دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 The Role of Political Culture in Political Participation: (A Case Study of Veterans, Released War Prisoners, and Martyrs’ Families in Tehran) نقش فرهنگ سیاسی در مشارکت سیاسی (مطالعة موردی: آزادگان، جانبازان و خانواده‌های شاهد و ایثارگر در شهر تهران) 344 309 102572 10.22059/jpq.2025.396453.1008374 FA سید رحیم ابوالحسنی دانشیار، علوم سیاسی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0000-0001-8610-7746 Journal Article 2025 05 10 Introduction Political participation is a key indicator of political development and state legitimacy. In ideologically-based systems, legitimacy depends not only on institutional performance but also on cultural and identity bonds between the state and society. Declining participation, especially among previously loyal groups, signals a possible rupture in foundational legitimacy. In Iran, martyrs' and veterans' families have long symbolized revolutionary political culture. However, generational shifts and social changes have altered the political attitudes of their children, requiring closer examination. Political culture, defined as beliefs and values about politics and authority, varies across democratic and authoritarian discourses. The current generation of veterans' descendants has been exposed to diverse sociopolitical influences, potentially redefining their political identity. Thus, this study seeks to determine the dominant political culture among them and assess whether it aligns more closely with democratic or authoritarian paradigms. Understanding how these discourses shape participation is essential for informed cultural and political policy-making. Methodology This study employs a quantitative research design to explore the relationship between political culture and political participation. The concepts were operationalized through measurable indicators, and a structured questionnaire was developed covering multiple dimensions of political culture and participation. A stratified sampling method was used to ensure demographic representation across 14 municipal districts in Tehran. The final sample consisted of 1,600 individuals from martyrs' and veterans' families, selected based on Cochran's formula for confidence level and error margin. Data were collected via in-person surveys at Veterans Foundations and analyzed using statistical methods to test correlations between variables. The quantitative approach ensured measurement accuracy and generalizability of findings across the target population. Findings The study identifies democratic political culture as the dominant discourse among participants, especially those with higher education and younger age. This group expressed support for participation as a civic and religious duty, but also voiced skepticism about politics’ morality and efficacy. Discourses of democracy and religious democracy gained the highest support, while authoritarian and purely religious rule had limited appeal. Variables such as age, education level, ethnicity, marital status, and employment significantly influenced both political culture and forms of participation. Political engagement manifested in diverse ways—from media consumption and discussions to electoral participation and interaction with officials. Democratic discourse correlated positively with higher levels and more diverse forms of participation. However, a notable segment viewed politics as ineffective or unethical, posing risks for future participation. Generational analysis revealed that older respondents aligned more with duty-based participation, while the youth displayed both critical distance and willingness for voluntary involvement. Ethnic and occupational differences further shaped patterns of political behavior and attitudes toward power and authority. Conclusion This study concludes that political participation among veterans’ families in Iran is profoundly shaped by their underlying political culture. While the first generation of these groups demonstrated a duty-oriented and loyal engagement with the political system, the second generation exhibits different expectations grounded in evolving socio-political realities. The empirical findings highlight a marked predominance of democratic and civic-oriented discourses among younger participants. Simultaneously, there is a noticeable erosion of legitimacy for authoritarian and non-participatory forms of governance. This generational transition underscores an urgent need for the state to implement trust-building mechanisms that align with modern norms of accountability, responsiveness, and inclusivity. Negative perceptions of politics—particularly those framing it as immoral or ineffective—suggest that without structural and cultural reform, political disengagement may intensify. Sustainable political engagement in this context must therefore be grounded in internalized democratic values, critical political consciousness, and institutional reliability. Policymakers should adopt differentiated strategies sensitive to generational, ethnic, and class-based variations to effectively cultivate participatory norms. Ultimately, the preservation of political legitimacy in the Islamic Republic hinges on revitalizing an inclusive and dynamic political culture among those traditionally seen as pillars of regime support. نظام جمهوری اسلامی ایران پس از پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی به رهبری امام خمینی، بر پایه هویت دینی-سیاسی و در چارچوب فرهنگ سیاسی اسلامی استقرار یافت. این هویت به‌ویژه در میان نیروهای ایثارگر از جمله شهدا، جانبازان، آزادگان و خانواده‌های آنان، نهادینه شده و در گذر زمان به یکی از منابع مشروعیت سیاسی نظام بدل گردیده است. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل گفتمان‌های فرهنگ سیاسی و تأثیر آن‌ها بر مشارکت سیاسی فرزندان ایثارگران در شهر تهران انجام شده است. پرسش اصلی تحقیق آن است که گفتمان‌های حاکم بر فرهنگ سیاسی این گروه چیست و چه رابطه‌ای با میزان و نوع مشارکت سیاسی آنان دارد. روش پژوهش کمّی و مبتنی بر پیمایش میدانی از ۱۶۰۰ نفر از اعضای خانواده‌های ایثارگر و تحلیل آماری داده‌ها با استفاده از آزمون‌های همبستگی و واریانس بوده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که فرهنگ سیاسی مشارکت‌محور، به‌ویژه در قالب گفتمان دموکراتیک و مردم‌سالاری دینی، دارای بیشترین فراوانی است و با متغیرهای زمینه‌ای مانند سن، تحصیلات، قومیت و اشتغال ارتباط معنادار دارد. در نهایت، نتایج پژوهش بر این نکته تأکید دارد که تداوم مشروعیت نظام سیاسی در گرو تقویت مشارکت آگاهانه نسل جدید ایثارگران است و این امر مستلزم بازتعریف سازوکارهای مشروعیت‌بخش متناسب با تحولات فرهنگی و نسلی آنان می‌باشد.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102572_8d6207d5c61585069754daf3b60ba52a.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 Identifying and Ranking Iran's Fundamental Geopolitical Challenges شناسایی و رتبه‌بندی چالش‌های ژئوپلیتیکی بنیادین ایران 374 345 102563 10.22059/jpq.2024.385545.1008249 FA محمد جعفری دهکبودی دانش‌آموختة کارشناسی ارشد جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران 0009-0002-2686-8134 مصطفی قادری حاجت دانشیار جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-2012-7394 محمدرضا حافظ نیا استاد جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-1099-6529 Journal Article 2024 10 18 Introduction Iran occupies a distinctive position due to its unique geographical and geopolitical characteristics. While the country possesses considerable strategic advantages, these have not been effectively leveraged to advance national interests and have, in some cases, transformed into geopolitical challenges. This study examines Iran's fundamental geopolitical challenges—those core issues that manifest at national, regional, and global levels—with the aim of identifying and prioritizing them according to their significance. The research employs a descriptive-analytical methodology, combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Data collection includes field studies utilizing interviews and questionnaires to gather expert perspectives. The central research question guiding this study is: What are the fundamental geopolitical challenges facing the Islamic Republic of Iran and which of these are most critical? The results indicate that the most significant geopolitical challenges for Iran include the structural weaknesses and vulnerabilities of the national economy, regional conflicts and Iran's involvement in them, and the inefficiencies of the bureaucratic and political-administrative system. These were consistently ranked as the highest-priority concerns by respondents. In contrast, the study identified several challenges that were perceived as less pressing, including the rise of geopolitical taboos, national security concerns linked to Iran's strategic geography and historical experiences of occupation, and political challenges related to national unity and cohesion. Methodology This research adopts an applied, mixed-methods approach, incorporating both theoretical analysis and empirical investigation. The methodology consists of several key components: a review of theoretical foundations and case studies to establish relevant indicators, qualitative analysis of geopolitical frameworks, and quantitative assessment through field research. Data was collected through structured interviews and questionnaires administered to a purposive sample of 75 experts and specialists in the field. Quantitative data was analyzed using the Shannon entropy method in Microsoft Excel to determine objective weightings for each geopolitical challenge. This combination of methods ensures a comprehensive and reliable assessment of Iran's geopolitical challenges, balancing theoretical insights with empirical validation. Results The analysis at the fundamental level indicates that the following three components received the highest scores: Weakness and fragility of the national economy (score: 0.244907232), Regional conflicts and Iran's involvement in them (score: 0.238593329), Bureaucratic and inefficient administrative-political structure (score: 0.238590818). In contrast, the following three components received the lowest scores: The growing trend of geopolitical taboos (score: 0.209129617), National security challenges influenced by Iran’s strategic location and historical experiences of occupation (score: 0.211934763), Political challenges, particularly regarding national unity and cohesion (score: 0.215443129). Given the average score of 0.226851181 at the fundamental level, 10 out of 19 components scored above the average, while 9 components scored below it. Conclusion The long-term viability and stability of any political entity fundamentally depend on its capacity to comprehend and navigate its strategic geopolitical environment. Accurate identification of both opportunities and threats within this environment constitutes a critical imperative for effective governance. When approached with strategic foresight, this analytical process can generate the dynamism required for national resilience and continuity - representing the paramount objective of statecraft. Conversely, failure to properly diagnose and address these geopolitical factors may undermine national stability, erode institutional foundations, and potentially precipitate systemic collapse. This study has systematically examined and prioritized Iran's core geopolitical challenges through rigorous empirical analysis. The research findings reveal a clear stratification among the identified challenges: of the 19 fundamental components analyzed, 10 demonstrated above-average significance scores, while 9 fell below this threshold. This quantitative differentiation provides valuable insights for policymakers seeking to allocate strategic attention and resources to the most pressing geopolitical concerns facing the nation. The results underscore the particular urgency of addressing the high-scoring challenges that threaten Iran's geopolitical position and internal stability. At the same time, the identification of lower-priority factors allows for more efficient strategic planning by distinguishing between immediate threats and longer-term considerations. This empirical stratification offers an evidence-based foundation for developing targeted policy responses to safeguard Iran's national interests in an increasingly complex regional and global environment. ایران کشوری منحصربه‌فرد از لحاظ ویژگی‌های جغرافیایی و ژئوپلیتیکی است، اما واقعیت این است که علی‌رغم پتانسیل‌های مطلوب جغرافیایی و ژئوپلیتیکی از آنها برای پیشبرد اهداف و منافع ملی به‌خوبی استفاده نشده و در جهت عکس به چالش‌هایی برای کشور تبدیل شده است. چالش‌های ژئوپلیتیکی بنیادین چالش‌های اساسی و پایه‌ای است، که دامنه‌ای از چالش‌های ملی، منطقه‌ای و جهانی را در برمی‌گیرد. هدف این پژوهش شناسایی و رتبه‌بندی چالش‌های ژئوپلیتیکی بنیادین ایران است. این مقاله با رویکرد توصیفی – تحلیلی و بهره‌گیری از روش کیفی و کمی به‌منظور گردآوری و تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها و در بخش میدانی و پیمایشی با ابزارهایی چون مصاحبه و پرسشنامه به شناخت و رتبه‌بندی چالش‌های بنیادین می‌پردازد. سؤال اصلی این پژوهش بدین‌گونه صورت‌بندی شده است که چالش‌های ژئوپلیتیکی بنیادین جمهوری اسلامی ایران کدام‌اند؟ و کدام‌یک از آنها اهمیت بیشتری دارند؟ یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد چالش‌های ژئوپلیتیکی بنیادین ج.ا.ا عبارت‌اند از سه مؤلفة ضعف و شکنندگی اقتصاد ملی، درگیری‌های منطقه‌ای و مشارکت ایران در آنها و ساختار اداری- سیاسی بوروکراتیک و ناکارامد که بیشترین امتیاز را در بین مؤلفه‌های بنیادین کسب کرده‌اند. در مقابل سه مؤلفة رشد روزافزون تابوهای ژئوپلیتیکی، چالش امنیت ملی متأثر از موقعیت سوق‌الجیشی (تجارب تلخ اشغال ایران) و چالش‌های سیاسی به‌ویژه در زمینة وحدت و انسجام ملی کمترین امتیازها را در بین مؤلفه‌های سطح بنیادین به خود اختصاص داده‌اند.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102563_e63c2bb5ffd8685603571c0706867d10.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 Digital impulses, Thermidor, Daily life in Iran تکانه‌های دیجیتال، ترمیدور و زندگی روزمره در ایران 399 375 102573 10.22059/jpq.2025.390679.1008302 FA سیدمهدی حسینی دانش‌آموختۀ دکتری اندیشة سیاسی، دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2019 09 03 Introduction In recent decades, the rapid expansion of digital technologies has deeply transformed not only the structural dimensions of economics, politics, and culture but also the foundations of everyday life—especially among the emerging generation. The digital generation has introduced new modes of awareness, knowledge production, and identity formation, challenging traditional systems of governance and social order. However, the specific relationship between these transformations and the future of governance in Iran has received limited scholarly attention. In an age characterized by "real competition of minds" and the rise of "digital literacy", the boundary between truth and falsehood, good and evil, or reward and punishment is increasingly determined by a mere click—either physical or cognitive. This blurring of lines constructs a lived reality that is simultaneously digital and physical, requiring a new theoretical lens to comprehend how power, legitimacy, and identity are being reshaped. Methodology This research adopts a qualitative-descriptive methodology grounded in Heideggerian phenomenology to investigate how the digital phenomenon deconstructs traditional modalities of "interest in awareness and knowledge production" in the daily lives of Iran's new generation. Phenomenology, particularly in the Heideggerian sense, offers a way to engage with the existential and ontological dimensions of the digital experience—how individuals perceive, embody, and respond to this new digital environment. The theoretical framework is built upon David Apter’s typology of political systems—namely, liberal secularism, cumulative-sacred authority—and is complemented by Fred Riggs’ concept of the “prismatic society”, which is especially apt for analyzing transitional or hybrid societies like Iran. In addition, the concept of “Thermidor”, as explored by Trotsky and Brinton in the context of revolutionary cycles, is employed to frame the potential political outcomes of Iran's current digital-cultural transformation. Results and Discussion The study reveals that the digital phenomenon in Iran is not merely an instrumental development but a paradigm of consciousness that has the power to redefine knowledge, legitimacy, and social identity. In the digital lifeworld, traditional binaries—such as real vs. simulated, private vs. public, or knowledge vs. belief—are constantly being restructured. The increasing influence of "mental clicks" and "manual clicks" reflects a new form of interaction that determines preferences, consumption patterns, political participation, and even religious engagement. Emerging concepts such as “personalized truth,” “fluid digital identity,” and “quasi-public participation” point to deep structural contradictions within the existing sociopolitical order. Technology has come to occupy the core of awareness, action, and even emotional life. As a result, the digital sphere has introduced new tensions within the four core dimensions of societal power: accumulation, hegemony, legitimacy, and identity. Moreover, the Iranian youth simultaneously engage with aspects of liberal-secular logic and deeply rooted sacred traditions, leading to a hybrid identity that matches Riggs’ characterization of a “prismatic society.” This duality intensifies the challenge for existing systems of authority, as legitimacy becomes harder to maintain in a context where algorithms shape awareness and global platforms mediate culture. At the same time, history shows that many large-scale political transformations go through a phase referred to as “Thermidor”—a stage in which the initial ideals of a movement are either diluted or re-appropriated by power structures. The central question then becomes: Is Iran undergoing a similar phase of digital Thermidor, where technological adaptation is used to preserve rather than challenge existing systems of control? Or are we witnessing the early signs of a broader socio-political rupture—one in which the new generation's digital sensibility could reshape Iran’s power structures fundamentally? Conclusion The Heideggerian phenomenological analysis presented in this study reveals that digitality in Iran operates as a new mode of being, reshaping how people think, live, and relate to authority. The digital experience is not merely about communication or access to information—it transforms the very logic of subjectivity and governance. This transformation generates ambivalence: on one hand, it can serve as a tool for the re-legitimization of existing regimes (a technological Thermidor); on the other hand, it opens the door to new demands, new failures, and new discourses of power. The distinction between the real and the virtual is no longer adequate to understand the social world of Iranian youth. As such, future research and policymaking must move beyond surface-level assessments of technology and engage with its ontological, political, and existential implications. The digital world is not an external factor imposed upon Iranian society—it is now internal to its consciousness, politics, and future. Whether this leads to passive adaptation, structural resistance, or revolutionary change depends on how various actors—from youth to state institutions—navigate this rapidly evolving terrain. تحولات و تغییرات حاصل از امر دیجیتال در زندگی روزمرة نسل نوظهور و ماهیت و منطق درونی گرایش به امر دیجیتال و نسبتِ آن با آیندۀ حکومت‌داری در ایران چندان در دستور کار دانش‌پژوهان قرار نگرفته است. هدف پرتوافکنی بر مدالیتیِ کلیت‌زداییِ امر دیجیتال در دگرگون‌سازیِ «علایقِ آگاهی/ دانش‌ساز» در ماهیت زندگی روزمرۀ نسل نو، و با روش کیفی توصیفی و مبتنی بر پدیدارشناسی هایدگر است. چارچوب تبیینی و نظریِ بحث بر گونه‌شناسیِ دیوید اپتر «نظام لیبرال -دنیوی، نظام جمعی – مقدس» و «جامعۀ منشوری» فرد ریگز قرار دارد. در عصر بازتولیدپذیری تکنیکی در جریانِ «رقابتِ واقعیِ مغزها»، و «سوادِ دیجیتال» مرز دوگانه‌های خیر و شر، خطا و صواب، راستی و دروغ ... به کلیک دست و کلیک مغز بستگی یافته است. غول فرنکشتاین با ابزار میکروپروسسور جهانِ الکترونیک و خودِ جهان را زیرو رو کرده است. با قرار گرفتن فناوری در مرکز روح، آگاهی و عمل جهانی، و برخی خواست‌های ارضانشده و احتمال گسست در ساختارهای چهارگانۀ «انباشت، هژمونی، مشروعیت، هویتِ» پارادایم قدرتِ مستقر در جامعه، راه برای بروز تناقضات جدید هموار شده است. آیا به‌دنبال تغییرات جاری در اکنونیتِ فرهنگ، اقتصاد و اجتماع، آن تحول بنیادین که در تأملی تئوریک، تروتسکی و برینتون، ترمیدور توصیف می‌کردند در سیاست ایران روی خواهد داد؟

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102573_af017f46be20ef7d72e6529737837f22.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 A Comparative Study on the Influence of Heidegger's Philosophy on Fardid and Henry Corbin and Its Reflection in the Critique of Modernity, Nativism, and Islamic Spirituality in Contemporary Iran مطالعۀ تطبیقی تأثیر فلسفۀ هایدگر بر فردید و هانری کربن و انعکاس آن در نقد مدرنیته، بومی‌گرایی و معنویت اسلامی ایران معاصر 430 401 102574 10.22059/jpq.2025.390425.1008296 FA سید مهدی ساداتی نژاد استادیار، علوم سیاسی، دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0000-0002-4802-0735 محمدرضا صالحی وثیق دانشجوی دکتری علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-1157-6326 Journal Article 2025 02 23 Introduction In contemporary Iranian philosophy, the intellectual relationship between Fardid and Corbin has attracted significant scholarly interest. While both philosophers were profoundly influenced by Heidegger, their respective engagements with his thought have not been sufficiently examined regarding their impact on modern Iranian intellectual history. Previous studies, such as those by Beizad Abdulkarimi and Ahmad Bastani, have posited that Fardid can be understood within the framework of Corbin’s philosophy, particularly in relation to Heidegger’s ideas. However, closer analysis reveals that their relationship cannot be reduced to a simple intellectual progression. Instead, their engagement with Heidegger’s philosophy represents a complex and often conflicting intellectual trajectory. This study aims to explore these complexities and tensions, specifically examining how Fardid and Corbin differently interpreted core Heideggerian concepts such as Being, modernity, and spirituality within the broader context of Islamic-Iranian thought. Research Method The study employs a qualitative methodology with a comparative-analytic approach. In its comparative dimension, it uses a systematic comparative method where: Each thinker's viewpoints are examined separately Points of similarity and difference are extracted The reasons for these similarities and differences are analyzed In its analytical dimension, the research focuses on analyzing key concepts, arguments, and intellectual foundations of both thinkers (Fardid and Corbin) to clarify their argumentative structures. Data collection was conducted through library research, consulting both primary sources (works of Fardid and Corbin) and secondary sources (research conducted about these two thinkers). Results and Discussion The findings indicate that Fardid and Corbin interpret modernity and Heidegger’s philosophy in notably distinct ways, reflecting their individual philosophical trajectories and the broader socio-political contexts of mid-20th century Iran. For Fardid, modernity is primarily seen as a nihilistic historical condition characterized by spiritual decay and the "forgetting of Being," as Heidegger described. His critique of modernity is radical, rooted in his interpretation of Heidegger’s later works. Influenced by Heidegger’s existential analysis of history andBeing, Fardid perceives modernity as a deviation from authentic Being— linked to Western domination via reason, technological rationality, and secularism. His response is both philosophical and ideological, advocating a return to Islamic and Eastern authenticity to resist Western modernity’s encroachment. Fardid aligns with Heidegger’s critique of technological enframing, viewing it as an existential crisis threatening human existence. In contrast, Corbin’s engagement with Heidegger centers on spirituality and metaphysics, leading him to develop a more integrative approach to tradition. He interprets Heidegger’s early phenomenology—particularly concepts like Dasein and temporality—as a foundation for spiritual phenomenology that transcends Western intellectual bounds. Corbin expands upon Heidegger’s notion of Being by incorporating Islamic mysticism, especially the ideas of Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi, creating a synthesis between Heideggerian philosophy and Islamic spiritual traditions. This fusion allows Corbin to conceptualize a universal approach to modernity—one that does not outright reject modernity but seeks to reclaim its spiritual dimensions through reinterpretation of Eastern mystical thought, emphasizing a "spiritual phenomenology." His focus is on transcending the historical limits of modernity to access a deeper, transcendent experience of Being. The most significant difference between the two lies in their views of history and temporality. Fardid, influenced by Heidegger’s later philosophy, regards history as a "destiny," a metaphysical unfolding of Being that has been corrupted by modernity. Accordingly, he advocates for a radical rupture with modernity, calling for a return to an unmediated spiritual tradition rooted in Islamic thought. Conversely, Corbin perceives history as a continuous, metaphysical process that encompasses material and spiritual dimensions, emphasizing the unfolding of spiritual potentialities accessible through Eastern mystical traditions. Both thinkers critique modernity’s secular, rationalist worldview. However, Corbin maintains a more optimistic outlook about spiritual renewal within the modern framework, proposing a "spiritual return" that seeks to reformulate and reintegrate spiritual dimensions into contemporary thought. Fardid, on the other hand, adopts a more radical stance, emphasizing the need for a decisive break from Western influence and a rediscovery of authentic Eastern-Islamic identity. Conclusions The study concludes that, despite sharing a Heideggerian foundation, Fardid and Corbin present fundamentally different philosophical approaches to modernity, spirituality, and tradition. Fardid’s radical critique positions him as an ideological resistor, advocating for a return to an authentic Islamic tradition that rejects Western influences. His thought, deeply rooted in Heidegger’s critique of modernity, becomes a tool for resisting Western cultural hegemony, especially within the post-revolutionary Iranian context. Conversely, Corbin’s spiritual phenomenology promotes an integrative approach, aiming to reconcile Eastern and Western traditions by emphasizing metaphysical and spiritual dimensions of existence. Both significantly shaped 20th-century Iranian intellectual thought, but their legacies diverge: Corbin’s focus on the continuity of Eastern spiritual traditions fostered new discourse on Islam and modernity, while Fardid’s anti-modern stance influenced ongoing cultural resistance, affecting debates on identity and the future of Islamic thought. در پژوهش حاضر به بررسی تطبیقی اندیشه‌های فردید و کربن در تأثیرپذیری از فلسفة هایدگر پرداخته شده است. مسئلة اصلی، واکاوی نحوة مواجهة این دو متفکر با مدرنیته و سنت‌های اسلامی-ایرانی بود. هدف پژوهش، تحلیل تطبیقی تأثیرپذیری آنها از هایدگر و بررسی تفاوت‌های بنیادین در نگرششان به مدرنیته، معنویت اسلامی و بومی‌گرایی را شامل می‌شد. روش پژوهش کیفی با رویکرد تطبیقی-تحلیلی بود که از طریق مطالعة کتابخانه‌ای و تحلیل محتوای کیفی آثار این متفکران انجام شد. نتایج نشان داد برای فردید، که در ستیز با تجدد به گنون سنت‌گرا نزدیک‌تر بود، مدرنیته به‌مثابة وضعیتی تاریخی اهمیت محوری داشت و با تأثیرپذیری از هولدرلین و مانیفست شعر، به نقد رادیکال مدرنیته و غرب‌زدگی پرداخت. در مقابل، کربن با تمرکز بر معنویت و عرفان اسلامی، کمتر به مدرنیته به‌عنوان وضعیتی تاریخی پرداخت و بیشتر در پی بازتعریف سنت‌های ایرانی-شیعی در قالبی جهانی بود. کربن در هایدگر متقدم توقف کرد و ادامة مسیر را با چراغ تشیع پیمود. نتیجه‌گیری پژوهش آشکار ساخت که تفاوت‌های فردید و کربن در عمق اندیشه و خوانش فلسفی آنها ریشه داشت، اما میراث فکری هر دو به‌گونه‌ای متفاوت به ایدئولوژیک‌سازی انجامید: کربن با بازخوانی میراث فلسفی ایرانی، زمینه‌ساز برداشت‌های ایدئولوژیک از عرفان اسلامی شد، درحالی‌که میراث تراژیک فردید به ایدئولوژیک‌سازی سنت در معنای منفی و غرب‌ستیزی رادیکال منتهی شد.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102574_87c23c9f6fb6ef706756b6698260e72d.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 The Models of the Implementation of Role by Emerging Powers in International Relations and Consequences on the Political - Security Strategies تبیین اثرگذاری نقش قدرت‌های امنیتی، تجاری و مدنی در راهبردهای سیاسی – امنیتی آنها 462 431 102575 10.22059/jpq.2025.385124.1008241 FA ابراهیم طاهری دانشیار، علوم سیاسی، دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی و تاریخ، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران. 0000-0003-0513-2494 Journal Article 2024 11 11 Introduction The term "emerging powers" refers to a distinct category of states that have gained prominence in the contemporary international system due to their growing economic capabilities, diplomatic influence, and recognition by established powers (Mahrenbach, 2019: 217). These actors actively engage in international regimes and institutions, employing strategic tools to expand their role and reshape global governance. However, emerging powers are not a monolithic group; they exhibit varied behavioral patterns, institutional engagements, and strategic objectives. This diversity necessitates a typological approach to better understand how different categories of emerging powers formulate distinct foreign policy strategies. The research question is: how can emerging powers be categorized into distinct typologies, and what kinds of foreign policy strategies does each typology produce? This study aims to analyze the role models of emerging powers and assess their impact on political-security strategies. Given the relative scarcity of theoretical frameworks in this area, this research seeks to contribute to the literature by developing a structured typology that links power attributes to strategic behavior. Methodology The method of this research is the matching of case with theory. For this purpose, the desired patterns are identified firstly and then they are applied to different countries. In addition, in order to achieve the goals of the research, these cases should be compared, qualitatively. Results and discussion The research findings demonstrate that emerging powers operate according to three distinct models: security powers, trading powers, and civilian powers. Each model represents a different strategic orientation in international relations, with significant implications for foreign policy formulation and implementation. Security powers concentrate their capabilities on defending their fundamental existence against perceived threats from both domestic and international sources beyond their immediate sphere of influence. This concept bears resemblance to Mackinder's continental power ideal from the 18th and 19th centuries, which posited that such powers could resist threats from sea powers (Blagden & Levy, 2011: 190). These states pursue territorial security objectives regardless of material costs or benefits, employing strict military balancing strategies to achieve their international goals. Political leaders following this model emphasize military capabilities, territorial control, and hard power dynamics in global affairs, believing that maximizing hard power forms is essential for achieving foreign policy objectives (Goksel, 2023: 83). In contrast, trading powers prioritize economic cooperation and peaceful relations with other states through strong economic ties, cultural exchanges, and diplomatic influence. These powers prefer soft power instruments over hard power to achieve their goals, utilizing business incentives, investments, and economic support as key tools for both internal development and external policy objectives. Their strategic approach revolves around competition for markets and economic advantage with other states and international actors. Trading powers typically evolve through four key transitions: from inflationary interventions to sustainable growth; from macroeconomic to microeconomic governance; from broad interventionism to targeted strategies; and from welfare-state models to efficiency-focused policies. Given the substantial costs associated with military balancing, these states shift toward hedging strategies (Darakhshandeh Lazarjani and Shafi'i, 2012), which involve improving economic and diplomatic relations even with potentially threatening states. Turkey's approach toward Greece since 2003 exemplifies this model, as Ankara has sought to advance its interests through expanded economic and political-diplomatic relations with various regional and global actors while maintaining balanced relations between different power centers. The civilian power model emerged following the collapse of the Soviet Union, representing states that aim to demilitarize international relations and avoid militaristic approaches toward other countries. This model emphasizes values, democratic principles, and social issues arising from the international system as key influences on state behavior (Hersich and Seydi, 2007: 21). Civilian powers reject arbitrary and unilateral actions, preferring conflict resolution through participation, mediation, and arbitration. A defining characteristic of civilian powers is their acceptance of the international status quo, leading them to avoid strategies that might fundamentally alter existing power structures - what Morgenthau would describe as avoiding imperialistic tendencies (Morghenta, 1401). This explains why post-Cold War Germany and Japan have secured their positions through strategic alliances with the United States rather than independent power projection. Unable to pursue formal power projection strategies, these states have adopted informal approaches through civilian power mechanisms (Maull, 1991: 69). Such powers typically employ peaceful means, particularly multilateralism, to achieve foreign policy objectives (Pehlivanturk & Demirtas, 2018: 2), combining strategies of accommodation and hedging. India's post-Cold War foreign policy illustrates this approach, as New Delhi faced economic pressures and growing Chinese threats while aspiring to great power status. This led India to abandon non-alignment policies in favor of closer ties with the United States (Ollapally, 2018: 61), demonstrating how civilian powers navigate complex international environments through balanced strategic positioning. Conclusion Emerging powers do not rely on a single strategy to achieve their foreign policy objectives. Instead, their chosen approach often depends on the role they perceive for themselves within the international arena. Based on these roles, three primary strategies can be identified: the security state, the commercial state, and the civil power. Security states, such as Iran and Russia, typically adopt a hard balancing strategy to advance their interests internationally. In contrast, some powers classified as commercial states tend to employ a hedging strategy, balancing engagement with caution. An interesting category is that of powers using an adaptation strategy, which we can term “civil powers.” These states aim to avoid militarism, favoring peaceful means and diplomacy to achieve their goals. In summary, these strategies—geopolitically oriented security power, commercial power, geoeconomic-oriented power, and civil power—are largely rooted in different geocultural ideals. However, it is important to recognize that not all countries neatly fit into these categories. Some may deviate from the typical pattern and pursue strategies that diverge from the classifications discussed here. عبارت وصفی قدرت بزرگ، قدرت میانی، قدرت منطقه‌ای و قدرت نوظهور برای توصیف جایگاه دولت‌ها در چرخة قدرت نظام بین‌الملل به‌کار می‌رود. ظرفیت‌های نظامی-امنیتی، اقتصادی، قدرت چانه‌زنی دیپلماتیک، شناسایی، حوزه‌های نفوذ و راهبردهای سیاسی – امنیتی آنها سبب این دسته‌بندی‌ها شده است. فارغ از چنین دسته‌بندی‌هایی اشکال جدیدی از ایفای نقش وجود دارد که می‌تواند بر راهبردهای سیاسی – امنیتی این قدرت‌ها اثرگذار باشد. هدف این پژوهش تبیین اثرگذاری نقش قدرت‌های امنیتی، تجاری و مدنی در راهبردهای سیاسی و امنیتی آنها در نظام بین‌الملل است. سؤال پژوهش این است که الگوی ایفای نقش در قالب قدرت امنیتی، قدرت تجاری و قدرت مدنی چه ویژگی‌هایی در نظام بین‌الملل معاصر دارد و این امر به چه پیامدهایی بر راهبردهای سیاسی – امنیتی آنها منجر می‌شود؟ این پژوهش با بهره‌گیری از چارچوب مفهومی راهبرد سیاسی- امنیتی قدرت‌های موجود از جمله موازنه‌گری سخت، موازنه‌گری نرم، مصون‌سازی و انطباق به این نتایج دست یافته است که نقش قدرت امنیتی توسط روسیه، چین و ایران قدرت ‌تجاری توسط ترکیه و قدرت مدنی توسط هند ایفا می‌شود. همچنین نتایج نشان می‌دهد اغلب قدرت امنیتی از راهبرد موازنه‌گری سخت و نرم، قدرت ‌تجاری از راهبرد مصون‌سازی و قدرت مدنی از ابتکار انطباق و مصون‌سازی برای دستیابی به اهداف سیاست خارجی خود استفاده می‌کند. روش پژوهش از نوع مقایسه‌ای و بر اساس انطباق نظریه بر مورد است.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102575_6dbdf2eecf3e17353dde495af0bf0433.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 Power, Politics of Representation and Everyday Life in Iran قدرت، سیاست بازنمایی و زندگی روزمره در ایران 492 463 102577 10.22059/jpq.2020.300954.1007574 FA رضا عباسی دانش‌آموختۀ دکتری علوم سیاسی، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران. تهران، ایران. 0009-0007-8341-4055 Journal Article 2020 04 14 Introduction In modern political systems, a central struggle persists between state power and citizens over the construction of meaning within cultural symbols and everyday social relations. This conflict has intensified in recent decades with the proliferation of digital communication technologies, particularly social networks, which have reshaped how narratives are produced, contested, and legitimized. The dynamics are especially pronounced in contexts like the Islamic Republic of Iran, where the state aggressively imposes its official ideology through pervasive regulation of daily life and social interactions. Yet, as governments attempt to monopolize meaning, the authority to define and interpret cultural signs has increasingly decentralized—shifting from state institutions to citizens and emergent social groups. Social networks have played a transformative role in this process, enabling users to create, circulate, and amplify alternative narratives. These platforms facilitate a redistribution of symbolic power fostering new frameworks of meaning that often undermine the credibility of state-sponsored discourses. Over time, unofficial narratives gain traction, while official ones face erosion of legitimacy. Focusing on the Iranian case, this article examines how digital communication technologies—especially social networks—disrupt the politics of representation. By decentralizing narrative control and empowering grassroots discourse, these technologies challenge authoritarian regimes’ ability to stabilize meaning, ultimately exposing the fragility of their ideological hegemony. Research Method This study adopts a qualitative research methodology, drawing on data gathered through systematic library research and critical documentary analysis. Focusing on the Iranian context, the investigation analyzes how new communication technologies—particularly social networks—disrupt state-controlled systems of representation and cultural narrative production. The research employs an in-depth examination of secondary sources, including scholarly literature, media analyses, and relevant policy documents, to trace the evolving dynamics between digital platforms and representational politics. By interrogating these materials through a critical lens, the study illuminates the mechanisms through which social networks facilitate alternative meaning-making processes that contest official narratives. Central to this inquiry is the following research question: how do new communication technologies, especially social networks, generate a crisis in the politics of representation? This framework allows for an exploration of the transformative impact of digital platforms on the struggle over symbolic power between state institutions and civil society. Results and Discussion This study demonstrates that social networks have fundamentally altered the dynamics of cultural production in Iran, serving as key sites for the reproduction and normalization of informal cultural relations. By facilitating the creation and dissemination of user-generated content, these platforms have systematically undermined the legitimacy of state-sponsored narratives, eroding the ruling power’s ability to monopolize public discourse. This research reveals a critical shift in cultural authority: as alternative representations of social life proliferate through digital networks, they increasingly compete with—and often displace—official narratives. This phenomenon has compelled the state to contend with unprecedented forms of cultural resistance, as decentralized digital practices challenge centralized ideological control. Notably, social networks have amplified previously marginalized cultural expressions, transforming what were once “hidden narratives” into visible, open discourses. The platforms showcase emerging lifestyles, interpersonal dynamics, and contested social perspectives that directly contradict the state’s curated portrayal of societal harmony. Ultimately, social networks have not merely reflected cultural change in Iran—they have accelerated it by providing infrastructure for resistance and the continuous negotiation of social meaning. The resulting crisis of representation marks a fundamental challenge to authoritarian systems reliant on narrative control. Conclusions This study demonstrates that the proliferation of digital communication technologies—particularly social networks—has precipitated a fundamental crisis in Iran’s politics of representation. By democratizing cultural production and enabling citizens to articulate alternative narratives, these platforms have significantly eroded the state’s capacity to regulate the semiotic boundaries of public life. The resulting divergence between state-propagated cultural ideals and the lived realities expressed through digital media has created an unsustainable tension, exposing the fragility of authoritarian cultural governance. The findings underscore an urgent paradox for Iranian policymakers: while the state’s legitimacy depends on maintaining ideological coherence, its current repressive strategies only amplify cultural dissonance. As digital-native generations and urban middle classes increasingly articulate divergent values and aspirations through social media, the government faces a critical juncture. The research suggests that institutional adaptation—through more inclusive cultural policies and responsive governance mechanisms—could mitigate growing societal fractures. However, the continued reliance on coercive control risks exacerbating cultural alienation, potentially transforming the current crisis of representation into broader political destabilization. From a policy perspective, this analysis highlights the futility of purely restrictive measures in the digital age. Sustainable cultural governance would require the Iranian state to transition from unilateral imposition to negotiated cultural pluralism—a shift that acknowledges the transformative impact of communication technologies on societal values. Without such structural adaptation, the Islamic Republic may face escalating cycles of cultural resistance and state repression, further undermining its ability to shape national narratives in an increasingly digital public sphere. بخش بزرگی از جدال میان قدرت حاکم و شهروندان در نظام‌های سیاسی جدید، در زمینۀ نحوۀ تثبیت معنا در نشانه‌ها و صورت‌های مختلف روابط اجتماعی در زندگی روزمره شکل گرفته است. در عصر گسترش فناوری‌های ارتباطی و ظهور و هجوم شبکه‌های اجتماعی، رابطۀ میان قدرت سیاسی و شهروندان وارد مرحله‌ای تازه و پویاتر شده است؛ مرحله‌ای که در آن دیگر معانی، نشانه‌ها و روایت‌های اجتماعی صرفاً از سوی نهادهای رسمی تعریف نمی‌شوند. در این میان، شبکه‌های اجتماعی به بستری فعال برای تولید و بازتولید معنا بدل شده‌اند و کاربران با بهره‌گیری از این ابزارها، روایت‌های شخصی، فرهنگی و اجتماعی خود را شکل می‌دهند و به چالش با روایت‌های رسمی می‌پردازند. در جوامعی مانند جمهوری اسلامی ایران، که ساختار قدرت تلاش می‌کند از طریق کنترل زندگی روزمره و مدیریت معنا، ایدئولوژی خود را تثبیت کند، این روند با پیامدهای فرهنگی و سیاسی عمیقی همراه است. پژوهش حاضر با تکیه بر روش کیفی و تحلیل داده‌های کتابخانه‌ای و اسنادی، به بررسی این پرسش می‌پردازد که فناوری‌های نوین ارتباطی چگونه سیاست بازنمایی را با بحران مواجه می‌سازند. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که شبکه‌های اجتماعی با تقویت روایت‌های غیررسمی و عرفی، نه‌تنها مشروعیت گفتمان رسمی را زیر سؤال برده‌اند، بلکه زمینه‌ساز شکل‌گیری فضایی شده‌اند که در آن، صداهای متکثر و گاه مخالف، به‌وضوح شنیده می‌شوند. این تحولات، بازتعریفی از قدرت، معنا و هویت در جامعۀ معاصر ایرانی را رقم زده‌اند و از ظهور دوره‌ای حکایت دارند که در آن انحصار معنابخشی دیگر در اختیار حاکمیت نیست.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102577_d59aea70276fb8a5b0abbdccaf79497f.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 Analysis of the Ratio between the Concept of Republic in the Constitution of I.R.Iran and Modern Public Law تحلیلی بر نسبت مفهوم جمهوریت در قانون اساسی ج.ا.ایران و حقوق عمومی مدرن 514 493 102579 10.22059/jpq.2025.385830.1008254 FA مهدی قنبری دانشجوی دکتری حقوق عمومی، دانشکدة حقوق، دانشگاه قم، قم. 0000-0002-4913-2624 علیرضا دبیرنیا دانشیار گروه حقوق عمومی، دانشکدة حقوق، دانشگاه قم، قم. 0000-0001-7259-5427 Journal Article 2024 11 27 Introduction The republic stands as the central concept of modern public law, serving as the primary indicator for assessing the proportionality between legal-political systems and contemporary constitutional principles. This study employs an analytical methodology and library research to examine the conceptualization of republicanism in the Iranian Constitution vis-à-vis the foundations of modern public law, particularly the right to self-determination framed within social contract theory. While the notion of republic has roots in pre-modern Western political thought, its contemporary understanding emerged through developments that shaped modern public law. This evolution has produced diverse approaches to conceptualizing republicanism among Western thinkers, with contemporary jurists and political philosophers emphasizing its interconnection with related concepts such as non-domination (Viroli), the common good (Zoller), l'intérêt commun (Odier), general will (Rousseau), and representation (Montesquieu). These conceptual linkages have become increasingly prominent in modern legal and political discourse, necessitating their consideration in any comprehensive analysis of republicanism. When examining the Iranian Constitution as an integrated system of principles, one finds meaningful engagement with various dimensions of republican thought. Notably, despite the constitution's grounding in Sharia principles, it incorporates concepts that resonate with contemporary republican theory. This creates potential for an interactive compatibility between the constitution's framework and modern public law, even if complete conceptual alignment is absent. Methodological Approach This research adopts a comparative analytical framework that examines Western philosophical developments of republican thought, identifies core elements and dimensions of modern republicanism and systematically analyzes constitutional principles and their interpretive possibilities and maps points of conceptual convergence and divergence Key Findings The results reveal that:- The relationship between the Iranian Constitution's conception of republic and modern public law principles is neither contradictory nor fundamentally divergent- While significant differences exist in their foundational premises, the constitution maintains space for constructive engagement with modern republicanism- Republican elements in the constitution are structurally embedded to exercise normative influence in legislation and governance- The text demonstrates capacity to articulate republican concepts in their modern sense, despite theological differences. Conclusion The study demonstrates that while the Iranian Constitution's conception of republic differs substantially from modern Western models, it maintains sufficient conceptual flexibility to permit meaningful engagement with contemporary public law principles. This interactive compatibility suggests that the constitution's republican provisions can function as normative foundations within Iran's legal-political system while remaining open to dialogue with modern constitutional thought. The findings highlight the importance of contextual interpretation in assessing constitutional republicanism across different legal traditions. جمهوریت محوری‌ترین مفهوم حقوق عمومی مدرن و در عین حال شاخصِ اصلی نسبت‌سنجی نظام‌های سیاسی حقوقی با حقوق عمومی مدرن به‌شمار می‌رود. پژوهش حاضر با استفاده از روش تحلیلی و منابع کتابخانه‌ای درصدد نسبت‌سنجی این مفهوم در قانون اساسی ایران با مبانی حقوق عمومی مدرن (حق تعیین سرنوشت در قالب یک قرارداد اجتماعی) است. در پاسخ به چگونگی این نسبت باید گفت تدقیق در ویژگی‌ها و نحوة جایابی مفهوم جمهوریت در کلیت قانون اساسی ایران، بیانگر این است که نسبت میان این مفهوم با مبانی حقوق عمومی مدرن، نه از جنس تباین و نه الزاماً از جنس واگرایانه است و علی‌رغم عدم تطابق کامل میان ماهیت و لوازم مفهوم جمهوریت مدرن با مفهوم جمهوریت در قانون اساسی، می‌توان نوعی نسبت سازگاری تعامل‌گرایانه را میان آنها استدراک کرد، به‌نحوی که از یک سو برخی مفاهیمِ مُقوِّمِ جمهوریت در آن درج شده است و از سوی دیگر نیز بخش‌های جمهوریت باورانه قانون اساسی (از منظر حقوق عمومی مدرن) به‌گونه‌ای در آن مندرج شده‌اند که نه‌تنها امکان مستحیل شدنِ آنها در سایر بخش‌های قانون اساسی وجود ندارد، بلکه قانون اساسی به‌عنوان تبلور قدرتِ مؤسس، به‌وضوح ظرفیت ایفای نقش هنجارسازی در مراحل قانونگذاری در نظام سیاسی حقوقی موردنظر خود را به بخش‌های مذکور داده است.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102579_0b748d80f3cef417de581b01f918e545.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 The Role and Performance of Turkmens in the Developments of the Last Decades in Iraq نقش و عملکرد ترکمن ها در تحولات دو دهه اخیر عراق 547 515 102581 10.22059/jpq.2025.370803.1008155 FA محمد مبینی استادیار دانشکده و پژوهشکده مطالعات بین‌الملل دانشگاه جامع امام حسین علیه السلام، تهران، ایران. 0000-0002-1005-055X Journal Article 2024 05 07 Introduction Ethnic minorities present a complex challenge in modern political societies, lacking precise definitions and clear boundaries. This ambiguity complicates interactions between central governments and minority groups. Broadly defined, ethnic minorities are numerically smaller groups within a nation-state that share a distinct identity. They often experience disparities in political participation, governance, and socio-economic influence, frequently facing discrimination, marginalization, and oppression (Dashti, 2011: 141–150). The subordinate status of minorities in social hierarchies—coupled with perceptions of their identities as "impure" compared to the majority’s homogeneity—renders these groups politically unpredictable and reinforces power inequalities (Moghadam Shad, 2017: 756). Members of such marginalized communities may exhibit *anomic* behaviors, developing critical awareness of their unequal conditions. This consciousness can fuel collective conflict as they seek to alter existing power structures (Ghofman, 2007). The British-drawn borders of Iraq created an artificial state comprising Shia and Sunni Arabs, Kurds, and Turkmens—a diversity that has profoundly shaped Iraq’s domestic and foreign policies (Badie Aznadahi, 2016: 652). Historically, Iraqi Turkmens have faced systemic discrimination, violence, and exclusion due to their minority status. However, they have increasingly asserted their political and social rights, demanding equal opportunities in employment, education, and linguistic rights, as well as greater participation in decision-making—sometimes even autonomy. Constructivist scholars argue that Turkey leverages the plight of Iraqi Turkmens to advance its ethnic policies, using diplomatic pressure to protect Turkmen rights. This serves dual purposes: reinforcing Turkey’s Kemalist identity and fostering internal cohesion (Haq-Panah, 2013: 86). Modern Iraq is dominated by three ethnic groups: Arabs, Kurds, and Turkmens. However, due to their smaller population, Turkmens wield limited influence in political, economic, and social spheres, while Arabs and Kurds compete for dominance (Noormohammadi, 2016: 184). From King Faisal’s rule to Saddam Hussein’s fall, Iraq’s nation-building strategy relied on forced assimilation, suppressing Kurdish, Turkmen, and Armenian identities in favor of an imposed Arab nationalism, alongside the Sunni minority’s oppression of Shia populations. Post-2003, the U.S.-backed federal model failed to achieve inclusive governance, instead exacerbating ethnic and sectarian tensions. While Kurdistan secured autonomy, the broader federal experiment intensified violence (Sardarnia, 2013: 25). The collective trauma of oppression endured by Shia, Kurds, and Turkmens has entrenched subnational solidarities at the expense of a unified Iraqi identity. Despite American efforts to implant democracy, Iraq’s political landscape remains dominated by ethnoreligious divisions, perpetuating cycles of violence. In the past two decades, Iraq has undergone seismic shifts: the 2003 U.S. invasion, the Ba’ath regime’s collapse, the 2005 constitution, the rise of ISIS (2014), and pervasive U.S. influence over Iraq’s institutions. Throughout these changes, Turkmens have occupied a strategic position, making them a critical case study for analyzing identity politics in the Middle East. This study examines the role of Iraqi Turkmens in the country’s political, security, and economic transformations over the past twenty years. Turkmens embody five key identity dimensions—religious, sectarian, national, ethnic, and civic—making their experiences vital to understanding broader regional identity dynamics. By analyzing their contributions and challenges, this research seeks to provide a systematic assessment of Turkmens’ impact on Iraq’s evolving landscape. Methodology Given that this research aims to highlight the role and performance of Iraqi Turkmens in recent developments in the country, and that the intended users of this research are foreign policy stakeholders, the study is as an applied research and is exploratory in terms of its objectives. This study employs a mixed-method approach (qualitative and quantitative) that begins with the Delphi method and continues with a survey method.In the qualitative method of the research, a purposive non-random sampling method was used to select 12 experts and specialists. Confirmatory factor analysis and covariance-based path analysis were used to analyze data. Results and discussion The study explores the influence of Iraqi Turkmens on the country's political decision-making processes, their contributions to national security and stability, and their impact on economic development. To understand these dynamics, it is necessary to examine the Turkmens' position within Iraq's complex power structures, their perspectives on the country's fragmented political landscape, and their evolving relationships with Kurdish and Arab groups. Given Iraq's susceptibility to external influences, the role of foreign actors must also be considered in any analysis of Turkmen political participation. Although constituting a minority within a minority, the Turkmens possess significant political leverage, as demonstrated by their electoral influence in both the Kurdistan Region and Iraqi Council of Representatives. Their geographically dispersed population, stretching from Tal Afar to areas near Kifri and Badra, combined with religious diversity encompassing Shia, Sunni, Christian and secular orientations, has resulted in varied political approaches within the Turkmen community itself. Some factions align with Turkish interests, while others support the Iraqi National Alliance's positions on ethnic issues. Certain groups have backed Kurdish autonomy aspirations, whereas others advocate for centralized governance, opposing federalism while aligning with Iranian policies through the Resistance Axis. The political and cultural organizations representing Iraqi Turkmens have historically received support from Turkey, which seeks to advance its own strategic interests, particularly regarding the oil-rich regions of Kirkuk and Mosul. Turkey aims to enhance the national profile of Turkmens in northern Iraq while protecting their cultural and historical identity. Turkmen leaders maintain that they constitute 70% of Kirkuk's population, while Kurdish groups claim majority status and seek to incorporate the city into the Kurdistan Region. This demographic dispute leaves Turkmens caught between Arab and Kurdish majority groups, creating ongoing challenges in their pursuit of autonomous governance for Turkmen-majority areas. Regional powers pursue competing agendas in Iraq that directly affect Turkmen political prospects. Iran supports Shiite political integration and opposes Kurdish separatism while backing counterterrorism efforts and the Popular Mobilization Forces, which include Turkmen units. The United States has promoted Kurdish autonomy as part of its strategy to counter Iranian influence, a position supported by the United Kingdom. Saudi Arabia has historically supported Sunni groups that sought to counter both Iranian and Kurdish influence, while Syria has opposed U.S.-aligned governance structures in Iraq. Within this complex environment, Turkmens continue to advocate for equal rights through multiple channels. Their political representatives participate in national institutions, voicing community concerns in policy debates. The integration of Turkmen units into the Popular Mobilization Forces has provided security for Turkmen areas while transcending sectarian divisions. Cultural preservation efforts focus on maintaining linguistic and traditional practices amid assimilation pressures, while economic initiatives seek to improve infrastructure and living conditions in Turkmen communities. The Turkmen community's ability to navigate Iraq's complex ethnic and sectarian landscape, while leveraging international relationships and asserting cultural-political rights, will significantly influence their future role in either strengthening national cohesion or contributing to further fragmentation. Their strategic position between competing Arab and Kurdish groups, combined with their connections to regional powers, makes them an important factor in Iraq's ongoing political evolution. The community's diverse religious composition and geographic distribution present both challenges and opportunities as they seek to establish a more prominent role in Iraq's governance structures while preserving their distinct identity. Conclusion The Turkmen community in Iraq has endured significant political marginalization since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, remaining largely excluded from Iraq's political processes until the late 1990s. Even after the 1991 uprisings and the emergence of opposition movements against Saddam Hussein's regime, Turkmens struggled to establish an effective political presence and faced severe repression under successive governments. Turkey's engagement with Iraqi Turkmens has consistently followed a pragmatic approach aligned with its own national interests. However, the post-ISIS period has marked a turning point, bringing notable political, social, and cultural transformations for the Turkmen community. As a distinct ethnic group with populations spread across multiple regions, Turkmens have recently developed stronger political representation through organized parties. Despite constituting only about 2% of Iraq's population and being geographically dispersed, their influence on Iraq's political and economic landscape remains substantial. Historically, Turkmens have played pivotal roles in maintaining Iraq's security and advancing national interests, establishing themselves as a stabilizing force in the country. Nevertheless, Iraqi Turkmens continue to confront serious security challenges and political pressures that threaten both national unity and their community's stability. These threats emerge through various channels - from the stirring of ethnic divisions to direct military actions by armed groups or foreign actors. Simultaneously, Turkmens have contributed positively to Iraq's political evolution by participating in government formation, decision-making processes, and the establishment of democratic institutions. The Turkmen political presence manifests through various organizations including the Iraqi Turkmen Party, the Turkmen Unity Party, and the Turkmen Democratic Party, all working to protect community rights, promote regional development, and preserve cultural identity. These groups address critical issues facing Turkmens, including political marginalization, rights violations, and security concerns, while navigating complex relationships with other ethnic factions. In Iraq's ethnically diverse society, equitable power distribution among groups represents a fundamental requirement for successful democratic governance. Such inclusion enables meaningful participation in political processes, fosters social cohesion, and contributes to long-term stability. For Turkmens, this principle holds particular significance as their political engagement lends legitimacy to Iraq's governing structures while strengthening national unity. This study affirms the Turkmen community's active role in Iraq's political, security, military and economic spheres, particularly through collaboration with unifying national movements. As a strategically important minority, Turkmens have consistently supported Iraq's political processes while enhancing national security. Current trends suggest their influence will grow further as political participation increases. With greater representation and recognition of their rights, Turkmens are poised to play an expanded role in shaping Iraq's economic future and overall development. ترکمن‌ها به عنوان یکی از اقلیت‌های مهم و تأثیرگذار عراق، علی‌رغم سهم قابل توجه در جامعه این کشور، در تحولات سیاسی و اجتماعی دو دهه اخیر جایگاه شایسته‌ای نیافته‌اند .ترکمنها با موقعیت راهبردی خود، در کانون بسیاری از بحران‌های عراق قرار داشته و مناطق ترکمن‌نشین با چالش‌های امنیتی، اجتماعی و اقتصادی قابل توجهی روبرو هستند. پژوهش حاضر، به تحلیل فرضیه‌ای می‌پردازد که بر ضرورت ایفای نقش مؤثر ترکمن‌ها در فرآیندهای سیاسی، نظامی و اقتصادی تأکید می‌کند و به این پرسش اساسی پاسخ می‌دهد که «ترکمن‌ها چه نقشی در تحولات اخیر عراق داشته‌اند؟» برای این منظور، از روش پژوهش آمیخته (کیفی-کمی) بهره گرفته شده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که ترکمن‌ها علی‌رغم توانمندی‌ها و پتانسیل‌هایشان در راستای تقویت امنیت و منافع ملی عراق، در عمل نقش کمتری دارند. این تحقیق همچنین روشن می‌سازد که با وجود همگرایی با جریان‌های یکپارچه‌ساز، ترکمن‌ها در معرض تهدیدات امنیتی و چالش‌های سیاسی قرار دارند که به نحو مستقیم و غیرمستقیم بر ثبات و وحدت عراق تأثیر می‌گذارد. این پژوهش می‌تواند به‌عنوان مبنایی برای درک بهتر وضعیت ترکمن‌ها و تعیین راهبردهای مؤثر در راستای تقویت نقش آن‌ها در آینده سیاسی عراق به کار گرفته شود.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102581_96764f6293df9991ef28ebf6be9a1597.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 Unbalanced Development and the Future of Political Developments in Saudi Arabia (A Comparative Study of Iran in the Second Pahlavi Era and the Government of King Salman) توسعة نامتوازن و آیندة تحولات سیاسی در عربستان سعودی (مطالعة تطبیقی ایران عصر پهلوی دوم و دولت ملک سلمان) 580 549 102583 10.22059/jpq.2025.388793.1008278 FA سجاد محسنی استادیار، روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه بین‌المللی اهل بیت، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-2789-269X حسن احمدیان استادیار، روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکدة مطالعات جهان، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0000-0002-2168-9973 Journal Article 2025 01 22 Introduction Even as the world transitions through new phases in political, economic, social, cultural, and technological dimensions, the fundamental definition of the state —based on people, land, sovereignty, and government— remains largely unchanged. People, as a core component of the state, encompass many political and social opportunities and threats. The quality of social services, social acceptance, political legitimacy and ideological influence —all along with countless other variables—shape the fabric of society, collectively. This focus has led many West Asian countries to develop long-term national plans. Saudi Arabia, as a key regional rival of Iran, has sought to pursue a new course under the leadership of King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Key initiatives include transitioning from an oil-dependent economy to a post-oil economy, fostering economic development, and expanding social freedoms. In the economic sphere, Aramco, the national oil giant, bears the costs of this transition. Socially, the growth of the middle class—primarily driven by the younger generation and technocrats like Mohammed bin Salman—aims to establish a new social base. Reforms promoting women’s rights and social liberties have continued to demand further freedoms. However, despite these reforms, political restrictions have persisted. Mohammed bin Salman’s approach to political figures such as Mohammed bin Nayef, the arrests at the Ritz-Carlton in November 2017, and the suppression of political parties and Brotherhood movement activists have caused political development to regress relative to economic progress. In Iran, during the second Pahlavi era, the political space was similarly constrained. The coup of 18 Mordad 1953 led to increased political repression, yet the surge in oil prices during the 1950s facilitated efforts to develop infrastructure. Despite this, the Pahlavi government was unable to control the political space effectively, leading to unbalanced development. The parallels between the unbalanced development approaches in pre-Islamic Revolution Iran and Saudi Arabia today suggest that Saudi Arabia's recent trajectory may have reached an impasse, with structural changes underway. This article aims to draw comparisons between these two political systems, focusing on their development experiences—specifically, Saudi Arabia today and the second Pahlavi era in Iran. We will examine the economic, political, and social dimensions of both cases through a comparative approach. Initially, we will address the concepts of sustainable development and participation, extracting key variables, followed by an analysis of the social variables in both periods. Methodology This research investigates the concept of unbalanced development through a descriptive-analytical approach, utilizing documentary data. It compares the policies of Saudi Arabia under King Salman with those of the second Pahlavi government, focusing specifically on three main areas: politics, economy, and society and culture, each comprising various interconnected variables. Results and discussion The process of unbalanced development seems to be emerging as a new model during an era when the liberal international order is weakening. China, as the most prominent example within this order, has managed to maintain political stability despite these global shifts. In this context, the common variables observed in Iran during the second Pahlavi era and in Saudi Arabia under King Salman merit detailed discussion. However, a key distinction between these two systems is their different temporal contexts; this does not necessarily mean that King Salman and Mohammed bin Salman will follow the same path as the Pahlavi government. While the economy is arguably the most critical initial step in the development process, economic progress alone is insufficient for holistic development. Historically, both the second Pahlavi government and King Salman’s administration began with ambitious economic programs aimed at achieving “civilization” through economic growth. Despite their shared goals, two vital variables have played influential roles: economic diversification—moving away from oil-dependent rentier economies—and attracting foreign investment as an essential alternative source of revenue. In the social sphere, variables such as the growth of a young population eager for participation in social, economic, and political decision-making, combined with increased urbanization, internal migration, and immigration, are transforming societal perceptions of participation. The expansion of educational infrastructure has fostered a significant educated middle class, which has become a key driver of political change. Over time, participation in social and economic spheres has spilled over into the political arena, leading to increased demands for political engagement. Since the political structures of both Iran and Saudi Arabia have been unwilling or unable to accommodate this rising participation, political activism has often occurred outside official channels. The second Pahlavi government responded swiftly to these developments, especially after the 1953 coup, whereas Saudi Arabia is still in the early stages of social development, with political participation not yet widespread. An important factor that inhibits revolutionary change in Saudi Arabia is its demographic composition, notably its large expatriate population, which creates significant social distinctions and helps maintain stability. Political variables, along with social and economic factors, are fundamental to development, yet in highly centralized systems, political change tends to lag behind social and economic transformations. During the second Pahlavi era, Iran was characterized by a highly centralized political structure, marked by an imbalance in foreign policy and a narrow view of political parties, which ultimately limited its ability to manage rapid development effectively. Conclusion The unbalanced development observed during the second Pahlavi period in Iran and in Saudi Arabia under King Salman, particularly at its peak, has brought the developmental trajectories of the two countries closer together. In both cases, the transition from economic to social development did not translate into political advancement. Although Saudi Arabia can be considered somewhat intermediate in this regard, its current movement trends do not indicate signs of political progress. The development model pursued by the second Pahlavi government ultimately led to widespread public dissatisfaction, culminating in the Islamic Revolution of 1979. However, this does not necessarily mean that the structural similarities or approaches of the two systems will produce identical outcomes. In Saudi Arabia, variables such as the diversity within the population have contributed to decreasing public cohesion regarding political participation. Conversely, the transformation of Saudi society from a traditional social structure into a modern one aligns with current social policy discourses, representing a significant point of difference from Iran’s Pahlavi society. Both cases start reform initiatives from the top—within central structures—meaning that these centralized systems continue to operate in a manner that maintains their centralization even while expanding social freedoms. The Chinese governance model offers an alternative example: despite being an unbalanced and less challenging development approach, it has demonstrated that economic and social development can be achieved without corresponding political reforms, leading to sustainable development in the medium term. Although this governance model differs from liberal democratic approaches, its practical reliability is evident at least over the medium term. During the Pahlavi era, Iran’s rapid adoption of the “open door” policy, combined with the lack of readiness within its political and social structures for genuine political development, ultimately led to structural collapse. In contrast, Saudi Arabia has so far been very cautious; despite Western pressures to expand political space, it has resisted significant reforms in this area. Instead, the Saudi government has attempted to offset this restriction by expanding public freedoms and investing in recreational and social infrastructure to temper public pressures, especially considering the large and youthful demographics. Nonetheless, it remains uncertain how effectively the Saudi government can meet the demands of social and economic development aligned with public expectations. Similar to the Pahlavi government, the Saudi regime—both under King Salman and potentially under Mohammed bin Salman—may face the phenomenon of “rising expectations,” which could ultimately lead to political deadlock. هدف از این مقاله بررسی وجوه اشتراک و افتراق تجربۀ توسعۀ شتابان در عربستان سعودی و ایرانِ پیش از انقلاب اسلامی است. خوانش‌هایی که دولت ملک سلمان و مدیریت توسعه‌محورِ محمد بن سلمان را با رویکردهای دولت دوم پهلوی در همان زمینه مقایسه می‌کند، در فضای نخبگیِ ایران و نیز عربستان رواج یافته و موجب طرح پرسش‌هایی جدی شده است. روی کار آمدن محمد بن سلمان نقطة عطفی در مسیر حرکت سیاست، اقتصاد و روندهای اجتماعی در آن کشور است. در یک نگاه مقایسه‌ای به تاریخ تحولاتِ ایران پیش از انقلاب اسلامی، حداقل در سطح کلان شاهد روندهای مشابهی هستیم؛ روندهایی که در نهایت به سقوط دولت پهلوی انجامید. پرسش اصلی مقاله بر مهم‌ترین وجوه اشتراک دو ساختار سیاسی از منظر نگاه به توسعه و شیوۀ اجرای آن متمرکز است: وجوه تشابه دو تجربۀ توسعه‌گرایی در عربستان امروز از یک سو و تجربۀ دوران پهلوی دوم در ایران از سوی دیگر چیست. برای پاسخ و تبیین میزان اشتراک دو ساختار مورد بررسی، دست به بررسی ابعاد مشترک اقتصادی، سیاسی و اجتماعی آن دو زده و در یک رویکرد مقایسه‌ای میان دولت ملک سلمان به رهبری محمد بن سلمان با دورة پهلوی دوم در ایران به مشابهت‌های شایان توجهی در روندهای سیاسی، اجتماعی و اقتصادی رسیدیم که می‌توان آن را در «توسعۀ نامتوازن» خلاصه کرد. پرسش آینده‌پژوهانة متفرّع از این پژوهش آن است که خروجی توسعۀ نامتوازنی که در ایران از عوامل سقوط شاه قلمداد می‌شود، در عربستان به چه صورت بروز خواهد کرد.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102583_a22afd7b8cf7d1c6821722b9d8809095.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 55 2 2025 06 22 The Evolution of the World Order and the Strategies of Middle Powers: A Reflection on Saudi Arabia’s New Foreign Policy تحول در نظم جهانی و استراتژی‌های قدرت‌های میانه: تأملی در سیاست خارجی نوین عربستان سعودی 614 581 102584 10.22059/jpq.2025.383273.1008220 FA مجید محمد شریفی استادیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی ، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران. 0000-0003-3974-0121 ساجده السادات جعفری دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد روابط بین الملل دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2024 10 08 Introduction The global landscape of international relations is experiencing a significant transformation, characterized by the emergence of new power structures, shifting alliances, and the decline of traditional hegemonies. These changes intensify the inherent uncertainties of international politics and foster new anxieties and strategic recalibrations among states worldwide. However, amidst this volatility, opportunities are also unfolding—particularly for middle powers. Positioned between great powers and lesser states, these nations often possess the necessary economic resources, diplomatic capabilities, and regional influence to shape global outcomes, even if they lack the capacity to unilaterally determine them. Middle power leaders now face a broader spectrum of choices as they navigate this fluid environment. Their strategic decisions— whether to align with dominant powers, hedge among competitors, or to pursue independent initiatives— will be influenced by their perceptions of global developments, their national interests, and their willingness to take calculated risks. Each option carries significant implications for their security, economic prosperity, and geopolitical relevance. Thus, analyzing the strategic alternatives available to middle powers during this transitional period is a vital task. This article aims to contribute to this discussion by addressing a key question: What strategic options are available to middle powers in a transforming global order, and which among them is the most effective? To answer this, the study examines a range of foreign policy strategies, including: (1) balance of power, (2) balance of threat, (3) soft balancing, (4) responsibility transfer, (5) followership, and (6) hedging. After evaluating the advantages and limitations of each, the article contends that hedging emerges as the most advantageous approach. This strategy allows middle powers to manage uncertainty, reduce risks, and retain strategic flexibility—providing them with the time needed to adapt to ongoing shifts in the global system. Importantly, the analysis emphasizes that hedging is not a passive fallback but a proactive strategy that enables middle powers to optimize their foreign policy objectives in an increasingly multipolar world. Methodology This research employs a descriptive-analytical methodology, suitable for both theoretical development and applied case analysis. It begins by examining the concept of the "middle power" within international relations theory, exploring how such states have traditionally situated themselves within the global system. Drawing on both classical and contemporary sources, the study outlines the main strategies that middle powers have historically employed to navigate the complexities of international politics. Building on this theoretical framework, the research then identifies the core features and operational mechanisms of six key foreign policy strategies. These strategies are not viewed as mutually exclusive categories but rather as points along a spectrum, with states positioning themselves differently depending on specific contexts and evolving international conditions. The study emphasizes a detailed focus on strategic hedging, elaborating on its theoretical foundations and practical applications—particularly for middle powers facing external pressures and internal transformations. To ground the analysis in real-world phenomena, the study applies the framework of strategic hedging to the case of Saudi Arabia, a country that has recently undergone a significant recalibration of its foreign policy. This case is chosen for its geopolitical relevance and its illustrative value as a middle power actively navigating the uncertainties of a changing global order. Saudi Arabia’s evolving approach—characterized by balancing traditional alliances, such as with the United States, and forging new ties with rising powers like China and Russia—serves as a compelling example of hedging in practice. By examining Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy choices through the lens of the hedging strategy, the study aims to assess its effectiveness and explore its broader relevance for other middle powers operating under similar conditions. Results and Discussion The ongoing transformation of the international system is characterized by several key trends: the relative decline of U.S. unipolarity, the assertive rise of China, the resurgence of regional powers, and the weakening of multilateral institutions. Collectively, these developments have heightened overall uncertainty in international relations. For middle powers, this environment presents both challenges and opportunities: increased vulnerabilities, such as exposure to external shocks, diminished strategic predictability, and mounting pressure from competing great powers; alongside new prospects for strategic maneuvering, diplomatic innovation, and greater autonomy on the world stage. To navigate this complex environment effectively, middle powers must critically evaluate their foreign policy strategies. Traditional approaches, like the balance of power strategy, involve aligning with one bloc to counter perceived threats. While offering short-term security, this can constrain long-term autonomy and provoke retaliation from rival powers. Similarly, the balance of threat strategy—aligning against states seen as the greatest dangers—may limit flexibility and create over-dependence on specific alliance networks. Soft balancing, which employs non-military tools such as institutional engagement, diplomatic coalitions, and economic statecraft, provides a more nuanced alternative. However, it may lack the immediacy and decisiveness required during crises. Strategies like responsibility transfer or followership—deferment to a dominant power or shifting burdens to others—risk undermining a state's credibility and agency in the international arena. In contrast, the hedging strategy offers a flexible, hybrid approach. It enables middle powers to maintain relationships with established hegemons while simultaneously engaging with emerging powers. This dual-engagement approach functions as strategic insurance: if one alignment becomes less viable or more costly, alternatives remain. Hedging reduces the risk of entrapment in great power conflicts and preserves the flexibility needed to recalibrate foreign policy in response to changing circumstances. The case of Saudi Arabia exemplifies this hedging approach. In recent years, Saudi foreign policy has experienced a notable shift under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. While preserving strong security and economic ties with the United States, Saudi Arabia has intensified its engagement with China—particularly in energy, investment, and infrastructure—and has sought cooperative initiatives with Russia, including participation within OPEC+. Meanwhile, it has also worked to reduce its reliance on U.S. security guarantees through regional normalization agreements and an emphasis on developing its own defense capabilities. This behavior aligns with the logic of strategic hedging. Saudi leadership is consciously diversifying international partnerships, balancing risks, and maintaining strategic flexibility. Instead of choosing between alignment and autonomy, East and West, Saudi Arabia is pursuing a strategy that keeps multiple options open—aiming to manage uncertainty more effectively and strengthen its position as an influential actor within the evolving global order. Conclusion Based on both the theoretical analysis and empirical examination of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy evolution, this study concludes that strategic hedging constitutes the most optimal strategy for middle powers navigating the current era of global transition. Unlike rigid alliances or reactive balancing approaches, hedging allows middle powers to adopt a more flexible, multi-dimensional foreign policy. It provides a buffer against systemic shocks, enhances bargaining power, and creates space for long-term planning and capacity-building. By engaging simultaneously with both established and emerging powers, middle powers can avoid premature commitments while preserving the benefits of strategic engagement. This approach better equips them to withstand geopolitical turbulence, protect their national interests, and even expand their influence in global affairs. Importantly, strategic hedging should not be viewed as a sign of indecision or weakness; rather, it is a deliberate, forward-looking strategy designed to maximize opportunities and mitigate risks. In conclusion, the ongoing transformation of the global order—although marked by uncertainty—also offers a strategic window of opportunity. Middle powers that adopt the logic of hedging can not only survive this turbulent period but also play an active role in shaping the future contours of the international system. As exemplified by Saudi Arabia’s case, strategic hedging is not merely a theoretical concept but a practical and effective policy approach for navigating the complex geopolitics of the 21st century. پدیدار شدن نشانههای تحول در افق نظم جهانی، همزمان که عدمقطعیت ذاتی روابط بینالملل و نگرانیهای حاصل از آن را تشدید میکند، برای تمامی دولتها بویژه قدرتهای میانه، نویدبخش فرصتهای بیشماری نیز است. رهبران قدرتهای میانه در دوران گذار نظام بینالملل، طیفی از انتخابها را پیشرو دارند. انتخاب هریک از استراتژیهای موجود، بدان وابسته است که رهبران این دولتها چه برداشتی از سرشت حقیقی تحولات جهانی دارند و اینکه چه منافعی را در اولویت قرار میدهند. با در نظر داشت پیامدهای سترگ انتخاب هر یک از این استراتژیها برای منافع ملی و اثرگذاری انکارناپذیر آنها بر تمامی شئون حیات سیاسی دولتها، این مقاله بر آن است تا فهم این پرسش را بیدار کند که در هنگامه تحول در نظم جهانی، قدرتهای میانه چه انتخابهایی پیشرو دارند و در این بین بهترین استراتژی کدام است؟ با بررسی انواع استراتژیهای موازنه قدرت، موازنه تهدید، موازنه نرم، احاله مسئولیت، دنبالهروی و هجینگ استراتژی، نویسنده بر این باور است که برای رفع عدمقطعیت حاصل از تحول در نظم جهانی و همچنین افق زمانی رهبران قدرتهای میانه برای بهرهمندی از منافع حاصل از این تحول، به نظر میرسد هجینگ بتواند استراتژی مطلوبی برای این کشورها باشد. این مقاله سیاست خارجی نوین عربستان سعودی را در مقام شاهدی برای این استدلال مطالعه میکند.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_102584_683a01ba3e07e46066afd4594f5230c9.pdf