Association of West Asian StudiesQuarterly Journal of West Asian Studies
(Faṣlnāmah-i Gharb-i Asiyā)2981-24293420251222Mechanisms of Evangelical Influence on US Foreign Policy Towards Israel: The Trump Era(2016-2020)Mechanisms of Evangelical Influence on US Foreign Policy Towards Israel: The Trump Era(2016-2020)73024739610.22034/wasj.2026.582853.1137FARezaMasoumi GoodarziAllameh Tabatabaei University - Faculty of Law and Political Science - Department of International Relations0009-0009-8720-0817Seyyed MohammadTabatabaeiAllameh Tabatabaei University, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Department of International RelationsJournal Article20250916US foreign policy towards Israel, especially during the presidency of Donald Trump (2016–2020), has often been analyzed solely based on geopolitical considerations or the role of traditional lobbies, with less attention paid to the identity, discursive, and institutional mechanisms of the Christian evangelical movement. The aim of this research is to explain the mechanisms through which American evangelicals have influenced the Trump administration’s foreign policy towards Israel. The main question of the research is what mechanisms have American evangelicals used to influence US foreign policy towards Israel during the Trump presidency? The research hypothesis is based on the fact that evangelicals have influenced the direction of this policy through discursive, institutional, and network mechanisms, although this influence occurred in a complex interaction with other political and strategic variables and cannot be considered the exclusive cause of decisions. This qualitative research was conducted with an explanatory-analytical approach and a case study strategy, and the data were collected through library and documentary methods (official documents, speeches of officials, think tank reports, and opinion poll data) and examined through qualitative and comparative content analysis. The theoretical framework of the research is a combination of structuralist theory and the institutional influence model, which allows for a balanced examination of identity-discourse variables alongside structural channels of influence. The research findings show that decisions such as moving the embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing the Golan Heights, and supporting settlements cannot be explained solely by geopolitical calculations, but rather these decisions make sense in the context of the overlap of religious-identity worldviews with institutional and network structures. The influence of evangelicals is the result of the synergy of three discursive, institutional, and network mechanisms that have transformed religion from a cultural element into an influential factor in American foreign policy.US foreign policy towards Israel, especially during the presidency of Donald Trump (2016–2020), has often been analyzed solely based on geopolitical considerations or the role of traditional lobbies, with less attention paid to the identity, discursive, and institutional mechanisms of the Christian evangelical movement. The aim of this research is to explain the mechanisms through which American evangelicals have influenced the Trump administration’s foreign policy towards Israel. The main question of the research is what mechanisms have American evangelicals used to influence US foreign policy towards Israel during the Trump presidency? The research hypothesis is based on the fact that evangelicals have influenced the direction of this policy through discursive, institutional, and network mechanisms, although this influence occurred in a complex interaction with other political and strategic variables and cannot be considered the exclusive cause of decisions. This qualitative research was conducted with an explanatory-analytical approach and a case study strategy, and the data were collected through library and documentary methods (official documents, speeches of officials, think tank reports, and opinion poll data) and examined through qualitative and comparative content analysis. The theoretical framework of the research is a combination of structuralist theory and the institutional influence model, which allows for a balanced examination of identity-discourse variables alongside structural channels of influence. The research findings show that decisions such as moving the embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing the Golan Heights, and supporting settlements cannot be explained solely by geopolitical calculations, but rather these decisions make sense in the context of the overlap of religious-identity worldviews with institutional and network structures. The influence of evangelicals is the result of the synergy of three discursive, institutional, and network mechanisms that have transformed religion from a cultural element into an influential factor in American foreign policy.https://www.wasj.ir/article_247396_89d590df89e99a0e503c6ff81f11b22a.pdfAssociation of West Asian StudiesQuarterly Journal of West Asian Studies
(Faṣlnāmah-i Gharb-i Asiyā)2981-24293420251222Analyzing the Intersection of Security and Political Development in Palestine: A Structural Analysis of Gaza and the West Bank Prior to the October 2023 WarAnalyzing the Intersection of Security and Political Development in Palestine: A Structural Analysis of Gaza and the West Bank Prior to the October 2023 War314824845210.22034/wasj.2026.584118.1140FAMohammadhadiSeydiMaster’s student in International Relations, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.0009-0003-5674-3671FarzadRostamiAssociate Professor and faculty member of the Department of Political Science and International Relations, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.0000-0002-1543-9409Journal Article20250605This research aims to analyze the reciprocal links between sustainable security and political development in Palestine and to explain its role in the stability of the Middle East. The central problem of the study is based on the question of how the systematic policies of the Zionist regime, in the continuation of the occupation and the structural interventions of global powers, have influenced the horizons of political institutionalization and comprehensive security in the region. The study is grounded in a theoretical framework that integrates the approaches of 'Critical Security' and 'Structural De-development' to examine the effects of dominant structures on political development through the analysis of power relations and the reproduction of inequalities. The research methodology is descriptive-analytical, utilizing specialized texts and strategic documents. Within this framework, the aggressive and occupational policies of Israel were measured as the independent variable, while political development and sustainable security served as the dependent variables. The findings indicate that the occupying regime has caused institutional rigidity and the weakening of civil society through the imposition of political restrictions, control over resources, and the engineering of external dependencies. Furthermore, it was found that systematic obstacles in accessing resources and geographical displacements have paralyzed political participation at the infrastructural level. The results imply that the prospect of sustainable security in Palestine depends on a paradigm shift from state-centric security to human-centric security. Finally, this study concludes that while strengthening civil actions is a necessary step, the sustainability of these transformations requires an end to the occupation and a shift in international support structures for the Zionist regime; for, without the removal of the primary deterrent—Israel's security policies—any political development will remain in a state of suspension and instability due to the interference of external factors and direct pressures from the regime.This research aims to analyze the reciprocal links between sustainable security and political development in Palestine and to explain its role in the stability of the Middle East. The central problem of the study is based on the question of how the systematic policies of the Zionist regime, in the continuation of the occupation and the structural interventions of global powers, have influenced the horizons of political institutionalization and comprehensive security in the region. The study is grounded in a theoretical framework that integrates the approaches of 'Critical Security' and 'Structural De-development' to examine the effects of dominant structures on political development through the analysis of power relations and the reproduction of inequalities. The research methodology is descriptive-analytical, utilizing specialized texts and strategic documents. Within this framework, the aggressive and occupational policies of Israel were measured as the independent variable, while political development and sustainable security served as the dependent variables. The findings indicate that the occupying regime has caused institutional rigidity and the weakening of civil society through the imposition of political restrictions, control over resources, and the engineering of external dependencies. Furthermore, it was found that systematic obstacles in accessing resources and geographical displacements have paralyzed political participation at the infrastructural level. The results imply that the prospect of sustainable security in Palestine depends on a paradigm shift from state-centric security to human-centric security. Finally, this study concludes that while strengthening civil actions is a necessary step, the sustainability of these transformations requires an end to the occupation and a shift in international support structures for the Zionist regime; for, without the removal of the primary deterrent—Israel's security policies—any political development will remain in a state of suspension and instability due to the interference of external factors and direct pressures from the regime.https://www.wasj.ir/article_248452_c4e65a9a59a73b44ff12147ae8b560a0.pdfAssociation of West Asian StudiesQuarterly Journal of West Asian Studies
(Faṣlnāmah-i Gharb-i Asiyā)2981-24293420251222The Role of China, Russia, and India in the Transition to aMultipolar financial Order in West Asia: An Analysis Based on Gilpin's Theory of International Order TransformationThe Role of China, Russia, and India in the Transition to aMultipolar financial Order in West Asia: An Analysis Based on Gilpin's Theory of International Order Transformation496824845310.22034/wasj.2026.586658.1142FANargesAksaPh.D student in Political Sociology, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran0009-0003-5867-653XRahmanHaririAssistant Professor, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.Journal Article20250605In the past few decades, the hegemony of the dollar has been recognized as a fundamental pillar of the international financial system. However, geopolitical shifts, widespread financial sanctions, and the rise of emerging economic powers have gradually eroded this dominance. Western Asia, due to its geostrategic location and central role in global energy supply, is one of the main arenas of these changes. This study, by employing the approach of international political economy and the theory of financial multipolarity, examines the transition from dollar dominance to the emergence of parallel payment systems in Western Asia. The question posed in this research is how eastern players challenge the dollar's dominance through the development of alternative financial tools. In response, it is hypothesized that the growth of alternative payment networks and regional financial institutions will lead to a decline in the dollar's dominance and strengthen financial multipolarity. This research employs a descriptive-analytical approach, and the findings indicate that parallel financial institutions, by enhancing the financial autonomy of the regional countries and reducing their vulnerability to dollar-based pressures, have paved the way for a transition toward financial multipolarity.In the past few decades, the hegemony of the dollar has been recognized as a fundamental pillar of the international financial system. However, geopolitical shifts, widespread financial sanctions, and the rise of emerging economic powers have gradually eroded this dominance. Western Asia, due to its geostrategic location and central role in global energy supply, is one of the main arenas of these changes. This study, by employing the approach of international political economy and the theory of financial multipolarity, examines the transition from dollar dominance to the emergence of parallel payment systems in Western Asia. The question posed in this research is how eastern players challenge the dollar's dominance through the development of alternative financial tools. In response, it is hypothesized that the growth of alternative payment networks and regional financial institutions will lead to a decline in the dollar's dominance and strengthen financial multipolarity. This research employs a descriptive-analytical approach, and the findings indicate that parallel financial institutions, by enhancing the financial autonomy of the regional countries and reducing their vulnerability to dollar-based pressures, have paved the way for a transition toward financial multipolarity.https://www.wasj.ir/article_248453_225132c33b661c7f028bd8335ed8c651.pdfAssociation of West Asian StudiesQuarterly Journal of West Asian Studies
(Faṣlnāmah-i Gharb-i Asiyā)2981-24293420251222Netanyahu's personality modeling with emphasis on personal objectives of regional militancy To the promised political and religious promises of Zionism.Netanyahu's personality modeling with emphasis on personal objectives of regional militancy To the promised political and religious promises of Zionism.698525127710.22034/wasj.2026.591200.1146FASeyed Mohammad RezaMousavifardFaculty member, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Semnan Branch, .Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran0000-0001-8735-9363HamidLohrasbiIndependent Legal Researcher, Shahriar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahriar, .IranSeyed HesamoddinRafiee TabatabaeiDepartment of Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Islamic Azad University, .Karaj Branch, Karaj, Iran0000-0003-0339-1775Journal Article20250909The political behavior of Middle Eastern leaders, particularly over the last two decades, has increasingly been analyzed through political and criminal psychology. This study models Benjamin Netanyahu’s personality, focusing on his personal militant objectives and their connection to Zionist political-religious promises. The central question examines how Netanyahu’s traits—political narcissism, suspicion, and crisis-creation—have shaped expansionist behavior and regional crisis management. The hypothesis posits that these traits have directly escalated conflict in Gaza and the West Bank by fostering aggression and rejecting peaceful solutions, thereby creating a vicious cycle where the leader’s political survival depends on sustained foreign crises.Using qualitative descriptive document analysis, data were gathered from scientific texts, reports, lectures, interviews, and political documents. Findings reveal that political narcissism, organized suspicion, and crisis-creation, combined with identity discourses like "Greater Israel" and the "Deal of the Century," have reproduced conflict, weakened regulatory institutions, and perpetuated occupation. While justified within Zionist ideology, Netanyahu’s expansionist policies have served dual purposes: securing regime interests while functioning as a tool for political survival, judicial immunity, and consolidating personal power. The study suggests interdisciplinary models for analyzing regional conflicts and recommends that foreign policy theorists integrate crisis-creation as a strategy for leader survival into analytical frameworks.The political behavior of Middle Eastern leaders, particularly over the last two decades, has increasingly been analyzed through political and criminal psychology. This study models Benjamin Netanyahu’s personality, focusing on his personal militant objectives and their connection to Zionist political-religious promises. The central question examines how Netanyahu’s traits—political narcissism, suspicion, and crisis-creation—have shaped expansionist behavior and regional crisis management. The hypothesis posits that these traits have directly escalated conflict in Gaza and the West Bank by fostering aggression and rejecting peaceful solutions, thereby creating a vicious cycle where the leader’s political survival depends on sustained foreign crises.Using qualitative descriptive document analysis, data were gathered from scientific texts, reports, lectures, interviews, and political documents. Findings reveal that political narcissism, organized suspicion, and crisis-creation, combined with identity discourses like "Greater Israel" and the "Deal of the Century," have reproduced conflict, weakened regulatory institutions, and perpetuated occupation. While justified within Zionist ideology, Netanyahu’s expansionist policies have served dual purposes: securing regime interests while functioning as a tool for political survival, judicial immunity, and consolidating personal power. The study suggests interdisciplinary models for analyzing regional conflicts and recommends that foreign policy theorists integrate crisis-creation as a strategy for leader survival into analytical frameworks.https://www.wasj.ir/article_251277_13f10ba306a19ce7bec2f3cae507b698.pdfAssociation of West Asian StudiesQuarterly Journal of West Asian Studies
(Faṣlnāmah-i Gharb-i Asiyā)2981-24293420251222Reconfiguring Legitimacy in the Transitional Global Order: Turkey and the Discourse of 'The world is bigger than five'Reconfiguring Legitimacy in the Transitional Global Order: Turkey and the Discourse of 'The world is bigger than five'8610425180710.22034/wasj.2026.589555.1143FAIsmailBaniadamFaculty of Political Science and International Relations, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.0000-0002-6148-9204MalekZolgadrFaculty of Political Science and International Relations, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.Journal Article20251015The slogan "A World Larger than Five," frequently used in Turkish political discourse, operates beyond mere verbal criticism of the UN Security Council, offering a multi-layered narrative about global governance, legitimacy, and the distribution of power. This research aims to analyze the discursive and geopolitical meanings of this slogan and examine its role in Turkish foreign policy. The study employs a qualitative approach utilizing interpretive discourse analysis. The theoretical framework is built upon a combination of International Relations theories, including constructivism, semiotics and Laclau and Mouffe discourse. Research data were extracted from political texts, official speeches, and theoretical literature pertaining to global governance and Turkish foreign policy, and were analytically interpreted. The findings indicate that the slogan "A World Larger Than Five" operates simultaneously on multiple levels: first, as a symbolic critique of the concentration of power in the Security Council; second, as a discursive instrument for Turkey's geopolitical positioning as a middle power; and third, as a communicative mechanism to garner support from Global South countries for the reform of international institutions. In conclusion, this slogan can be regarded as a form of strategic discourse through which Turkey seeks both to challenge the legitimacy of existing global governance structures and to redefine its diplomatic and identity status within the transitioning international order. This article, by presenting a three-level model and integrating three theoretical frameworks, goes beyond previous research to demonstrate that the main function of the slogan in question lies not in its superficial content, but in its discursive structure and the process of others. In this way, it has become a tool for redefining Turkey's strategic identity within the emerging global orderThe slogan "A World Larger than Five," frequently used in Turkish political discourse, operates beyond mere verbal criticism of the UN Security Council, offering a multi-layered narrative about global governance, legitimacy, and the distribution of power. This research aims to analyze the discursive and geopolitical meanings of this slogan and examine its role in Turkish foreign policy. The study employs a qualitative approach utilizing interpretive discourse analysis. The theoretical framework is built upon a combination of International Relations theories, including constructivism, semiotics and Laclau and Mouffe discourse. Research data were extracted from political texts, official speeches, and theoretical literature pertaining to global governance and Turkish foreign policy, and were analytically interpreted. The findings indicate that the slogan "A World Larger Than Five" operates simultaneously on multiple levels: first, as a symbolic critique of the concentration of power in the Security Council; second, as a discursive instrument for Turkey's geopolitical positioning as a middle power; and third, as a communicative mechanism to garner support from Global South countries for the reform of international institutions. In conclusion, this slogan can be regarded as a form of strategic discourse through which Turkey seeks both to challenge the legitimacy of existing global governance structures and to redefine its diplomatic and identity status within the transitioning international order. This article, by presenting a three-level model and integrating three theoretical frameworks, goes beyond previous research to demonstrate that the main function of the slogan in question lies not in its superficial content, but in its discursive structure and the process of others. In this way, it has become a tool for redefining Turkey's strategic identity within the emerging global orderhttps://www.wasj.ir/article_251807_25e439c1f25c13b6aa383661c04b7fd7.pdfAssociation of West Asian StudiesQuarterly Journal of West Asian Studies
(Faṣlnāmah-i Gharb-i Asiyā)2981-24293420251222Inclusive foreign policy; a gendered perspective on Israel’s foreign policyInclusive foreign policy; a gendered perspective on Israel’s foreign policy10512325127810.22034/wasj.2026.589577.1144FAEhsanEjaziCentre of Iran Informatics, University of Applied Science and
Technology, Tehran, Iran0000-0003-3686-1913Journal Article20250927Among different social groups, women may be one of the most important groups that have so far played a relatively limited role in the foreign policy processes of states. Israel is no exception. Given this issue and Israel’s war-oriented policies, the main research question is: To what extent can the presence and participation of women in Israel’s foreign policy decision-making process prevent or constrain Israel’s military policies in the West Asian region? The hypothesis suggests that the increasing presence of women in the Knesset, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and National Security Council has not prevented Israel from pursuing realistic, militaristic, and expansionist policies in the region. Rather, statements by female members of the Knesset and policy proposals advanced by Israeli women politicians indicate that they support the use of military force and expansionist policies to a degree comparable to, and perhaps even greater than, their male counterparts. The findings demonstrate that although the number of women holding political positions in Israel has increased over recent decades, and women have attained significant positions in the Knesset, cabinet, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and certain security institutions, their presence in decision-making bodies has not necessarily resulted in peaceful policies or reduced reliance on military power. Some Israeli women politicians have supported extensive military actions against Palestinians and other state and non-state actors in West Asia, including Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Furthermore, a distinction must be made between women’s presence, participation, and influence within foreign policy institutions. Women may be represented in decision-making bodies and participate in decision-making processes while lacking the capacity to alter the foreign policy agenda. Employing a qualitative methodology and a descriptive-analytical approach, this study systematically examines women’s roles in the Knesset, government, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and National Security Council of Israel through documentary and library research.Among different social groups, women may be one of the most important groups that have so far played a relatively limited role in the foreign policy processes of states. Israel is no exception. Given this issue and Israel’s war-oriented policies, the main research question is: To what extent can the presence and participation of women in Israel’s foreign policy decision-making process prevent or constrain Israel’s military policies in the West Asian region? The hypothesis suggests that the increasing presence of women in the Knesset, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and National Security Council has not prevented Israel from pursuing realistic, militaristic, and expansionist policies in the region. Rather, statements by female members of the Knesset and policy proposals advanced by Israeli women politicians indicate that they support the use of military force and expansionist policies to a degree comparable to, and perhaps even greater than, their male counterparts. The findings demonstrate that although the number of women holding political positions in Israel has increased over recent decades, and women have attained significant positions in the Knesset, cabinet, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and certain security institutions, their presence in decision-making bodies has not necessarily resulted in peaceful policies or reduced reliance on military power. Some Israeli women politicians have supported extensive military actions against Palestinians and other state and non-state actors in West Asia, including Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Furthermore, a distinction must be made between women’s presence, participation, and influence within foreign policy institutions. Women may be represented in decision-making bodies and participate in decision-making processes while lacking the capacity to alter the foreign policy agenda. Employing a qualitative methodology and a descriptive-analytical approach, this study systematically examines women’s roles in the Knesset, government, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and National Security Council of Israel through documentary and library research.https://www.wasj.ir/article_251278_b4ed0cd0900d07c66bada00f3d45489e.pdf