Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies

Abstract Over the past century, the United Kingdom has transitioned through various international roles, from a global superpower during its imperial era to a key partner within the European Union. Brexit, however, has triggered what many scholars describe as a foreign policy ‘identity crisis’. This paper challenges this conventional narrative by applying an ontological security framework to investigate how EU membership and the European integration process themselves represented an identity crisis for many Britons. The analysis explores the emotional motives behind Brexit by examining how Euroscepticism, combined with a desire to reclaim Britain’s ‘islandness’ identity, contributed to the decision to leave the European Union. Employing a thematic narrative analysis, the research examines the interaction between identity-based motivations and broader political and historical contexts to reveal new understandings of the multifaceted factors driving Brexit and its enduring effects. By investigating ontological security concepts such as existential threat, continuity disruption, and the restoration of narrative identity, the paper argues that EU integration itself, rather than Brexit, was perceived by many as the principal threat to Britain’s biographical narrative and national identity. These insights contribute to understanding how identity-based anxieties influence major political decisions and carry implications for policymaking and EU–UK relations moving forward.

Abstract Since the victory of the Islamic Revolution, sanctions have consistently been a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy against Iran. Beyond their direct impact on bilateral tensions between the two nations, U.S. secondary or extraterritorial sanctions have also significantly influenced Iran's relations with other global actors, particularly the European Union (EU). The conclusion of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) generated optimism regarding the end of sanctions against Iran. However, with the advent of the Trump administration and its unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, the United States’ extraterritorial sanctions against Iran were reinstated, dispelling the optimism that had emerged. The US and the EU are major economic and strategic partners. Given this reality, the critical question arises: How has the resurgence of U.S. sanctions, with their extraterritorial dimensions, affected Iran-EU relations? This paper hypothesizes that the resumption and intensification of extraterritorial sanctions have negatively impacted the economic and political aspects of Iran-EU relations. On the one hand, these sanctions have reduced bilateral relations to their lowest possible level; on the other, they have constrained diplomatic channels for resolving issues. To examine this hypothesis, the analysis employs Trump’s Maximum Pressure policy and its theoretical underpinnings as its conceptual framework. The method of research is based on impact analysis. Findings indicate that while sanctions have profoundly impacted Iran-EU
relations, they have failed to achieve their ultimate objective of altering behavior. A key outcome of these sanctions has been the sidelining of Europe in Iran’s foreign policy sphere.

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 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 Despite EU’s engagement with the Mediterranean region and its active support for intra-regional integration initiatives, the data shows an impressive underperformance of Southern and Eastern Mediterranean Countries (SEMCs) in regional trade. Ideally, an energy rich North Africa and energy deficient neighbors in the South would unlock considerable opportunities for regional trade. Therefore, the following question looms large: How has EU’s trade policy contributed to the low market integration among the SEMCs? To answer this question, under the Market Power Europe and qualitative methodology, it is hypothesized that EU’s externalization of policies through different embedded tools such as rules of origin and outward processing schemes (OPS) has contributed to the divergence, instead of convergence, of trade among SEMCs. Research findings point to a distortion of competition between EU enterprises and African and third party enterprises in the benefit of European interests. Further, the results reveal that despite the higher complementarity between some of the SEMCs, still the predominant direction of trade is north-south, thanks to EU’s trade policy in the Mediterranean region.

Abstract The Three Seas Initiative harks back as another version of strategic integration in the Central and Eastern Europe. Based on the Neofunctionalism, a functional-based regionalism is expected to take roots in the region with the spillover effect into the political and institutional levels; therefore, the main question of the research study is: what is the effect of the EU on the regionalism in the Central and Eastern Europe? The hypothesis of this research states that the EU’s highly developed institutional arrangement has led to a specific type of regional arrangement to take place in the CEE under the Three Seas Initiative, which lacks highly supranational institutionalism, even though it maintains high functional and political dimensions. The main research question was investigated using the qualitative method, namely descriptive method within the theoretical framework of Neofunctionalism. Results indicate that while Central European regionalism is under the effect of political and functional spillover as well as spill-around in institutionalization, the divide between Central European conservative and Western liberal values has been used by Eurosceptic parties to accelerate the process.

Abstract This article examines the impact of European Union's (EU) Counter-Terrorism Strategy on European security, considering recent developments and challenges. This investigation seeks to answer two pivotal questions: (1) How do varying counter-terrorism approaches impact the effectiveness of European security measures against terrorist threats? (2) How does cooperation or divergence in counter-terrorism strategies influence Europe's broader security environment? The research explores key developments in European counter-terrorism cooperation and analyzes the effects of regional cooperation on European security dynamics, drawing on empirical evidence from recent terrorist attacks and counter-terrorism operations. Findings emphasize the need for a comprehensive and coordinated European counter-terrorism strategy, which addresses immediate security concerns and long-term drivers of radicalization and extremism. The research utilizes the method of Library Resources and Documentary Research, analyzing existing literature, academic publications, reports, and relevant documents related to counter-terrorism strategies, European security, and the interplay between terrorism and counter-terrorism in the region. The article also presents a theoretical framework of institutional cooperation to understand the implications of counter-terrorism strategies on European security. It highlights the significance of intelligence sharing, legal harmonization, capacity-building, and addressing challenges within regional and international collaborations.

Abstract Resilience-building within the EU borders is critical to ensure the security of European states. Moldova is one of the target areas for this policy due to the frozen Transnistrian conflict. The primary purpose of this article is analyzing the role of the EU in the Transnistrian conflict and why the EU resilience building activities had limited effects on the ground. The theoretical framework of this study is Mullainathan and Shafer's idea of Scarcity. Scarcity is a broad concept that means "having less than you need." The EU security scarcity has led to a security poverty. Scarcity’s capture of attention affects not only what the EU sees the world, but also the way in which it interprets and understands it. This article hypothesizes that the EU has started tunneling due to the security scarcity for resilience-building in the Transnistrian conflict, and this has led to a decrease in the bandwidth and consequently diminished the resilience-building capacity and conflict resolution in the region. The method of research is case study.

Abstract The rise of the far right is one of the significant challenges facing European countries;  the growing Eurosceptic and nativist attitudes in Central Europe have resulted in transforming regional alliances according to anti-immigration concerns. Despite the fact that the Visegrád 4 group, (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia), was founded in the early 1990s with the aim of detaching itself from the legacy of communism and pushing towards the Western liberal democracy, it has recently become a base to oppose EU and promote nativism and illiberal democracy. Adopting a descriptive-analytical approach, this paper reviews the rise of nativism and Euroscepticism with a historical perspective, through an examination of the political geography of Central Europe. Findings reveal that the influxes of refugees to Europe and increasing xenophobia, along with cultural concerns, specially about Muslims, have been the driving force behind the growth of the far-right parties. Additionally, the geopolitical situation of these countries and the external borders of the European Union have an important role in turning the refugee crisis into a driving factor of Euroscepticism.

Abstract Since the advent of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the country has been continuously subject to severe sanctions by the Western countries, especially the United States. In all these years, the U.S. sanctions did not affect Iran’s economy much, due to the fact that the two countries have no formal relations and as a result, their economies are not, by any means, interdependent. However, Iran’s economy has been reliant on extensive interactions with the European countries; the EU sanctions against Iran since 2011, therefore, have harshly affected Iran’s economy and caused adverse social impacts on Iranian lives. In the shadow of Iran’s dark image in the eyes of the world, one issue that has remained overshadowed by the discussions on the impact and effectiveness of the sanctions, is the severe human rights crises left by the EU sanctions. The key question is what have been the human rights and humanitarian consequences of the EU sanctions for Iran, and how serious have these consequences been for the country? As the author argues in this paper, EU economic sanctions against Iran are considered violations of the three main generations of human rights and are therefore unwarranted. Given this, the resumption of sanctions since 2018 would lead to a human rights disaster in Iran. The effect of these sanctions will not affect the Iranian government, but the Iranian civilians, especially the vulnerable, which will undermine their human dignity.

Abstract By causing a serious gap in the optimistic literature on European integration processes, Brexit has provided numerous challenges for international relations theorists. In this regard, in the present article,  three influential theories that best explain Brexit will be discussed: neorealism, constructivism, and the English school of international relations. Notwithstanding that both neorealism and constructivism are able to raise important issues, it seems that there are still certain shortcomings in the two theories in explaining Brexit. Neorealism relies too much on macro-analysis and material factors, and, on the other hand, constructivism tries to account for essential factors from the domestic or second-level analysis. Therefore, the paper's central question is how does the English School provide a convincing explanatory framework for understanding Brexit? In response to the question, the paper adopts a theoretical perspective to analyze and explain both the micro-level and macro-level of the Brexit phenomenon by utilizing the English School’s central assumptions: institutions, the great power status, pluralist-solidarist debate, and the balance of power. It is concluded that English School is able to explain Brexit more satisfactorily. According to the school’s assumptions, Brexit is not an oddity, but a natural consequence of internal and external equations in the United Kingdom.

Abstract Far-right parties have been increasingly spreading throughout Europe since 1980s; they have attracted the attention of many voters, especially the youth and the workers by campaigning against immigration and multiculturalism. Through an anti-establishment approach, these parties have become mainly mistrustful of the mainstream politics articulating themselves as the true voice of the people and the only alternative to the status quo; the far-right parties have been able to distance themselve from traditional fascism and adopt a populist approach and have become a rising forcein many European countries. The current paper aims to explore the status of far-right parties in European countries; it studies both the electoral victory of this movement and its consequences, and compares the condition of these parties across the European countries. Finally, the social status of far-right parties will be examined together with demographic variables of age, gender, social class and education.