Reza mousazade; mahmood ganjbakhsh
Abstract
The way governments deal with the claims of victims of terrorist incidents is one of the most important political issues of the day. Since the Canadian government claims that it fights terrorism the political strategies that govern this government are important in responding to the survivors of the terrorist ...
Read More
The way governments deal with the claims of victims of terrorist incidents is one of the most important political issues of the day. Since the Canadian government claims that it fights terrorism the political strategies that govern this government are important in responding to the survivors of the terrorist events. By accusing the Iranian government, it has done its most important action against one of the victims of terrorism. By using the theory of Barry Buzan in analyzing this action of the Canadian State the findings of this paper show that Canada by utilizing some policies like a particular definition of international terrorism advocating state and regarding Iran as one the biggest countries which advocate terrorism, giving up the diplomatic relation with Iran, repudiating the immunity of Iran’s properties and their seizure in the interests of victims of terrorist attacks in occupies lands is a way of cooperating with the US and Israel. According to Buzan theory about security dilemma and the complexities and contradictions inherent in political choices about that the operation of Canada about the Iranian government's immunity in international law is not defensible. In this article we are looking for answers to this question that "What are the political fields of Canada’s action against Iran?" This review is based on Barry Buzan's theory and was conducted by using descriptive analytical method.
