National Security Policymaking

Document Type : Research Paper




The circumstances governing the international system and global power structure are indicative of the spread of insecurity and crisis at varying local to international scales. As much as the development of pervasive and far-reaching crises has created challenges for the international security systems and requires the need for rearrangement of and transition from security ambiguities, it has similarly added to the importance of adopting efficient strategies and updating the national security policymaking structure of countries. “Erosion” as an ancient and efficient strategy adopted by different countries during wars, crisis control, and change in power balance is rooted in history, and has been used by weak or strong sides of various conflicts as a strategic initiative while incorporating efficient and economical mechanisms. Despite the wide applications of this strategy in national security policymaking, there is no formulated theoretical framework outlining its deep knowledge and effective use at the strategic, operational and tactical levels. The existing literature on erosion is of historical and descriptive nature and does not embody a theoretical framework. For this reason, the present study aims to provide a theoretical framework for the strategy of erosion in national security policymaking through review of theoretical literature and tapping scientific knowledge available in the fields of strategic management and strategic policymaking as well as scientific and historical information on the erosion strategy. The present study was carried out with a qualitative approach and by utilizing an analytical-descriptive method. Information was gathered on a library basis, and a deep qualitative analysis method was adopted for information analysis.


  1. الف) فارسی

    1. اسماعیلی، محسن؛ بالایی، حمید (۱۳۹۲). «الگوی راهبردی تأمین امنیت ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در قوانین برنامۀ توسعۀ اقتصادی، سیاسی، فرهنگی»، فصلنامۀ پژوهشهای راهبردی سیاست، دورۀ 2، ش5، تابستان، ص 75-43.
    2. الوانی، سید مهدی؛ شریف‌زاده، فتاح (1394). فرایند خطمشیگذاری عمومی، انتشارات دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی.
    3. الوانی، سید مهدی (1396). تصمیمگیری و تعیین خطمشی دولتی، تهران: سمت (ویراست دوم).
    4. دوویت، باب؛ می‌یر، وران (1396). استراتژی: فرایند، محتوا، زمینه؛ نگرش بینالمللی، ترجمۀ ناصر پورصادق و اصغر جهانگیر، تهران: انتشارات واژگان.
    5. رضوی‌نژاد، سید امین (1398). «طراحی مدل راهبردی سیاست‌گذاری امنیت داخلی جمهوری اسلامی ایران»، فصلنامۀ مجلس و راهبرد، دورۀ 26 ، ش 97، ص 444- 409 .
    6. چهاردولی، عباس؛ قاسمی بنابری، حمیدرضا (1398). مبانی و اصول سیاست‌گذاری با رویکرد تطبیقی (اسلام و غرب)، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه و پژوهشگاه عالی دفاع ملی و تحقیقات راهبردی.
    7. غرایاق‌زندی، داود (1390). درآمدی بر سیاستگذاری امنیت ملی، تهران: پژوهشکدۀ مطالعات راهبردی.
    8. مبینی دهکردی، علی؛ سلمانپور خوئی، مجید (1385). «درآمدی بر برنامه‌ریزی استراتژیک و عملیاتی»، راهبرد توسعه، ش 6، ص 202-187.
    9. مصلی‌نژاد، عباس؛ صمدی، علی (1397). «سیاست‌گذاری راهبردی عربستان در روند گسترش ژئوپلیتیک بحران خاورمیانه»، فصلنامۀ سیاست، 48(1)، ص 219-197.

    ب) خارجی


    1. Ayoob, Mohammed (1995). The Third World Security Predicament, Boulder, CO: Lynne Reiner.
    2. Barnett, Michael (2006). “Building a republican peace”, International Security, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 57-112.
    3. Barkawi, Tarak & Mark Laffey (2006). “The post-Colonia moment in security studies”, Review of International Studies, Vol. 32, No 2, pp. 329-352.
    4. Baldwin, D. A (2014). “Power Analysis and World Politics: New Trends Versus old Tendencies”, World Politics, Vol. 31, No. 2.
    5. Bilgin, Pinar (2019). Regional Security in the Middle East: A Critical Perspective, New York: Rutledge.
    6. Blainey, G (2015). The Causes of War, New York: Free Press.
    7. Booth, Ken (2005). “Critical explorations in Ken Booth” ed., “Critical Security Studies and World Politics”, Boulder, CO: Lynne Reiner, pp.1-25.
    8. Bialasiewicz, Luiza, David Campbell, Stuart Elden, Stephen Graham, Alex Jeffrey and Alison J. Williams (2007). “Performing security: the imaginative geographies of current US Strategy”, Political Geography, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 405-422.
    9. Dahl, R (2008). “The Concept of Power”, Journal of Politics, Vol. 15, No. 4.
    10. Delbruck, H (2016). The History of the Art of War within the Framework of Political History in The Modern Era, Westport, CT: Greenwood.
    11. Clausewitz, Carl Von (2017). On War, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    12. David, Fred (2015). Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases, Global Edition, Pearson Education Limited; 15th Student Manual/Study Guide edition
    13. Freedman, L (2011). “The Changing Forms of Conflict”, Survival, 40, 4 winter.
    14. Huntington, Samuel, (1957). The Soldier and State, New York: vintage.
    15. Hart, L (2016). Strategy, London: Faber & Faber.
    16. Hart, L (2010). Thought of War, London: Faber & Faber.
    17. Kimery, A. (2014). “Inviting the Electronical Pearl Harbor”, Military Information Technology, Vol. 2, No. 4.
    18. Klein, Y, (2015). “A Theory of Strategic Culture”, Comparative Strategy, Vol. 10, No. 1. January- March.
    19. Mack, Andrew, (2013). Global Politics Violence, New York: Crisis working paper.
    20. Maoz, Z (2012). “Power, Capabilities, and Paradoxical Conflict Outcomes”, World Politics, Vol. 41.
    21. Mossalanejad, A. (2019). US Comparative Policy toward Iran and the Middle East Security. Geopolitics Quarterly, 14(52), 1-20. Weierter, Stuart (2019). Executing Truth: Public Policy and the Threat of Social Science, London: by Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
    22. Ritter, G. Fredrick (2015). A Historical Profile, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    23. Sivard R. L. (2014). World Military and Social Expenditures, Washington, DC: World Priorities.
    24. Paul, T. V (1994). Asymmetric Conflicts: War Initiation by Weaker Powers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    25. Susan E (2013). Strednansky, Balancing the Trinity: The Fine Art of Conflict Termination, Maxwell: School of Advanced Airpower Studies, Air University Press.