العلاقات الدولية المتعالية

This research aims to explain the agents, structure, objectives, and ultimate end
of transcendent international relations. To this end, at the meta-theoretical level, the epistemological, ontological, and anthropological foundations are addressed. The main question is: What are the characteristics of transcendent international relations at the meta-theoretical level? The findings indicate that in transcendent international relations, dynamism governs international interactions; evolution is inherent to its essence, and it is oriented toward an ultimate end. Rules, laws, and traditions govern it, demonstrating that human beings, states, and other international entities, while possessing free will, also bear responsibility and are accountable for their policies and actions. In explaining the agents of international relations, given the principles related to the study of
human nature, it was determined that, in terms of the four human faculties—the
rational (ʿāqila), the irascible (ghaḍabiyya), the estimative (wāhima), and the bestial (bahīmiyya)—eight types of human beings can be identified, and consequently eight types of agents in international relations. Each type produces a particular form of international relations through its actions. Among them, the type of agency in which
the rational faculty predominates has the effective capacity to transform existing international relations toward transcendent or desirable international relations. Regarding the structure of international relations at global, regional, and national levels, two structures were discussed: the virtuous (fāḍila) and the non-virtuous. In the structure of virtuous international relations, its nature is just, flexible, adaptive and guiding, cultural, oriented toward transcendence, progressive, peace-seeking, and invitational. The process of this structure is based on changing the status quo, transformation, and evolution. In the objectives and ultimate end of transcendent international relations,
the importance of power and its acquisition as one of the objectives was addressed. However, attaining power is not permissible by any means, and the goal of acquiring power is not domination or superiority-seeking; rather, power derives its meaning and significance in the service of realizing transcendent objectives. The development of ethics and divine-human values, and the establishment of justice in relations among countries, are considered other objectives. The ultimate end of international relations
is oriented toward perfection, and its future horizon is bright and transcendent, encompassing the attainment of human societies to divine proximity (qurb ilāhī). The final finding is that, in order to achieve sustainable peace, effective structures and institutions, the elimination of discrimination and oppression, the establishment of justice and equality, the realization of the rights of nations, and the formation of a desirable international society, it is necessary to move beyond conventional and base international relations and attain transcendent international relations. The agents, structures, objectives, and transcendent ultimate end possess the necessary capacity and power to realize transcendent international relations. Methodologically, by selecting the macro level of analysis—both material and spiritual—and adopting a theological approach with a descriptive-analytical method, each of the characteristics of transcendent international relations is explained. International relations, as an independent academic discipline, possesses its own specific subject matter, set of issues, methodology, objectives, and theorists. Each of the existing theories, within the
main currents of realism, liberalism, and communism, has its own ontological, epistemological, anthropological, and methodological foundations. Commitment to these foundations leads to the formation and production of knowledge and the construction of theory specific to it. A review of the history of theorizing in international relations shows that studies in this field have largely been influenced by materialist meta-theory and a positivist approach. This has caused international relations theories to address only one dimension of international relations, whereas broader dimensions can be conceived that go beyond the material. In transcendent international relations, not only are the material and worldly dimensions of human life in the global society considered, but—with attention to the existential purposes of humanity and the philosophy of creation—all dimensions of international relations, including material, spiritual, and otherworldly, are taken into account. What is certain is that any change or transformation in meta-theory and epistemological sources will bring about extensive effects and consequences in theory production. Transcendent international relations does not rest content with this level of explanation; rather, by choosing the macro level of analysis—material, spiritual, and eschatological—it presents a new narrative and explanation that encompasses everything from the macro level to the micro level and the action programs of states.