https://asr.ihu.ac.ir/ American Strategic Studies en daily 1 Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0330 Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0330 https://asr.ihu.ac.ir/article_210876.html Public education is regarded as one of the most important instruments for shaping and strengthening social cohesion in modern governance. Since the nineteenth century, governments, recognizing the vast capacity of this institution, have used it to create societies aligned with the values and objectives of the ruling class, reproducing their desired concepts within the framework of education. In the United States as well, public education has played a key role in realizing the “melting pot” theory and in creating cultural homogeneity among immigrants. In recent decades, however, this very instrument of convergence has itself become one of the principal sources of divergence and political conflict. Adopting a descriptive-analytical approach and using documentary and comparative methods, this study, within the theoretical framework of “education as a public good,” seeks to answer the question of how political divisions in education become a tool for the decline of internal cohesion in the United States. The findings show that the two dominant discourses in this field are, first, an individualistic and market-oriented discourse that emphasizes reducing the role of the federal government, strengthening charter schools, and expanding families’ freedom of choice; and second, an equality-oriented discourse that calls for the expansion of educational justice, free education, and support for minorities and low-income groups. As a result, education in American society has become a focal point for reflecting deep internal ideological and cultural conflicts. https://asr.ihu.ac.ir/article_210874.html Following the Citizens United and SpeechNow judicial rulings in 2010, the financial architecture of U.S. elections underwent a fundamental transformation, and “Super PACs” became the central mechanism for organizing resources outside the formal framework of parties and campaigns. Drawing on the legal and political science literature, Federal Election Commission data, and media monitoring, this article addresses the question of what consequences the emergence and strengthening of Super PACs have had for the financial, communicative, and organizational processes of electoral competition. The research hypothesis is that, by outsourcing channels of fundraising and expenditure, Super PACs have elevated financial influence from the individual and party level to a networked and self-reproducing level. The findings of this study, conducted on the basis of a descriptive-analytical approach and using documentary research, show that since 2010, outside spending has grown exponentially and has captured a significant share of electoral messaging from official campaign organizations. Financial resources have become concentrated in the hands of a minority of major donors and organized consortia, thereby influencing the legislative agenda. Negative advertising and techniques such as “redboxing” have shifted potential liabilities from candidates to outside arms. Dark money networks have deepened and weakened electoral transparency. Moreover, with the expansion of single-candidate Super PACs, many party functions have been delegated to expanded networks and “shadow parties.” The overall result of these developments is that financial influence in American politics is reproduced not episodically, but through a stable and institutionalized cycle—a cycle that raises serious questions about political equality, transparency, and the democratic quality of elections in the United States. https://asr.ihu.ac.ir/article_210871.html A military attack on the territory of a state, even when justified on the grounds of preventing serious human rights violations, may generate not only legal consequences arising from the use of force and the law of armed conflict, but also subsequent obligations for the intervening state, including the responsibility to rebuild. The withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Afghanistan after nearly two decades of presence raises the question of whether the United States’ obligations are confined solely to the rules of war, or whether, within the framework of the “responsibility to rebuild,” one may speak of an independent and attributable obligation in the post-conflict period. Adopting a descriptive-analytical approach and employing documentary research, this article examines, within the theoretical framework of the responsibility to rebuild as an extension of jus post bellum and the responsibility to protect, Security Council documents, U.S. official practice and statements, reports on the reconstruction of Afghanistan, and relevant doctrines of peacebuilding. The findings indicate that the United States, through its direct involvement in Afghanistan’s security, institutional, and economic processes, as well as through reliance on Security Council resolutions and its declared reconstruction commitments, provided the basis for attributing responsibility to rebuild. At the same time, the hasty withdrawal of 2021, the collapse of security and political structures, the return of the Taliban, and Afghanistan’s continuing economic and institutional dependency demonstrate that the measures taken in the three areas of security, the rule of law, and economic development were neither sustainable nor consistent with the standards of the responsibility to rebuild. Accordingly, the responsibility of the United States is to be assessed not in terms of guaranteeing a desired outcome, but rather in light of its failure to adopt reasonable, sustainable, and non-injurious measures in the reconstruction process. https://asr.ihu.ac.ir/article_210873.html Despite the expansion of studies on the relative decline of the economic power of the United States and the rise of emerging powers, no comprehensive assessment has yet been offered of the simultaneous role of the BRICS coalition and the leading economies of North Africa in altering the balance of international economic power. This article examines the active role of the BRICS member states and the key economies of North Africa (Algeria, Egypt, and Morocco) in shaping the emergence of a new global economic order. Accordingly, the main question is whether this coalition possesses the necessary capacity to effectively reconfigure the global balance of power and reduce the international system’s financial dependence on the United States. Relying on the theoretical framework of structural power and the hegemonic transition approach, and through the analysis of statistical data from institutions such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organization, the article depicts the occurrence of a major shift in the balance of power. Based on this research, which has been conducted through documentary study and a descriptive-analytical approach, the share of the United States in global production has declined over six decades from approximately 40 percent to 27 percent, while the combined share of BRICS and North Africa has increased from 17 percent to more than 31 percent. Cases such as Egypt, Algeria, and Morocco, drawing on their energy resources, geopolitical position, and strategic relations with China, India, and Russia, are becoming regional poles of economic power. As a result, the future global economy will be built not on the hegemony of single states, but on the collective synergy of emerging markets, in which the BRICS–North Africa axis will play a facilitating and pivotal role. https://asr.ihu.ac.ir/article_210872.html Chaos and disorder, alongside ambiguity and complexity, have become an inseparable part of the equations of the West Asian region. This condition persists not only in times of war, but also under circumstances of peace and ceasefire. The present study seeks to analyze and examine how the strategy of peace through strength has been applied in the strategic doctrine of Trump and Netanyahu in West Asia. In this regard, the main question is: how has the strategy of peace through strength in the strategic doctrine of Trump and Netanyahu manifested itself in the equations of the West Asian region, from the Gaza war to the Ramadan war? Drawing on the propositions of realist theory and employing a descriptive-analytical approach, the article attempts to provide an appropriate framework for understanding how this strategy has been implemented. The findings of the article show that the predominance of realism in the governing thought and state approach prevailing in the United States and the Zionist regime has constituted the foundation of strategic thinking in the domains of war and peace. In this context, war and peace, within the shared Trump-Netanyahu approach, have been transformed into violent/peaceful instruments for change in the existing order of West Asia. Through the intelligent combination of stick-and-carrot tools, the necessary grounds are prepared for laying the foundations of the order desired by the United States and the Zionist regime in the West Asian region. These developments have been manifested in the Trump-Netanyahu strategic coordination centered on scenarios of imposed peace (from a position of strength). It is argued that through the strategy of peace from a position of strength, the long-standing issues and problems of the West Asian region—from the Arab–Zionist regime conflict to the Iran file and the axis of resistance —are to be managed and resolved within the framework of a new initiative. The method of the present article is documentary research, and the required data have been collected through library research and consultation of written and electronic sources. https://asr.ihu.ac.ir/article_210875.html The war between Iran and the Zionist regime, as two key actors in West Asia, has become one of the major geopolitical challenges in the regional order. The United States, as the dominant power in the international system and the strategic ally of the Zionist regime, has played a decisive role in shaping the trajectories and outcomes of this conflict, thereby making it all the more necessary to reassess the role of the United States as an extra-regional interventionist actor. Relying on the theoretical framework of offensive realism and the analysis of security discourse, this study examines U.S. foreign policy toward the 12-day war of the Zionist regime against Iran. The main question is what the objectives, dimensions, and consequences of U.S. involvement in this conflict are, and how the foreign policy of this country has been adjusted in line with the balance of power and the control of perceived threats. The research method is documentary study based on a descriptive-analytical approach, and the data have been collected from official documents, analytical reports of think tanks, reputable media outlets, and political statements. The findings show that U.S. policy has consisted of a combination of unconditional support for the Zionist regime, efforts to contain Iran regionally, and the use of military, intelligence, and diplomatic instruments to preserve the desired order in the West Asian region. This war has had not only geopolitical dimensions, but also extensive discursive and psychological layers that will confront the future of the regional order with serious challenges.