Search

Afghanistan's reversion to Taliban rule poses severe threats to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran faces a dilemma over how best to respond to these dangers: it could continue to conciliate the Taliban or it could revert to the antagonistic posture it adopted towards Kabul in the 1990s. While each of these strategies can improve Iran's security situation to some extent, they also entail unintended consequences that exacerbate Iranian vulnerabilities. More importantly, whatever policy Tehran pursues has an impact on Iran's nascent alignment with Tajikistan, as well as on Tajikistan's relations with Afghanistan. The fact that Iran's decision to conciliate the new leadership in Kabul did not prompt Dushanbe to scale back its belligerence towards the Taliban poses a puzzle for Glenn Snyder's concept of the alliance security dilemma. Its solution requires a reconsideration of adversary–ally dynamics that highlights the reciprocal interaction between shifts in inter-state alignment and changes in domestic political contestation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a close ally of Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi, Israel participated in the September 1974 Asian Games – the 'Asian Olympics' – that were held in Tehran. Among the 18 sports in which athletes competed, football attracted the most attention, especially after Iran's historic victory over Israel in the AFC Asian Cup in 1968. As both countries reached the final of the Games' football tournament, the match came to be seen by Iranians as nothing short of war. Standing in stark contradiction to the close and multifaceted relations between Jerusalem and the monarchical regime, this public attitude was lost on Israeli decisionmakers in what foreshadowed the failure to anticipate the Islamic revolution and the attendant collapse of Iranian-Israeli relations five years later. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Iran's enmity with Israel is ideological in the first place and strategic in the second. Iran intends through anti‐Israel actions and messaging to internally mobilize its populace and, externally, to claim the leadership of the Muslim world and strike a balance against a regional nuclear power. This article uses a critique based on constructivism and realism to reveal how Iran's confrontation with Israel has evolved historically from "identity‐ideological" to "politico‐strategic." I argue that Iran's adoption of this approach without taking its internal and external capacities into consideration has ironically bolstered the Israeli far right, increased global sympathies for Israel, escalated Iranophobia, aligned conservative Arab states with Israel, and marginalized the issue of Palestine. To preserve its national interests and regional security, Iran needs to overcome this politico‐historical stage and replace conflict with competition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Approximately four million Iranians live outside their home country today. As a proportion of the local population, Sweden is home to the largest Iranian expatriate community in the world - some 121,000 strong. Its members are diverse in all respects and have achieved remarkable success in their new country. This article examines attitudes held by Swedes of Iranian origin about Israel, as well as the factors that influence these attitudes. Data were gathered by means of a Swedish-language questionnaire distributed to members of the local Iranian community via social networks. Their answers suggest that most of the Iranian diaspora holds a conciliatory attitude towards the Iranian-Israeli conflict and may have the potential to effect a rapprochement between the two countries. However, many members of the community are passive or silent, clearly exposed to the threat of their home country's regime. Hence, it may not be possible for them to realize their peace-making potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Israel's new approach to Iran under the leadership of Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett. Topics discussed include the active engagement of Bennett and his cabinet with Biden administration officials; a revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA); and Bennett's friendly relations with the Biden administration, lower-key approach and allowance of more criticism of former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu's handling of the nuclear issue.

Copyright of Strategic Review / Przeglad Strategiczny is the property of Faculty of Political Science & Journalism, Adam Mickiewicz University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Iran has been waging a hybrid war against Israel since the Islamic revolution of 1979. In an era when conventional wars have given way to a different method, hybrid warfare, the main challenge facing states is how to deal with this new type of security threat. Thus, while states have previously faced security threats from regular enemy states' armies, nowadays hybrid warfare in which non-state actors play a key role has become a widespread security threat that requires democratic states to use very different strategies and tactics to overcome it. Using securitisation theory, which explores how normal issues transform into security threats, this article analyses how the State of Israel has securitised Iranian hybrid warfare which has been mainly executed through its proxy terror organisations of Hezbollah. It does so by applying a revised version of the Copenhagen School's securitisation framework, which focuses on security practices and is underpinned by an understanding of security as belonging to a continuum. The proxy terror organisations have moved towards the end point of the continuum, which is characterised by survival, existential threats, and militarisation, albeit without completely reaching the end point. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the cyber war between Israel and Iran as the two countries have invested significant resources in developing defensive and offensive cyber capabilities. Topics discussed include an overview of the cyber capabilities of Israel and Iran and their impact on the entire Middle East, the highly secretive nature of a cyber arsenal to prevent the development of countermeasures, and a comparison between Iranian and Israeli cyber program.

This article contends that the international is integral to populism. Thus, it calls for populism scholarship to embrace the interconnectivity between the domestic/internal and international/external. By borrowing from Global Historical Sociology, Global International Relations and Ernesto Laclau's notion of populist discourse, the article puts forward a new conceptual framework for the study of populism that bridges the gap between Comparative Politics and International Relations. It shows how populist discourse simultaneously constructs several aspects of the social world: the actor who is articulating it and its relationship with its own population, that actor's relationship with others in the international system, and global order. To illustrate its case, it examines populist discourses of Islamic Republic of Iran elites. Their discourses articulate the need to maintain the Islamic Republic's legitimacy and populist credentials inside and outside Iran, delegitimise Israel, and construct global order. These discourses are grounded in a historical trajectory: the 1979 Revolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers author's opinion on brewing war between Iran and Israel. It is mentioned that Syria has emerged as the main battleground of the Iranian-Israeli confrontation and both the nation has denied carrying out terrorism and cyber attacks of each other. The article adds that U.S. decision to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action has helped Israel launch more intensive attack on Iranian positions in Syria.

The article analyzes the difficult relations between Iran and Israel from the establishment until today. It was determined the main reasons for changing relations between these countries and the role of Iran's nuclear program. Also in the article was considered and substantiated the ways of resolving the nuclear problem. The US and European countries were engaged in solving the nuclear issue. After long and difficult negotiations the world powers and Iran reached a final agreement as a part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), on July 14, 2015. However, it has not changed the position of Israeli, political leaders quickly condemned and criticized the agreement. Iran's nuclear program and the maintenance of terrorism are a major threat to the national security of Israel. The Iranian theme has become the most popular in the political life of Israel. So, it was concluded that, today Israel is radically determined to solve this issue and its policy is aimed at eliminating a nuclerar threat. Obviously, that the Iranian-Israeli confrontation in the light of recent events can lead to a full-scale armed conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers insight to the impact of U.S.- Iran agreement Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on U.S. Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. Topics discussed include history of U.S.-Israel and Iran–Israel relationships; issues surrounding U.S. defense trade with Israel; and enactment of Arms Export Control Act for addressing the same.

The challenge of balancing relations with both Iran and Israel has been a growing concern for New Delhi. Due to India's rapid economic growth and increasing energy and defense needs, its ties with both Iran and Israel are essential. This article provides an overview of India's relations with each country followed by a brief history of Iranian-Israeli relations. It then discusses prospects of cooperation for India with each. It is in India's interest to reduce the conflict scenario between Iran and Israel so that it can continue to reap the benefits of cooperation from both. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Israeli political leadership has invested massively in preparing a credible preventive strike option on Iran's nuclear program. The article assesses this option in the context of Israel's operational acumen and strategic preferences. It points out to a critical gap between the capacity to achieve the operational objectives and the strategic utility of a preventive strike. It then discusses the logical fallacies underlying Israeli leaders' explanations of how this gap would be overcome, assessing the potential downsides of a strike. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bilge Strateji is the property of BILGESAM and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)