چکیده:
This article is an attempt to understand the place of the concept of dialogue of civilizations in the theory of international relations. Among the theories of international relations, constructivism has been chosen as one of the suitable theoretical platforms for absorbing this concept, because this theory emphasizes the ontological dimensions of international relations, the constructed nature of international reality, and the transformability of international relations. It also emphasizes this transformability and opens the way for raising ethical, normative, and value-based issues that this concept emphasizes. Based on this, the role of dialogue of civilizations is examined in light of the theoretical and meta-theoretical achievements and discussions of this theory, and it will be shown that in addition to the fact that this theory can pave the way for clarifying the importance and place of the concept of dialogue of civilizations, this concept itself is a serious supporter and complement to many of the most important topics of concern to constructivism. In this article, after a brief look at the concept of dialogue of civilizations and its importance in international relations, the foundations and main axes of constructivism are examined, and then the relationship between dialogue of civilizations and these foundations will be discussed.
خلاصه ماشینی:
This theory, rooted in social theory and meta-theoretical discussions in the entire social sciences, with its emphasis on the constructed nature of international relations, the importance of rules, procedures, and institutions in shaping the identities of actors, and the importance of identity in shaping interests and policies, on the one hand opens the way to explain similarities and continuities in international politics and the foreign policy of countries, and on the other hand, potentially with its emphasis on the historical and constructed nature of the international system and the identity of actors, opens the way for theorizing about change and striving to find alternative interactions and relationships and, consequently, alternative systems at the international level based on changes in characteristics such as violence, self-centeredness, security-seeking, and...
Although constructivists, like the mainstream theory in International Relations, emphasize state actors (among constructivists, Alexander Wendt explicitly places this understanding at the heart of constructivist claims), (1994,tdneW), it does not necessarily theoretically close the way for considering individuals, groups, non-governmental organizations, international organizations, etc.
If we consider international institutions, based on a systemic constructivist perspective (macro level), as embodiments of shared causal and prescriptive meanings and arenas for dialogue where norms are applied, interpreted and changed, the institutionalization of civilizational dialogue, whether through the participation of governments belonging to different civilizations and cultures or through the participation of non-state actors with civilizational identities, can be a source of change in relations between civilizations and their governments.
(
, 
, 
)
