by rampant instability, terrorism proliferation, arms race, and various humanitarian catastrophes, have had ramifications extending far beyond the borders of Syria. In addition to the involvement of non-state actors, this crisis also served as a battleground for the competition between regional and global powers. Hence, due to its diverse geographical scope and the influence of foreign stakeholders, the crisis merits in-depth study and analysis. Dania Koleilat Khatib undertakes this task in her book, delving into the motives, policies, and utilization of significant tactics by influential stakeholders involved in the Syrian crisis. The actors include Russia, China, the United States, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as non-state actors to a certain degree. The resulting 13-chapter volume, titled The Syrian Crisis: Effects on Regional and International Relations, serves as an attempt to deepen the understanding of the crisis and its genesis regarding foreign power intervention.

Abstract The efforts of the international community to free the Middle East from weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) date back five decades ago. This process was initiated with Iran’s proposal in 1974 and has not yet achieved its goals after almost five decades. The main question in this article is how to achieve a WMD Free Zone in the form of a regional arms control and disarmament regime in the Middle East. The answer is formed in the form of the hypothesis that despite the presence of Israel as the only possessor of nuclear weapons in the region and uncertainties about Iran's nuclear program, reaching a WMD-free zone will not be far from reach. Using the theoretical framework of international regimes, in this article the possible actions needed to create a WMD Free Zone will be discussed.

Abstract This analysis delves into the contentious issue of naming the Persian Gulf, asserting that the distinction between Arabian and Persian nomenclature extends beyond a simple dichotomy between two neighbouring Middle Eastern countries, Arabs and Persians. Instead, it represents a significant dispute that resonates throughout the entire Middle East. This study addresses two key questions: ‘Why is the Persian Gulf naming dispute considered a problem rather than a mere disagreement between the two sides of the Gulf?’ and ‘How can this problem be resolved?’ The research employs two qualitative methods: a descriptive analytical approach to answer the primary question and a policy-oriented approach to propose practical solutions for the secondary question. By going beyond analysis and contributing to policy formulation, the study seeks to inform public opinion and enable official stakeholders to effectively address the issue. The push to rename it the 'Arabian Gulf', led by Arabists, not only negatively impacts Arab-Iranian relations but also presents an unexpected opportunity for Israel to forge connections with the Arab world while advancing its de-Arabization agenda, particularly regarding Palestine. To address this problem, a novel solution is proposed, taking into account the historical, geographical, political, and strategic context of the issue. The solution advocates recognizing a distinct 'Arabian Gulf' in the Gulf of Aqaba, off the coast of Palestine, by reverting to its historical origin.

Abstract The geopolitical competition between India on one hand and the China-Pakistan axis, on the other hand, have made various researchers investigate the different, unknown, and influential aspects of this competition. One of the fields that can influence the analysis of these competitions is political geography. Therefore, in the present research, the researchers have tried to create a new point of view regarding Iran's position in the geopolitical competition between China and India by relying on the sources and analyses that have been done by Indian authors and researchers regarding the issue of China-India competition and also Iran's position in this competition. The authors of this research adopted a meta-analytic approach to drive conclusions from the collected data. Authentic documents in books, scientific-research articles, reliable internet websites and important international news agencies were analyzed to collect the relevant data. The findings suggest that regarding geopolitical access, both China and India are persistently seeking to facilitate their connection to Eurasia through Iran and Pakistan and thus increase their geopolitical weight to enjoy a better position in world politics in the 21^st century.

Abstract The present article aims to investigate the modality of coverage and infodemic management regarding COVID 19 by the two Iranian mainstream media i.e., IRNA and Fars News Agency. To investigate the modality of infodemic management, the article specifically examines ‘building resilience to misinformation’. To reach this aim, content analysis has been used. Data for this study were selected from the Instagram pages of Fars News Agency (@fras_news) and Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) (Irna_1313) from February 19, 2019, the day of the official announcement regarding the first Coronavirus case in Iran, until October 25, 2021. In total 218 items were collected, out of which 64 cases were from IRNA and 154 were from Fars News Agency. Both news agencies were examined in terms of infodemic type, Infodemic themes and infodemic sources. The results of the study indicated that in terms of infodemic type, Fars mainly focused on fake news; while IRNA concentrated on prevalent public questions and concerns regarding the Coronavirus. In terms of infodemic themes, both news agencies focused on Corona phobia and vaccination. The results of the study indicate that social networking sites are the main sources of spreading infodemic regarding COVID-19. 

Abstract Since the late 19^th century, Iraqi immigrants have formed a community in the United States, which is widely known as a part of the Arab-Muslim diaspora in the country, while the reality is rather different, since the majority of this community is non-Arab and non-Muslim. The focus of this paper is to investigate the US-based Iraqi diaspora identity regarding its formation and evolution by reviewing its history and exploring its diversity, which could inform readers about the major identification modalities taken by members of the community in the American context. The key question discussed in this paper is therefore the following: how does Iraqi diaspora identity diverge or converge within the American context, influenced by historical, ethnic and religious elements? Using analytical narratives as our corpus of study, we will discuss the way in which Iraqi-Americans present their identity by commenting on their ethno-religious diversity and the impact of the diversity on the community. Findings indicate that affected by US-Iraq relationships as well as different contexts in both homeland and the host country throughout the last three decades, a divergent dynamism has serious potentials to influence the future of this diaspora community in the United States.

Abstract Iran’s ‘resistance economy’ is sometimes presented as defensive strategy. Despite Washington’s ‘New Middle East’ wars and the rapid evaporation of expected benefits from the long JCPOA (nuclear deal) process, a certain illusion remains that a general ‘normalisation’ with the outside powers might still bring economic benefits to the country. Nevertheless, it remains true that, while Iran is a large country, pure self-sufficiency would impose physical limits. Therefore, the question that one may ask is what are the better economic opportunities for the nation’s economic growth? By engaging with the globalist and new regionalism debates, making parallels between Latin American and West Asian
integration, and presenting examples from Iran’s previous experiences, this paper argues that the answer to the above-mentioned question lies in a resistance economy, which builds an economically integrated regional bloc. The article begins by demonstrating the false promises of global economic liberalism, and then locates Iran’s resistance economy principles in the context of the ‘new regionalism’ debates. This forms the basis for discussing the economic potential of West Asian integration. This research is an interpretive study, testing the economic liberal project with evidence, and then comparing it with contemporary regional initiatives.

Abstract Many studies have been conducted on the Kurds and their movements. Most authors have considered historical dimensions or applied limited theoretical variables, but have not been able to identify the variables to identify the key reasons behind the rise and fall of Kurdish movements in an explanatory theoretical model. Consequently, there is neither available data about their rise, continuity, and fall, nor an explicit model to explain how they rose and fell. This paper seeks to create such a theoretical model by relying on the concepts of international relations. This paper responds to the key questions of why Kurdish movements rise, fall, and continue, and what factor or factors influence their distinguishing features? It is hypothesized that the ways that Kurdish movements rise, fall, and continue are influenced by the distributive and reproductive power structures at the four analysis levels of the international system, regional, national, and intra-Kurdish levels. The unique features of each level are expressed in one of the four possible states of hegemony, power-centered, balance-centered, and transition as applies to each of the four levels separately. This study applies distributive models for the period 1815–1990. Future studies
could consider reproductive model analysis.

Abstract Due to both internal and external factors, Western Asia has long been suffering from security tribulations and political instability. The institution of various military and militia groups in the region in the absence of powerful central governments is the leading cause of most crises in Western Asia. The development of such security and military interactions outside the sovereignty framework paves the way for foreign interventions, making the region unstable and insecure. Working at times as proxy agents, these groups take action in the absence of a powerful stable central government in short term, and set the ground for sustained unrest, dispersion and the development of irresponsible armed groups in long term. These groups proliferate when the central governments lack the necessary persuasive power or lose the ability to manage crises and to exercise exclusive power for reasons such as lack of effective military power, disagreement over the quality of interaction with opposition groups, losing the monopoly of military power, intervention of regional or transboundary powers, high financial and organizing abilities of the militia, etc. This article is based on the hypothesis that the development and continuous growth of non-state armed groups stems from various internal and external reasons, causing security crisis in the concerned countries. The most crucial way to end these crises is empowering the central government through national cohesiveness, consensus, and the exclusive practice of hard power based on the law.

Abstract Considering corruption as one of the chronic harms of the administrative system, and the social factor affecting economic growth, the present study sought to explain, for the first time, the differences in the perceived levels of corruption among 16 Southwest Asian countries, relying on the sociological “new institutionalism” theory in analyzing organizations, describing causal mechanisms and their mutual impact, and creating corruptive contexts. The fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Method (fsQCA) and the secondary data were used to find the causal configurations leading to corruption in these cases. The experimental judgment led to two causal configurations showing that some institutional requirements of the institutional environment, in contrast to the requirements of the technical environment, exacerbated the gap between formal and informal structures. Conflicts lead to the formation of informal norms and networks that, over time, provide shared mental patterns for actors in executing current actions and confronting ambiguity and uncertainty; and on the basis of contextual rationality, they are interpreted as an appropriate way of acting. This reduces the costs of corruption and increases the opportunity for abuse by diminishing supervision and control and strengthening informal networks.

Abstract Research on the special relationship between the United States and Israel has usually been focused on strategic aspects, whilst fewer scholars have focused on non-material dimensions of the relationship. In addition, the existing research is mostly confined to the political and decision-making realms, with very few excursions into the academic arena. The current article aims to fill this lacuna through the study of pro-Israel academic discourse in America, focusing on the specific case of the field of terrorism studies. Critical discourse analysis of pro-Israel academic texts in this field is carried out to reveal the discourse, themes and arguments used to build this ideational pillar of the special relationship and move towards a common identity between the US and Israel. The common ingroup identity model (CIIM) is used to describe the process through which a common identity is constructed. The article concludes that defining the Self, defining the Other, and defining the norms are the three main strategies employed in the studied texts to achieve this goal.

Abstract The primary concern of this research is to reassess the British foreign policy, focusing on its military withdrawal in 1971 from the Persian Gulf and its return in 2014. The Persian Gulf, as a region of geo-strategic importance, has always
been at the center of attention for the UK and other great world powers. This study will therefore attempt to answer the following question: what are the realities behind the British retreat from the Persian Gulf in 1971, and its return to
the region after 43 years? Britain, which has a significant history of military presence in the Persian Gulf, decided to keep a low profile in the Arab hosting countries since 1971. The UK has been working to manage interstate conflicts
among Arab-speaking countries, deter Iran, and maintain its ‘special relationship’ with the U.S. In terms of the theoretical framework of the study, realist theory will be used by focusing on the defensive and offensive realism as the instrument of analysis. Britain’s military withdrawal from the Persian Gulf can be analyzed through defensive realism, whereas its military return to the region could be explained by offensive realism. The case study method has been helpful in arriving at the conclusion that the main motivation for the British military presence in the Persian Gulf has been to strengthen an alliance with the Gulf’s periphery Arab States.

Abstract This article enters into the debate on the link between security and identity by looking at the security context in the states surrounding the Persian Gulf, particularly Iran. Earlier scholarly works have approached security and identity
separately, but lack a framework that connects them in a single account. The process tracing method offers a scientific approach to connect various notions in a single study, allowing the synthesis of diverse disciplines to establish links
connecting them. Applying the method to the current security and identity issues of the regional states with Jundallah _a terrorist group in the eastern border of Iran_ has established a link between them and has thus enriched the current
studies of the region. The main findings are that the Persian Gulf region is a heterogeneous security complex with diverse actors wielding power, and that societal threats have increased since the 2003 Iraq War. Since that year, a conflictual security complex has predominated in the region, which has destabilized the region more than before.

Abstract This article examines the rise and fall of the Peace Process and questions the reason for which the United States of America was successful in bringing the two sides to the negotiating table during the 1990s. It investigates the reason for which the process ultimately failed, as well as the reason for which Washington was unsuccessful in restarting the peace process in the past decade. It is argued that the collapse of the Soviet Union, as the Arab states’ most important ally, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)’s decision to back Saddam Hussein during the First Persian Gulf War, and the rise of Islamic movements in the occupied territories were the main reasons for which the PLO decided to negotiate with Israel. The subsequent Peace Process was a major political, economic and public image success for Washington and Tel-Aviv, while it was damaging to the Palestinian cause. Not only did the PLO recognize Israel and the Zionist movement, but it also ceded most of the West Bank in the process. Finally, it is argued that after the collapse of the process during the early 2000s, Donald Trump has attempted to restart the negotiations, but has failed thus far due to the inexistence of strong leaders in both Palestinian and Israeli sides, the rise of Hamas as a resistance movement, and the disenchantment of the Palestinian people with the Peace Process.

Abstract Changes in the international system, along with crises in the Middle East and the emergence of inefficient states coexisting with religious and racial groups in the region, make one wonder about the nature of the state in today’s
systematic world, in general, and the nature of the state in the Middle East, in particular. The present study provides a theoretical framework based on quantum mechanics, known as New Global Governance or the pattern of proliferative order (in contrast to the distributive order pattern) in an attempt to examine changes in the concept of the state in developed and developing/underdeveloped (the Middle East) countries. It focuses on class structure in the context of global governance and the way in which it is related to the state in order to examine the nature of the state in the future.
The study argues that in the new systemic order in developed worlds, states drive class struggles from the economic realm into the political realm and sustain themselves as an institution. However, in the Middle East, states are mythic; they lack social bonding forces and are highly influenced by class structure, dominant political and economic structures, their meta-class nature, and the emergence of multi-group movements challenging states, making them vulnerable to continuous breakdown. In such a situation, new myths of governance as governance institutes, such as partisan-urban governance in the Kurdistan region, the Islamic emirate of al-Qaeda, the Isis Islamic Caliphate, the Rojava Cantons and the Democratic confederalism of P.K.K. will replace the state and the collapsed states will never regain their power.

Abstract The League of Arab States (also known as the Arab League) is well past its sixth decade of establishment. However, it has a long way to go to achieve the objectives enumerated in its charter. In a sense, there is much stronger propensity towards disintegration than integration in the league. This article seeks to study the reasons that account for the failure of such integration in the Arab League. Current trends in the Arab Union are studied through the lens of Neorealist Theory. To that end, the paper seeks to find an answer to this question: What are the reasons for the failure of integration in the Arab League? The main hypothesis of this article is that the member states’ main concern is survival, security, and relative gains rather than convergent cooperative behaviors conducive to integration; as a result, six decades after its birth, integration is yet to be achieved.

Abstract Human rights situation in the Middle East (ME) is a central concern in contemporary political as well as academic discourses. There is a considerable amount of literature on the subject, both academic and journalistic, in the Western world. A large part of that literature blames the ME in different ways for its ‘terrible’ conception and treatment of human rights norms. They typically, do not hesitate to contextualise it as ‘Middle Eastern’ phenomenon. It is fascinating, though, that such contextualization is proposed predominantly without a substantial and appropriate context analysis. In this article, a context analysis is conducted, adopting an Area Studies Approach to identify the major features of a Middle Eastern context where human rights norms experience the region’s realities. As a result, four particular items, Islam, oil, Islamic-Western relations, and Israel are proposed as the main factors that form the real context of human rights in the Middle East. This analysis demonstrates that the influential causes of human rights violations in the ME are from both internal and external sources. The internal sources are highlighted in the dominant works of the field. It is interesting, however, that these works largely ignore the external ones. The nature of external factors, Western or attached to Western treatment of the Middle East might reveal the real motivations behind such remarkable overlooking.

Abstract In recent years, the United Arab Emirates has begun creating artificial islands in the Persian Gulf. These actions have sparked many concerns throughout the region, particularly from Iran. This study defines and analyzes the process of securitizing the creation of the UAE artificial islands in the Persian Gulf. Although, according to the Law of the Sea Convention, coastal states are entitled to create artificial islands, observing neighboring states’ interests are a primary prerequisite for creating these lands. This study seeks to answer the following question: What are the consequences of the UAE creating artificial islands in the Persian Gulf for Iran? The hypothesis of this paper proposes that creating these islands, regarding the expanding nature of the concept of security in the contemporary world, will have a fivefold consequence for Iran; creating artificial islands by the UAE will cause military, political, environmental, economic, and social insecurities for Iran in the Persian Gulf. The research follows a descriptive-analytical method and studies the question utilizing library sources. The Copenhagen School of Security Studies constitutes the theoretical framework of the paper.

Abstract Relying on its partisan principles and values, the Ba’athist regime– the period when Saddam Hussein was in charge in Iraq– sought a powerful government. Not respecting and believing in ethnical and sectarian differences and seeking the realization of national unity, Saddam tried to regulate security policies in a way in which he could assimilate the differing Iraqi society, using the policies of carrot and stick. This project was consisted of two fundamental pillars: (1) positive or carrot assimilation policies; and (2) negative or stick assimilation policies. This article discusses the way in which Saddam’s unifying principles were implemented in Iraq during the Ba’athist regime. The research method of the article is qualitative and the data are gathered from various documents and interviews with former and current Iraqi government officials. The questions this paper seeks to answer are: (1) What were the patterns of policymaking in Iraq’s national security during the period of the Ba’ath Party’s rule? and, (2) Did those patterns help Iraq’s national unity and solidarity? The article concludes that because of the specific characteristics of these policies, and considering the sociological, cultural, and historical principles of Iraq, assimilation policies during the Ba’ath Party’s rule caused numerous ethnical and sectarian cracks and consequently gave birth to discordant and disharmonious groups in the society.