Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies

Abstract Global supply chains, initially designed to enhance production efficiency and reduce costs through geographically dispersed networks, have evolved into complex global value chains (GVCs) characterized by deep interdependencies among countries and industries. According to Economic Interdependence Theory, higher levels of mutual economic dependence can influence both cooperation and systemic vulnerability, which are often underestimated—especially amid escalating geopolitical tensions. This study examines the resilience of global value chains by analyzing the structural positions of the US and China between 2012 and 2020. Using OECD Inter-Country Input-Output tables and a social network analysis (SNA) framework, it evaluates the network positions of 45 industries across 76 economies (excluding services), through three weighted centrality measures: degree, betweenness, and PageRank. These metrics allow us to (1) measure the degree of bilateral interdependence, (2) evaluate structural resilience to supply disruptions, and (3) uncover network-driven asymmetries in global economic power. Results indicate that China has significantly enhanced its resilience by diversifying industrial connections and expanding its structural centrality, thereby reducing vulnerability to external shocks. In contrast, while the United States remains integral to high-value nodes, its network position is more concentrated, which may expose it to greater risks under conditions of disruption or fragmentation.

Abstract The geopolitical significance of Taiwan has prompted the United States to remain vigilant about the island's security, even after recognizing the People's Republic of China in 1979. Consequently, while refraining from any legally binding commitment to defend Taiwan, the U.S. Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act, with the aim of equipping Taipei with the necessary military capabilities to deter a potential attack by China—a policy later termed "Strategic Ambiguity". However, while Taiwan’s economic development and democratic transition over the past four decades have underscored the importance of preserving the cross-strait status quo, China’s integration into the global economy has enabled the People’s Liberation Army to challenge it. Although conventional debates suggest the United States must choose between strategic clarity and traditional ambiguity, this paper moves beyond such a dichotomy, arguing that U.S. foreign policy behavior toward Taiwan exhibits elements of both. Building on the new conceptual framework of "Adaptive Strategic Ambiguity", this paper categorizes the U.S. policy toward Taiwan into three distinct dimensions: the reinvigoration of regional balance of power, the transition toward political clarity, and the advancement of economic de-risking.

Abstract Saudi foreign policy was mostly affected by its strategic relations with the United States as its primary and sole security provider. However, since the rise of Mohammed Bin Salman, Saudi Arabia further developed its relations with permanent non-Western members of the United Nations Security Council, respectively China and Russia. This study mainly contends that this transformation took place through strategic hedging, with regional and global consequences. It is contended that Saudi Arabia has adopted a triangular foreign policy through hedging, in order to balance its foreign relations with America and achieve regional supremacy. In this article, through a thematic analysis, we will investigate the ways in which Saudi foreign policy adopted hedging, the reasons for this action, and the motifs behind this decision. Saudi Arabia has tried to pursue national interests through hedging. This attempt is affected by a post-Cold War environment, preparing for a possible multi-polarization of the international system. Saudi Arabia also tries to improve its image alongside this approach in foreign policy. Correspondingly, this diversification of Saudi foreign policy is noticeably compatible with its domestic policy of opening up and adopting rapid modernization, which is analyzed through hedging and Neoclassical Realism.

Abstract This paper is an attempt to reconsider the legacy of universalism of traditional empires from the perspective of systems theory. In the West, the system ideas were already present in ancient Greek/Roman philosophy and developed further since the Renaissance within the domain of natural sciences (anatomy, mechanics or astronomy), whereas they did not develop as much in social sciences and particularly in politics, which lacks a holistic understanding. In the universal empires of the East (such as Iran, China and Russia) the system paradigm developed from the political life of centralized statehood. The core concept of the traditional imperial universalism was a particular understanding of “justice”, not as equality or absence of coercion, but as a certain form of social order. As the Chinese philosopher Xunzi and the Persian philosopher Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, noted, “justice” is primarily an “equilibrium”, that is a way of maintaining optimal interrelationships between different aspects of society within a single political whole. Traditional imperial universalism understood “just order” as a centralized hierarchical order. However, the current state of the systems approach and the complexity theory allows the reconsideration of the legacy of traditional universalism as the principle of totality of organizational connections and hierarchies of “systemic elements”, in the terminology of Russian philosopher, Alexander Bogdanov. It is concluded that the three Eastern thinkers share similar systematic understanding of “justice” as a hierarchically-arranged political order, coordinated on the basis of a single plan, which permits to maintain a dynamic balance.

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 coronavirus pandemic has attracted the international media since the first infection was identified in Wuhan, China in late 2019. Despite the similar frames all around the world, the present study assumes that international media have not portrayed the countries with confirmed outburst of the disease in similar terms. It is believed that diseases in the world are both political and biological. The present study, therefore, employs media framing, as conducted by Entman and Van Gorp, to analyze the first fifty VOA and BBC Persian news that covered the spread of COVID-19 in Iran. These agencies are chosen for their significant position in the western public diplomacy and their probable influence within the country. The results indicate that the outbreak of COVID-19 in Iran is framed in seven major frame packages: Iran at crisis, Iran as the source of regional and international threatening virus, lack of determination and confidence in decision making in Iran, Iran’s incompetence and disqualification as an ill-equipped system, lying and hypocrisy in Iran, violation of human rights, and finally, Islamic political ideology as a source of corruption.

Abstract It has been argued and stated that the 21st century is America's Pacific Century, the century or millennium of Asia, and century or era of China, the inevitable superpower. This paper explains the essence of the new changes
when the Pivot Policy was announced by President Obama in 2011. The main question discussed is therefore the following: ‘Why (and how) did President Obama adopt (and implement) the Pivot to Asia policy in 2011?’ One probable answer to this question is that President Obama intended to prevent “China’s hegemony” in East Asia through the Pivot Policy; however, “China’s hegemony” was carried out by economic and military levers. The theory applied is Joseph Nye’s “Liberal Realism,” because the Pivot as a question of foreign policy is considered to be part of Realism and Liberalism
simultaneously, and can be used for analysis at both global and domestic levels. The methodology used in this research is a mix methodology of Qualitative Content Analysis and Case study. The “Pivot” or “Rebalance” to Asia is a policy based on significant changes such as the rise of China and the US relative decline, at global and domestic levels, respectively. The Pivot is a regional coherent strategy from the Indian ocean to the Americas, a strategy of cooperation and competition toward China, implemented through “smart” leadership, rather than hegemony by economic and military tools like modern alliances, partnerships and institutions in order to prevent “China’s rise” and lead it to a responsible emerging power when in the half of the millennium, 2050, it reaches its peak of progress. The U.S. tries to maintain its worldwide leadership status up to the 22th century through the implementation of the Pivot Policy in 2011.