Abstract
IntroductionSome governments and organizations are preparing to exploit artificial intelligence (AI) in order to destabilize the world and benefit from numerous cyber-attacks. The rapid advancement of AI enables cybercriminals to amplify their destructive impact worldwide, as AI has the potential to ...
Read More
IntroductionSome governments and organizations are preparing to exploit artificial intelligence (AI) in order to destabilize the world and benefit from numerous cyber-attacks. The rapid advancement of AI enables cybercriminals to amplify their destructive impact worldwide, as AI has the potential to reshape and disrupt global conditions in the coming years. The primary objective of this research was to establish a comprehensive framework for critically evaluating the role of AI in facilitating unethical practices within the realm of security, both in theory and in practice. To lay the groundwork for the practical implementation of national security measures based on grounded theory requires adopting a problem-oriented perspective on terrorism, warfare, and conflict. A strategic instance of this approach is the concept of algorithmic national security which has the potential for creating and developing a new security order. This article aimed to contribute to the existing body of scientific literature, as there is currently a dearth of research in this field, thereby paving the way for future investigations. The primary objective of this research was to establish a comprehensive framework for critically evaluating the role of AI in facilitating unethical practices within the realm of security, both in theory and in practice. The present research aimed to develop a comprehensive framework for the critical evaluation of the role of AI in the unethical utilization of its functions in security matters, both in theory and in practice. In this line, the main question is: How can national security topics be problematized in light of AI hegemony and within the framework of terrorism, war, conflict, and defense?Materials and MethodsAdopting a descriptive–analytical approach, the present research relied on library research and documentary method to collect the data from various printed and electronic sources, including websites and magazines. Note-taking was used as a tool in data collection stage. In this study, AI and national security were considered as the independent and dependent variables, respectively.Results and DiscussionThe debate surrounding the use of AI and its autonomy on future battlefields has predominantly centered on the ethical implications of granting complete authority to independent and autonomous weapons, often referred to as killer robots, capable of making life or death decisions. Is it truly feasible for these systems to operate without any human intervention, or does their deployment potentially violate the principles of warfare and international humanitarian laws? Avoiding such a predicament necessitates that those involved in warfare differentiate between combatants and civilians on the battlefield, prioritizing the preservation of civilian lives and minimizing harm to them to the greatest extent possible.Proponents of this emerging technology argue that machines will eventually possess enough intelligence to distinguish themselves from humans. Conversely, opponents maintain that machines will never possess the capability to make such a fundamental distinction. They argue that machines lack the capacity to make split-second decisions in the heat of war or exhibit timely empathy. In response to these concerns, several human rights and humanitarian organizations have launched the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, aiming to establish an international ban on the development and deployment of fully automated and autonomous weapon systems. In the meantime, a highly contentious debate is unfolding within the military sphere regarding the use of AI in the command and control systems governing how senior officers convey essential orders to their subordinate soldiers. Throughout history, generals and admirals have consistently sought to enhance the reliability of command and control systems to ensure the fullest realization of their strategic objectives.Nowadays, these systems are heavily relied upon to ensure the security of radio and satellite communication systems that connect headquarters to the front lines. However, strategists are concerned that in a future hyper-warfare environment, these systems could be vulnerable to disruptions caused by jamming, which would make the speed of military operations exceed commanders’ limited ability to receive battlefield reports, process data, and issue timely orders. It is important to go beyond these concerns and consider the practical definition of the uncertain fog of war, which is further complicated by the multiplication effect of AI and the potential for failure. Many military officers see a solution to this dilemma in relinquishing the control of machines to these systems. As stated in a report by the Congressional Research Service, AI algorithms can offer more reliable tools for real-time analysis of the battlefield and enable faster decision-making, thus being able to stay updated.ConclusionWe are currently witnessing a turning point in technology. The pace of advancements in AI is surpassing even the expert predictions. These breakthroughs offer significant advantages to humanity, enabling AI systems to tackle complex issues in medicine, the environment, and other fields. However, along with progress, there are also accompanying risks. The implications of AI for national security are becoming increasingly profound with each passing year. In this article, the aim was to assess the extent of these consequences in the years ahead. The findings indicate that AI is likely to highlight several, if not all, of the most challenging aspects of transformative military technologies. It thus becomes increasingly crucial to address its implications in examining how policymakers in the realm of national security respond to this technology.Unfortunately, AI carries the potential for risks comparable to those posed by previous technologies, and in some cases, its impact could be even more devastating, owing to the rapid pace of technological advancement and the intricate relationship between government and industry in the present era. While we appreciate the increasing number of high-quality AI reports published in recent years, we acknowledge that a certain degree of conservatism has somewhat impeded comprehensive analysis. In this article, the objective was to provide an honest description of the AI revolution as truly revolutionary rather than merely different. To address this challenge effectively, governments must approach the issue with ambition, emphasizing both research and development while considering its ramifications.The advancement of AI technology in the military, information technology, cybersecurity, and economic sectors over the next decade will lead to profound transformations worldwide. These changes are occurring at a faster pace than anticipated, and undoubtedly, they will present their own set of challenges, with implications extending to various aspects, including national security. AI introduces a level of complexity in the interactions between states, industries, and individuals, necessitating the deployment of skilled experts to respond quickly and effectively to the evolving landscape shaped by this phenomenon.
Abstract
Benyamin Netanyahu has been the main figure in the Israeli political scene for the past decade. Since he has played a major role in shaping the Israeli foreign policy in the international arena, this study seeks to examine his leadership style and personality traits as an influential and at the same ...
Read More
Benyamin Netanyahu has been the main figure in the Israeli political scene for the past decade. Since he has played a major role in shaping the Israeli foreign policy in the international arena, this study seeks to examine his leadership style and personality traits as an influential and at the same time a neglected factor in the foreign policy behavior of the state of Israel. Hence, the main hypothesis is the fact that Israel’s foreign policy behavior has been more influenced by Netanyahu’s cognitive system and leadership style. The conceptual/methodological framework used in this paper is Leadership Traits Analysis (LTA) proposed by Margaret G. Hermann with a focus on the Conceptual Complexity variable in this regard. The results of this study, which itself are the quantitative content analysis of Netanyahu’s verbal material from 2009 to 2019; suggest that BIBI’s low conceptual complexity and his black and white thinking to foreign policy with high belief in ability to control events, a high desire for power, and a strong distrust to others have shaped Netanyahu’s aggressive and hawkish approach to Israeli foreign policy, which can be seen in exaggerating the Iranian threat and opposing to the idea of a Palestinian independent state.
Abstract
IntroductionFew people acknowledge that Mossadegh’s political style contributed to the loss of a historic opportunity for Iranians to establish democracy and a popular government. Many of his critics—who were ironically his former collaborators in politics and administration—argue that ...
Read More
IntroductionFew people acknowledge that Mossadegh’s political style contributed to the loss of a historic opportunity for Iranians to establish democracy and a popular government. Many of his critics—who were ironically his former collaborators in politics and administration—argue that the opportunity was lost due to Mossadegh’s approach to the oil issue and his management of domestic affairs. According to these critics, despite his libertarian rhetoric, Mossadegh did not often value the opinions of others. They claim he prioritized his public image over the practical realities of politics, which caused him to miss opportunities to resolve the oil crisis and ultimately led to the downfall of the national government. Furthermore, his critics argue that several of Mossadegh’s actions—such as dissolving parliament, holding a referendum, and even defending himself in a military court—lacked legal foundation. They contend that these actions relied more on stirring up public opinion and gaining popular support. The current study aimed to examine Mossadegh’s personality and its impact on his political decisions and relationship with the people. It tried to answer the following question: How did Mossadegh’s personality influence his macro-political decisions and his relationship with the people?Literature ReviewPersonality refers to the unique identity of individuals. The personality analysis of famous and influential figures constitutes an important area of study. The psychological examination of political leaders, however, is not a new phenomenon; it has existed for over a century. In addition to the evaluations by Freud (Jung, 1939) and Erikson of leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini, recent decades have seen growing interest in studying world political leaders, attracting attention from psychologists and researchers in political psychology (Marshall, 2014). Analyzing the personalities of political figures offers a way to explore the contradictions inherent in celebrity culture (Marshall & Barbour, 2015). The political personalities and actions of leaders are influenced by both the era in which they come to power and their mindset and attitudes toward political realities. For example, Mayer (2012) evaluated the personalities of George Bush and Saddam Hussein, while Post (2010) conducted psychological assessments of Bill Clinton and Saddam Hussein. Following the definition of persona in personality studies, some researchers have focused on the persona as the version of one’s personality presented behind their virtual or public personalities (Giles, 2020). Psychoanalytic theories proved to be useful in analyzing the personalities and actions of two Iranian kings from the Pahlavi and Qajar dynasties. For instance, Coolidge (2001) used Horney’s theory to examine how experiences in childhood, adolescence, and adulthood shaped their behavior as rulers. As an another example, Nettmann (2013) applied Jung’s concept of persona to interpret the stories of Iranian writers.Materials and MethodsThe present study used a qualitative document analysis conducted on library resources. Moreover, it relied on Karen Horney’s theory of personality, along with Jung’s model of persona, as the theoretical framework of the study.Results and DiscussionOne of Mossadegh’s notable traits was his insistence on securing majority approval for his opinions during government meetings or other gatherings, even if these opinions included flawed examples. He was willing to take bold actions, even if it meant facing criticism for not aligning with the British, all in order to maintain his image. Despite the controversy, his actions were of great significance. Many believe that, despite his democratic rhetoric, Mossadegh had an autocratic personality. This inner authoritarianism is thought to have been fueled by his aversion to criticism. Both political opponents and individuals with no political affiliation, including some of his relatives, voiced criticisms of Mossadegh and his personal actions. A key weakness of in Mossadegh’s character was his unwillingness to tolerate opposition. He was one of the most authoritarian figures of his time, and while he may have had internal authoritarian tendencies, he rarely expressed them outwardly. For example, Mossadegh’s susceptibility to illness during sensitive situations, his hysterical episodes, his tendency to wear informal clothing in certain meetings, his avoidance of official banquets, and his handling of prime ministerial affairs all point to a leader who struggled with certain personal challenges.The research findings indicate that Mossadegh does not fit neatly into the heroic image his supporters paint nor the purely villainous portrayal by his critics. Despite his valuable service in the nationalization of the oil industry, which sparked a movement for independence in the Middle East, Mossadegh struggled to shed the mask created by his own acclaim. This façade—coupled with his penchant for seeking attention and admiration (some kind of perfectionism)—hindered a true understanding of Mossadegh’s character among Iranians and led to a missed historical opportunity for democracy, culminating in the 1953 coup d'état and the fall of his government. Had Mossadegh relied on communicating facts to the people rather than maintaining his public image, he might have better sustained his government despite severe sanctions. Maintaining a certain image in the public eye sometimes led Mossadegh to take unconstitutional actions to garner support or to fulfill his popular but illegal demands. His unconventional behaviors, such as wearing pajamas in meetings, resting on his lawyer’s shoulder in court, or fainting in moments of crisis, seemed more aimed at drawing public attention and sympathy rather than pursuing justice.ConclusionMossadegh is an influential figure in modern Iranian history, revered by some of his supporters to the point of near sanctification, with his character seen as flawless and beyond criticism. However, this view is not universally held. On the other side are those, largely supporters of the Pahlavi monarchy, who strongly criticize Mossadegh’s actions and hold a negative view of his constitutionalism, which stood in opposition to the absolute rule of Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza Shah. Despite Mossadegh’s success in leading the movement to nationalize the oil industry, a major achievement in his time, his personal characteristics prevented the consolidation and continuation of this victory. While external factors, such as foreign conspiracies and the tyranny of local agents, certainly played a role in his failure, his image as a great leader also contributed significantly to the missed opportunities.
Abstract
IntroductionThe Palestine issue has held a central position in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Since its inception, the Islamic Republic of Iran has pursued a policy of non-alignment and protection of Muslims, marked by the non-recognition of the Israeli regime and the protection ...
Read More
IntroductionThe Palestine issue has held a central position in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Since its inception, the Islamic Republic of Iran has pursued a policy of non-alignment and protection of Muslims, marked by the non-recognition of the Israeli regime and the protection of Palestinian rights. This article aimed to elucidate the foreign policy perspective of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the Palestine issue, with a primary focus on formulating possible, likely, and desirable scenarios for Iran’s future foreign policy on this matter.Materials and MethodsAs an exploratory endeavor, the present research employed a qualitative research method, which consisted of two stages: an initial exploratory study involving extensive reading and subsequent interviews. The research did not involve a statistical population; instead, a community of experts comprising 21 individuals was selected through the snowball sampling method.Results and DiscussionThe interviews were conducted until reaching the saturation stage. Then, nine themes were identified through thematic analysis. The identified themes encompassed the main statements derived from the interviews. They are as follows:Prioritizing the Palestine issue and emphasizing its significance in Iran’s constitution, as well as the necessity of supporting anti-Israeli resistance according to Imam Khomeini’s perspective, as national religious duties and fundamental pillars of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran;Supporting the resistance front, fostering unity, aligning goals among resistance groups against Israeli dominance, and establishing strong ties with countries that maintain anti-Israel policies;The lack of public incentive to support Palestine attributed to distrust in domestic policymakers, divisions among Muslims, and lack of consensus and a single voice on the part of the regional superpower concerning the Palestinian cause;Potential compromises involving recognition of the Palestinian government, alongside the importance of Islamic unity and awakening;Supporting Palestine as a national project, requiring a unified stance and support from all branches of government, including political, economic, social, military, and cultural sectors, as well as academic and research institutions;Supporting the resistance front and pursuing common goals against Israeli monopolization, while fostering strong relationships with the countries opposing Israel;Advocating for international laws pertaining to Palestine, planning and overseeing referendums, and championing the right to self-determination;Highlighting Israeli vulnerabilities, dismantling the perception of Israeli invincibility, exposing the true nature of Israel, and refusing to recognize it;Restoring the lost rights of Palestinians and reclaiming control over their territories;Achieving absolute dominance in the Middle East and gaining control over its financial and economic resources as Israel’s main objective, in addition to its strategic positioning. ConclusionIn conclusion, the following strategies are recommended for Iran’s foreign policy on Palestine. First, the regional crisis indicates that the Middle East experiences the highest political and security unrest compared to other regions. This is primarily due to the conflicting security policies pursued by actors with different identities. The United States has focused its national security strategies on the Middle East. Iran should aim to create a regional and Islamic identity among the actors in order to foster constructive interaction. Each country in the Middle East has its own identity incentive to play its political role. Therefore, any regional innovations by Iran in addressing the Palestinian conflict and promoting Middle East peace should take into account making an identity model. The emergence of Islamic groups has transformed the nature of conflicts in the region, highlighting the influence of identity and ideological trends. These factors have also imposed limitations on the United States and Israel.Second, the redress of Palestinian rights is the main issue in the Middle East. Iran should play a role in establishing a strong, integrated government in Palestine as a first step towards finding an Islamic identity and reducing ongoing bloodshed in the region. Other countries must recognize the Palestinian government. Third, the increasing conflicts in Palestine keep the peace proposal to come into effect and help stablish two governments in this region. Iran’s foreign policy goal on Palestine should be to support the idea of establishing a unified Palestinian government based on the majority demands. Organized support for Palestinian fighters is necessary under these circumstances. However, if Palestinian groups reject Iran’s policy, a new wave of anti-violence policies will emerge in the region. Therefore, revolutionary movements in Palestine should be recognized internationally, especially by the Islamic world. This recognition will help protect the revolutionary identity and resistance in Palestine by preventing Israel from repressing them. Finally, Iran’s foreign policy towards Palestine relies on the support of its own people. It is crucial for Iran to maintain and protect this public support at any cost. While the current support is largely based on religious beliefs, the government should also clarify other aspects of its policy to the people. Addressing any questions or concerns that arise will help reinforce Iran’s policy on supporting the Palestinian cause. Therefore, Iran’s foreign policy on Palestine should be backed by comprehensive national support, and any compromise in this regard is tantamount to compromising Iran’s Islamic and revolutionary identity.
Abstract
Governments in water-based civilizations have been stronger than society due to organizational consolidation, and water and its consumption have caused water to play its essential role in shaping the socio-political relations of nations and human societies. Therefore, the main question of the research ...
Read More
Governments in water-based civilizations have been stronger than society due to organizational consolidation, and water and its consumption have caused water to play its essential role in shaping the socio-political relations of nations and human societies. Therefore, the main question of the research is what are the requirement of state and society interaction in Iran water governance? Findings of the research based on descriptive-analytical method show that the state in Iran due to its ability to penetrate, the ability to regulate social relations and resource allocation has made it stronger than society. Factors that strengthen the state in Iran in the field of water are: port transfer, licensing, water treatment, structural policy, pricing policy, obtaining permits for diversions, increasing population and raising living standards, agricultural and industrial growth, resolving disputes between water applicants, creating economic and socio-cultural incentives. To change water management, we need to change the behavior of state and society in the form of water governance. The strategic implication that should be considered in the interaction of the state and society in the water governance include: Sustainable Behavior Change, National Dialogue, Institutionalization and Creation Efficient and Effective Structure, holistic thinking, attention to the historical and cultural background, social learning, referential of the water governance.
)
