دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 The Political Philosophy of Blockchain: A Three-Paradigm Reinterpretation in the Context of the New World Order and National Approaches فلسفه سیاسی بلاک‌چین: بازخوانی سه‌پارادایمی در بستر نظم نوین جهانی و رویکردهای ملی 318 293 107405 10.22059/jpq.2026.399528.1008399 FA روح اله اسلامی دانشیار علوم سیاسی دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران. وحید آرمان دانشجوی دکتری علوم سیاسی دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران. Journal Article 2025 07 30 Introduction Blockchain technology, one of the most significant innovations of the 21st century, has drawn widespread attention not only for its technical and economic capabilities but also for its far-reaching social and political implications. Originally developed to support decentralized transactions through Bitcoin, blockchain has evolved into a transformative paradigm that challenges foundational concepts in political philosophy—such as power, sovereignty, trust, and justice. With its core features—decentralization, transparency, immutability, and disintermediation—blockchain enables the reconfiguration of social relations and institutional structures at both local and global scales. This study proposes a tripartite analytical framework for the political philosophy of blockchain, engaging three distinct paradigms: market-libertarian (e.g., the U.S.), regulatory-moderate (e.g., the EU), and authoritarian-centralized (e.g., China). By combining theoretical analysis with comparative case studies, the research explores how political, economic, and cultural contexts shape blockchain adoption. Ultimately, the study aims to assess blockchain's potential to democratize power or reinforce new forms of control, and to offer insights into ethical governance and sustainable regulation in the digital era. Methodology This study employs a qualitative, theory-driven methodology grounded in comparative political analysis and critical theory. The central analytical framework is structured around three paradigmatic lenses—optimistic, critical, and moderate—each representing distinct ideological and philosophical interpretations of blockchain. The optimistic paradigm, rooted in libertarianism and radical transparency, views blockchain as a tool for individual empowerment, decentralization, and digital self-sovereignty, drawing on theorists such as Andreas Antonopoulos and William Davidson. The critical paradigm, informed by the Frankfurt School and critiques of digital capitalism from scholars like Shoshana Zuboff, Byung-Chul Han, and Ivan Illich, emphasizes the risks of data dispossession, algorithmic domination, and the rise of surveillance capitalism under the guise of decentralization. The moderate paradigm, articulated by thinkers such as Yuval Noah Harari, Michael Walzer, and Rahel Jaeggi, focuses on algorithmic governance, participatory regulation, and the co-evolution of the state and technology. Using this tripartite framework, the study critically analyzes blockchain’s socio-political implications, integrating conceptual analysis with real-world case comparisons (U.S., EU, China) to uncover how blockchain reconfigures fundamental notions of power, legitimacy, and institutional trust. Results and Discussion Different countries have adopted markedly distinct approaches to blockchain technology, shaped by their underlying political philosophies, economic priorities, and governance frameworks. These approaches illustrate how cultural and institutional contexts influence the acceptance, regulation, and development of emerging technologies. The United States exemplifies an optimistic, market-driven approach to blockchain. Rooted in libertarian ideals emphasizing individual freedom, private ownership, and limited government intervention, the U.S. fosters a dynamic innovation ecosystem, particularly centered in Silicon Valley. This environment encourages rapid technological experimentation and the growth of startups, venture capital investment, and private-sector leadership in blockchain and cryptocurrency. Blockchain is seen as a transformative technology capable of decentralizing traditional power structures and empowering individuals with direct control over assets, data, and decision-making. However, the absence of a unified federal regulatory framework has led to a fragmented legal landscape, with individual states imposing diverse and sometimes contradictory regulations. While this regulatory heterogeneity creates challenges and legal uncertainties, it also allows for local experimentation with different regulatory models. The U.S. approach thus balances fostering innovation and autonomy with the complexities of governance in a decentralized technological context. Nonetheless, concerns remain about the concentration of economic power in a few large tech companies and the potential exacerbation of social inequalities—trends that may contradict the libertarian vision of distributed power and individual empowerment. The European Union takes a more moderate, law-centric stance toward blockchain. This approach emphasizes integrating innovation with legal oversight, aiming to balance technological advancement with ethical considerations and consumer protection. Blockchain is seen not as a tool to eliminate oversight but as a platform to improve governance transparency, accountability, and public trust. The EU’s regulatory frameworks focus on ensuring that service providers disclose risks, protect user privacy, and reduce systemic vulnerabilities. Such measures are designed to create a secure and trustworthy environment for blockchain applications while preventing excessive decentralization that could undermine economic stability or facilitate misuse. This law-focused strategy reflects a broader political commitment to democratic values, the rule of law, and social responsibility. While these regulations may pose compliance challenges for smaller startups and could inadvertently consolidate market power among large firms, the EU’s model aims to foster a sustainable innovation ecosystem that serves the public interest. Through various initiatives, the EU promotes blockchain applications in public services such as digital identity management and supply chain transparency, reflecting its vision of blockchain as a tool for enhancing societal governance and social justice. China’s approach to blockchain is distinctively authoritarian and state-centric. Rather than embracing decentralization and individual autonomy, China uses blockchain technology primarily as an instrument to reinforce government control and economic oversight. Decentralized cryptocurrencies have been banned outright, while state-issued digital currency systems are developed to enable comprehensive monitoring and management of financial transactions. This centralized digital currency facilitates real-time tracking of monetary flows, enhancing the government’s ability to enforce monetary policy and combat illicit activities, but it also increases surveillance over citizens’ financial behaviors. China has invested heavily in building permissioned blockchain infrastructure platforms tightly controlled by the state, integrating blockchain into various sectors such as finance, logistics, and e-government. This model reflects a broader philosophy of "authoritarian innovation," where technological development is pursued under strict government guidance and control to serve national objectives. While this approach enables rapid scaling and deployment of blockchain solutions, it significantly limits decentralization, user autonomy, and privacy protections. The state’s emphasis on control and oversight represents a fundamentally different vision of blockchain’s role compared to the U.S. and EU models. In summary, the United States, European Union, and China represent three divergent paradigms in blockchain governance. The U.S. model champions market freedom and technological autonomy but faces regulatory fragmentation and social equity challenges. The EU balances innovation with robust legal oversight and social accountability, prioritizing democratic governance and ethical standards. China adopts a state-directed, centralized approach that leverages blockchain for governance control and economic management, subordinating decentralization to political authority. Conclusion Blockchain technology, as outlined in this study, transcends mere technical innovation to redefine core concepts of sovereignty, authority, ownership, and participation within the digital political economy. A tripartite paradigm analysis—optimistic, critical, and moderate—reveals divergent perspectives on blockchain’s potentials and risks. The optimistic paradigm emphasizes radical transparency and digital self-sovereignty, contingent on robust legal and social infrastructures. The critical paradigm highlights the risk of data-centric power reconcentration even under decentralization. The moderate paradigm advocates for algorithmic governance and participatory regulation, balancing innovation with oversight through multi-stakeholder collaboration. A comparative analysis of the U.S., EU, and China illustrates how cultural, historical, and geo-economic factors shape distinct governance models, ranging from market-driven innovation to regulatory foresight and authoritarian digital control. فناوری بلاک‌چین صرفاً یک نوآوری فنی در حوزۀ اقتصاد دیجیتال نیست، بلکه به‌تدریج به یکی از موضوعات مهم در فلسفۀ سیاسی، حکمرانی دیجیتال و نظم نوین جهانی تبدیل شده است. این فناوری با ویژگی‌هایی مانند تمرکززدایی، شفافیت، تغییرناپذیری داده‌ها و امکان حذف برخی واسطه‌های سنتی، پرسش‌هایی بنیادین دربارۀ قدرت، حاکمیت، اعتماد، آزادی فردی و عدالت اجتماعی مطرح می‌کند. پژوهش حاضر با رویکردی توصیفی- تحلیلی و با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای، فلسفۀ سیاسی بلاک‌چین را در قالب سه پارادایم اصلی بررسی می‌کند: پارادایم خوش‌بینانه که بلاک‌چین را ابزاری برای تقویت آزادی فردی، خودحاکمی دیجیتال و کاهش اقتدار نهادهای متمرکز می‌داند؛ پارادایم انتقادی که بر تمرکززدایی ظاهری، سرمایه‌داری نظارتی و امکان بازتولید سلطه در بستر فناوری تأکید دارد؛ و پارادایم میانه‌روانه که بر تنظیم‌گری هوشمند، اخلاق الگوریتمی و همزیستی دولت و فناوری تمرکز می‌کند. در ادامه، مقاله رویکردهای ایالات متحده، اتحادیۀ اروپا و چین را به‌صورت تطبیقی بررسی می‌کند. ایالات متحده اغلب با منطق بازارمحور و نوآوری‌گرا به بلاک‌چین می‌نگرد؛ اتحادیۀ اروپا با مقرراتی مانند MiCA در پی ایجاد تعادل میان نوآوری، شفافیت و حمایت از کاربران است؛ و چین با توسعۀ یوان دیجیتال و زیرساخت‌های بلاک‌چینی تحت نظارت دولت، این فناوری را در چارچوب حکمرانی متمرکز به‌کار می‌گیرد. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که بلاک‌چین ماهیتی ذاتاً رهایی‌بخش یا سلطه‌گر ندارد، بلکه پیامدهای سیاسی آن به زمینۀ نهادی، حقوقی و ایدئولوژیک هر جامعه بستگی دارد. بنابراین، آیندۀ سیاسی بلاک‌چین نه در نفی دولت و نه در کنترل کامل آن، بلکه در طراحی نوعی حکمرانی ترکیبی، پاسخگو و اخلاق‌محور قابل جست‌وجوست.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107405_51e5bbdf6a0828d2a896761bfdbf1c7a.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 Islam and International Relations in the Political Theology of Ayatollah Javadi Amoli Based on Skinner's Hermeneutic Method صورت‌بندی رابطة اسلام و روابط بین‌الملل در کلام سیاسی آیت‌الله جوادی آملی بر پایة روش هرمنوتیکی اسکینر 351 319 107406 10.22059/jpq.2026.400846.1008415 FA علی آقاجانی استادیار، گروه علوم سیاسی، پژوهشکدۀ علوم اجتماعی، پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه، قم، ایران. Journal Article 2025 09 04 Introduction In the face of moral, identity-based, and structural crises within the contemporary international order, re-reading Islamic thought based on revealed rationality has become increasingly necessary. Ayatollah Abdullah Javadi Amoli, as one of the most prominent contemporary Islamic thinkers, offers an alternative framework for understanding and organizing international relations—one that can open new horizons against secular and power-oriented Western paradigms. The main question is: How are international relations defined from Javadi Amoli's perspective, and what components distinguish his view from common Western theories? Javadi Amoli's political theology is based on the premise that international relations should be organized according to the divine nature of humanity, revealed rationality, and monotheistic ethics, rather than on national interests, power-seeking, or value relativism. This view has the capacity to present a civilizational and justice-oriented model. The importance of this study lies in its attempt to articulate an indigenous Islamic discourse on global order, addressing the theoretical vacuum created by the dominance of Western paradigms in the study of international relations. Methodology The present study analyzes Javadi Amoli's political discourse on international relations using Skinner's four-stage hermeneutic method, adapted to the Islamic context. The four stages are as follows: 1 .Identifying key concepts: Terms such as "Caliphate of Allah," "Unified Nation" (Ummah), "Just Peace," "Nature" (Fitrah), and "Servitude" ('Ubudiyyah) are extracted as fundamental concepts within his discourse. 2. Examining the historical and discursive context: Javadi Amoli's works are analyzed within the broader context of global crises, contemporary Islamic intellectual discourse, and his critique of Western modernity. 3. Reconstructing the author's intention: Javadi Amoli's goal in proposing these concepts is to present a divine and justice-oriented model for a global order in which humanity is the end of politics, not its means. 4. Assessing the impact of the discourse: His thought has the capacity to influence Islamic theorizing in international relations and to offer a fundamental critique of the global secular order. The research is qualitative in nature, relying on primary sources including Javadi Amoli's major works in Quranic exegesis, philosophy, and political theology, as well as secondary literature engaging with his thought. Results and Discussion Javadi Amoli views international relations as an arena for the realization of justice, human dignity, and divine servitude. By critiquing the epistemological and value foundations of the modern world order, he redefines the concepts of human rights, peace, and justice from a Quranic perspective. His thought emphasizes the civilizational capacity of Islam to present an alternative world order founded on revealed rationality and monotheistic ethics. Javadi Amoli's political theology rests on three fundamental axes: 1. Monotheism (Tawhid) as the ontological and ethical basis of international relations 2. Inherent human dignity (Karamah) as a guiding principle in global interactions 3. Justice ('Adl) as the goal and criterion of legitimacy for the international order From his perspective, international relations are part of international law, and since law in Islamic thought is rooted in religion, religion itself is considered the primary source of international relations. Among his fundamental views on international relations are: the acceptance of all nations—whether Muslim or non-Muslim, monotheist or non-monotheist—within the circle of human interaction; the characterization of Islam's international language as the "language of monotheistic nature" (Fitrah); the position of Islam as the guardian of world peace; the rejection of emotional attachment to unbelievers or acceptance of foreign impositions, alongside the inadmissibility of breaking treaties or committing aggression against others; and the maintenance of a balance between moral principles, political realism, and religious obligations in the international arena. The findings reveal that Javadi Amoli's political theology offers a coherent alternative to secular international relations theories by grounding global interactions in ontological and ethical foundations derived from revelation. Unlike realist theories that prioritize power and national interest, or liberal theories that emphasize procedural justice and contractual agreements, Javadi Amoli's framework places inherent human dignity and divine servitude at the center of international order. This approach shares certain affinities with normative theories such as the English School's emphasis on international society and cosmopolitanism's focus on universal human rights, but it distinguishes itself by rooting these norms in monotheistic ethics and revealed rationality rather than secular humanism. Conclusion This study demonstrates that Javadi Amoli's political theology presents a distinctive and coherent model for international relations that challenges the foundational assumptions of secular Western paradigms. His thought emphasizes that international relations should be organized not around power, interest, or value relativism, but around monotheistic ethics, inherent human dignity, and justice as the ultimate criterion of legitimacy. By reinterpreting key concepts such as peace, justice, and human rights from a Quranic perspective, Javadi Amoli offers a civilizational alternative capable of addressing the moral and structural crises of the contemporary global order. Future research could explore the practical implications of his model for Islamic foreign policy, its points of convergence and divergence with existing international law frameworks, and its potential contribution to global justice discourse. در مواجهه با بحران‌های اخلاقی، هویتی و ساختاری نظم بین‌الملل معاصر، بازخوانی اندیشة اسلامی مبتنی بر عقلانیت وحیانی ضرورتی دوچندان یافته است. آیت‌الله جوادی آملی به‌عنوان یکی از برجسته‌ترین متفکران معاصر، چارچوبی بدیل و تمدنی برای ساماندهی روابط بین‌الملل ارائه می‌دهد که در برابر پارادایم‌های سکولار و قدرت‌محور غربی، افق جدیدی می‌گشاید. پرسش اصلی پژوهش آن است که روابط بین‌الملل از منظر کلام سیاسی جوادی آملی چگونه تعریف می‌شود و چه مؤلفه‌هایی آن را از نظریه‌های رایج غربی متمایز می‌سازد؟ یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که اندیشۀ وی بر این فرض استوار است که روابط بین‌الملل باید بر پایۀ فطرت الهی انسان، عقلانیت وحیانی و اخلاق توحیدی سامان یابد؛ نه بر مبنای منافع ملی، قدرت‌طلبی یا نسبی‌گرایی ارزشی.با بهره‌گیری از روش چهارمرحله‌ای هرمنوتیک قصدگرای اسکینر، پژوهش حاضر نشان می‌دهد که جوادی آملی روابط بین‌الملل را عرصه‌ای برای تحقق عدالت جهانی، کرامت انسانی و عبودیت الهی می‌داند. او با نقد بنیادین مبانی معرفتی و ارزشی نظم مدرن، مفاهیم کلیدی همچون حقوق بشر، صلح، جنگ و تعهدات بین‌المللی را از منظر قرآنی بازتعریف می‌کند. کلام سیاسی او بر سه محور اصلی توحید (مبنای هستی‌شناختی)، کرامت ذاتی انسان (اصل راهنما) و عدالت (غایت و معیار مشروعیت) استوار است و ظرفیت ارائۀ الگویی اخلاق‌محور، عدالت‌طلب و تمدن‌ساز را برای نظم جهانی بدیل داراست.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107406_de28caba67417fa24e41b3e7bdd051ac.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 Theology and Political Modernity Examining the Relationship between theology and Modern Political thought الهیات و مدرنیتۀ سیاسی بررسی رابطۀ الهیات با اندیشة سیاسی مدرن 376 353 107407 10.22059/jpq.2026.393041.1008337 FA رضا جاوید دانش‌آموختۀ دکتری جامعه‌شناسی فرهنگی، گروه جامعه‌شناسی، دانشکدۀ علوم انسانی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران. Journal Article 2025 05 03 Introduction In general, the relationship between modernity and theology (political and economic) has been considered from two different perspectives. One aspect, which is a more classical and general approach, considers modernity and the Enlightenment as a fundamental break with the world of tradition. In this view, modernity is the product of disregard for religion and liberation from it. In contrast to priests and religious missionaries, philosophers and scientists emerged during the Enlightenment who were known as interpreters of the new world. But there was another branch that considered modernity and secular rationality not in opposition to the theological tradition but in its continuation. For them, modern thought and experience are the earthly and humanization of theological and religious ideas. In this branch, the theological tradition is present and manifests itself in the context of modernity, whether in the form of pursuing messianic promises, or in the form of moral influences. In late modernity, each of these readings has focused on unique aspects. However, Walter Benjamin’s political theology, while criticizing theological and enlightenment traditions in the right and left camps, reveals historical philosophy that draws on theological ideas and applies them in revolutionary traditions. In the view of this article, such a combination, which goes beyond previous approaches, can provide new solutions for overcoming the problems, challenges, and dead ends of late modernity. The Research Method This article, relying on library sources (documents) and using a descriptive and analytical method, examines different readings of the relationship between theology and the experience of early modernity and its transformation into the theory of political theology in late modernity. Results and Discussion Regarding the relationship between theology and the Enlightenment, one perspective emphasizes the opposition between the two. In this reading, the wisdom of the Enlightenment and theology, the virtues of Christian thought that prevailed in the Middle Ages, were overturned, and the salvation of that world gave way to a prosperous life in this world. The Enlightenment thinkers pinned their hope on human progress. In their view, progress knew no bounds. In their belief, if an institutional and comprehensive transformation could be created, the perfection of society would be within reach. They imagined that science and material progress would provide the means for happiness and virtue. In another reading, the Enlightenment and modernity were the continuation of theology. In this reading, the Enlightenment and history were in line with the medieval messianic religion and were intended to implement its claim to salvation on earth. And finally, critical theory and its branch that focused on political theology attempted to go beyond the limitations of the first two perspectives and utilize the services of theology to achieve the social, economic, and political ideals of modernity. Conclusion In his final conclusion, Walter Benjamin sees the role of theology as simply providing images of worldly happiness for modern subjects, going beyond the conventional dualism of theology and enlightenment and their complete connection. Benjamin uses the power of theology and its images to combat the conquerors of the past and present. Thus, theology is placed at the service of remembering and then liberating and redeeming modern man and transcending the limitations of modernity. رابطة الهیات و روشنگری موضوعی مهم و چالش‌برانگیز در تبارشناسی دنیای مدرن است. در تحلیل کلاسیک، خدای مسیحی دال اولیۀ دنیای پیشامدرن بود و هر چیزی با رجوع به آن معنا و جایگاه خود را پیدا کرد. مدرنیته در این نظام شکاف ایجاد کرد و خدا و معنای مقدس را از قلمرو این جهان حذف و در نهایت انسان و عقل خودبنیاد او را جایگزین آن کرد. اما قرائتی دیگر مدرنیته و عقلانیت روشنگری را ادامه و پیوند با الهیات می‌داند. در این تحلیل، سیاست و اقتصاد مدرن مفاهیم و مدل‌های خود را از الهیات وام گرفته‌اند. حاکم و دولت مطلقۀ مدرن جایگزین خدای یکتا می‌شود و اقتصاد جایگزین نظم الهی ـ مادی او می‌شود. این مقاله به بررسی رابطۀ الهیات سیاسی-اقتصادی با تجربة مدرنیته و عقلانیت روشنگری در دو صورت گسست و تداوم می‌پردازد و بر نارسایی هریک تأکید می‌کند. مقاله با تکیه بر فلسفة تاریخ بنیامین به این نتیجه می‌رسد که ترکیبی از تصاویر الهیاتی رستگاری و رهایی در کنار ایدة سعادت زمینی مدرنیته می‌تواند از نارسایی‌های سیاسی، اقتصادی و اجتماعی مدرنیتة متأخر فراتر رود و به خلق الگوهای جدید کنش سیاسی و اقتصادی منجر شود.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107407_244914fa44a625db3b4bf1150eeb3d6a.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 A Methodological Feasibility Study of the Application of Reason as a Source in Political Jurisprudence: A Critical Reconsideration امکان‌سنجی روش‌شناختی کاربست عقل منبعی در فقه سیاسی: بازاندیشی نقادانه 401 377 107408 10.22059/jpq.2026.401447.1008422 FA هادی جلالی اصل استادیار گروه فقه سیاسی، دانشکده الهیات و ادیان، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2025 09 07 Introduction Political jurisprudence, as a foundational branch of Islamic jurisprudence, constantly grapples with the sources and methodologies used to derive legal rulings. Among these, the status of reason as a source—that is, reason functioning as an independent authority alongside scripture and tradition—remains one of the most contentious issues in Twelver Shi'i thought. This debate is particularly significant in the political sphere, where complexities such as conflicting interests, fluid circumstances, and the risk of secularizing religious discourse are most pronounced. The central question of this article is whether reason can reliably and methodologically serve as an independent source for political rulings, and if so, what limitations govern its application. Methodology This study employs a descriptive–analytical approach within the framework of political jurisprudence philosophy. It first explores the place of reason in Imami thought through two main pathways: (1) deriving rulings by identifying compelling benefits and harms (masāliḥ and mafāsid), and (2) rational approbation and disapprobation (ḥusn and qubḥ). The study then analyzes the theoretical and methodological challenges associated with these approaches in the political context. Sources include classical Imami jurisprudential works, major uṣūl texts, exegetical literature, and contemporary scholarship in the philosophy of political jurisprudence. Results and Discussion The findings reveal that the central difficulty with source reason lies not in its general legitimacy (ḥujjiyya kubrā), but rather in the possibility of definitively arriving at specific rulings (ḥukm sharʿī ṣughrā). The first pathway—deriving rulings through benefits and harms—is hindered by the difficulty of distinguishing between the benefit inherent in the divine ruling itself and the benefit inherent in its object. In the political realm, given the multiplicity of variables, the tension between short- and long-term interests, and the instability of conditions, definitively identifying benefits becomes nearly impossible. The second pathway—rational approbation and disapprobation—can be examined in two forms: first, based on the consensus of the rational community, and second, based on rational judgments about interests and harms. In the first case, consensus is only possible regarding a limited set of self-evident values, many of which have been historically disputed. Moreover, rational conventions often reflect dominant discourses and social perceptions, rendering them unreliable as definitive criteria. The second form ultimately reduces to the problem of benefit–harm reasoning, with its own set of uncertainties. Therefore, this study argues that any uncritical reliance on claims of rational judgment—whether rooted in cultural traditions, religious heritage, or modern Western standards—is methodologically unsound in political jurisprudence. Conclusion This study concludes that in political jurisprudence, reason as an independent source can only be employed within a critical and methodological framework, one that shields it from the hidden influences of social and political discourses. While the application of source reason faces serious methodological limitations in deriving binding rulings, the instrumental role of reason in subject analysis (mawḍūʿ-shināsī) and case application (miṣdāq-shināsī) remains indispensable to the jurisprudential process. This study calls for a methodological rethinking of rational inference in political jurisprudence—one that balances reason and revelation—in order to prevent the secularization of rulings and the subjective interpretation of scriptural texts. این پژوهش با هدف امکان‌سنجی روش‌شناختی کاربست عقل به‌عنوان منبعی مستقل در استنباط احکام شرعی در فقه سیاسی انجام شده است. عقل در فقه امامیه، افزون بر کارکرد ابزاری در فهم متون دینی، می‌تواند از طریق کشف مصالح و مفاسد ملزمه و نیز تحسین و تقبیح عقلی، به‌صورت منبعی مستقل در فرایند استنباط ایفای نقش کند. این مطالعه با روش توصیفی–تحلیلی و در چارچوب فلسفه مضاف به فقه سیاسی، به بررسی چالش‌های کاربرد عقل منبعی در حوزة احکام سیاسی می‌پردازد. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که چالش بنیادین نه در اصل حجیت عقل، بلکه در تحقق عملی «کشف قطعی» حکم شرعی است؛ مسئله‌ای که به‌واسطۀ کثرت متغیرها، تزاحم مصالح، فسادخیز بودن قدرت و تأثیرپذیری ادراکات عقلانی از دانش عامه پیچیده‌تر می‌شود. مقاله با تحلیل دو مسیر عمدۀ کشف حکم (مصالح/مفاسد و حسن/قبح) نشان می‌دهد که دستیابی به قطع روشمند در بیشتر موارد دشوار است. افزون بر این، بنای عقلا نیز اغلب برخاسته از عرف‌های متأثر از گفتمان‌های مسلط است و نمی‌توان آن را معیار قطعی در فقه سیاسی دانست. بر این اساس، پژوهش بر ضرورت نگاه نقادانه به آنچه اقتضای حکم عقل تلقی می‌شود تأکید دارد تا از عرفی‌ شدن احکام به بهانة عقل‌گرایی جلوگیری شود.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107408_221f7cd57d46fa80de4f57d90a9bff43.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 Orientalism Under Critical Scrutiny: Western Narratives of Qajar Iran شرق‌شناسی در بوتۀ نقد: روایت غربیان از ایران دورۀ قاجار 430 403 107452 10.22059/jpq.2026.396531.1008378 FA نوذر خلیل‌طهماسبی دانش‌آموختۀ دکتری علوم سیاسی و پژوهشگر پسادکتری، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی و دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. شهرام یوسفی‌فر استاد، گروه تاریخ، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2025 07 13 Introduction The intellectual confrontation between East and West, particularly since the Renaissance, has consistently occupied a prominent place in the discourse of various thinkers and schools of thought. Each scholar or intellectual tradition has analyzed this dynamic—whether characterized by conflict or interaction—based on distinct intellectual, historical, and philosophical foundations. The encounter between East and West, especially concerning mutual interpretations of cultural traits and foundational ideas, has been marked by debates and conflicting views, sometimes leading to either praise or rejection of the "other." Orientalism emerged as a theory making specific claims about this East-West encounter, dominating discussions for decades. Edward Said, as its most influential proponent, viewed Orientalism and Orientalists as justifications and facilitators of Western dominance over the East. While Said's perspective will be elaborated, the primary focus here is a critical re-evaluation of his claims: Are his views historically grounded? Do they offer a historically informed perspective on the East-West encounter? Do they foster intellectual dialogue and accurate understanding? Crucially, to what extent do his views align with the historical reality of Eastern nations, and to what degree is his interpretation dominated by generalization and oversimplification? Methodology This research employs a critical re-reading of Edward Said's theory of Orientalism alongside a historical analysis of Qajar-era Iran, using thematic analysis as its primary method. Thematic analysis, a qualitative research method, focuses on analyzing and interpreting the meanings embedded within data, documents, and findings. The term "theme" originates from the Greek thema, signifying a proposition or subject from which important concepts and data are derived. Conceptually developed in the 1970s, thematic analysis emphasizes understanding, analysis, and interpretation as fundamental components in examining and re-reading texts and data. Braun and Clarke further refined this method, particularly in psychology, though it has also gained significant traction in other qualitative humanities fields such as sociology, political science, and history. In this method, themes are paramount, serving as key elements for decomposition and analysis. A theme embodies meaning and concept, representing the fullest interpretation of a phenomenon or event. Consequently, identifying themes is the most crucial step in textual analysis. This involves discerning concepts, patterns, and perspectives from information and documents; the researcher's success in this task reflects their analytical skill. Thematic analysis relies on the ability to differentiate, connect, and reconstruct documents and data, aiding a systematic and coherent understanding of events or subjects while preventing reductionism. Findings The re-examination of Western accounts of Qajar Iran reveals significant contradictions to many claims of Said's Orientalism. Contrary to the notion of a universally denigrated East, these texts often express admiration for Iran's historical past as an ancient land. Iranian character and culture were not merely disparaged; alongside some critiques, pleasant descriptions of Iranian temperament and culture were also presented. More importantly, while criticizing prevailing political despotism, these accounts offered insightful and forward-looking interpretations regarding the potential for political revival in Iran and Iranians' resistance against tyranny. Western narratives of Iran were not solely aimed at facilitating Western dominance or demeaning Iranian national culture. A re-interpretation of these writings, focusing on three main themes—"Iranian Character, Culture, and History," "Condemnation of Despotism and Arbitrariness," and "Revival of Iranian Politics"—leads to a different understanding. For instance, Sir John Malcolm's The History of Persia (1815) draws on Persian historical and literary sources, praising figures like Khosrow Anushirvan for his just rule, thus demonstrating nuanced historical engagement. Eugène Flandin, a French traveler, admired Iran's historical heritage and artistic ingenuity, despite noting the country's decline under Qajar rule due to "corrupt and incompetent government." Conclusion This research concludes that Edward Said's theory of Orientalism, while influential, suffers from significant overgeneralizations and an ahistorical approach, particularly when applied to the specific historical context of Qajar Iran. The detailed analysis of Western accounts from this period—including those by Sir John Malcolm, Eugène Flandin, Arthur de Gobineau, Samuel Greene Benjamin, and George Curzon—reveals a more complex and nuanced portrayal of Iran than Said's theory suggests. These narratives often expressed admiration for Iran's ancient history, rich culture, and the character of its people, challenging the notion of a uniformly condescending or power-driven Western gaze. While some Orientalist tendencies may have existed, the prevailing narratives were not solely aimed at facilitating Western dominance or denigrating Iranian identity. The findings underscore the importance of historical specificity and caution against the uncritical application of broad theories to diverse historical realities. By re-interpreting these primary sources, this study demonstrates that intellectual and political encounters between Iran and the West during the Qajar era were multifaceted, involving mutual observation, critique, and even admiration, rather than a simplistic binary of oppressor and oppressed. This nuanced understanding is crucial for moving beyond reductionist interpretations and fostering a deeper appreciation of the intricate historical dynamics between East and West. در این پژوهش بر بازخوانی نقادانۀ نظریۀ شرق‌شناسی تأمل می‌کنیم. نظریۀ شرق‌شناسی ادوارد سعید با تکیه بر برخی مضامین و صورت‌بندی دوگانه‌انگارانه میان شرق و غرب از منظر تلاش یکی برای سلطه بر دیگری، پژوهش‌ها و دیدگاه‌های متعددی را به خود معطوف کرده است. پرسشی که بر آن درنگ می‌شود بدین ترتیب است که دشواری نظریۀ شرق‌شناسی چیست و روایت غربیان از ایران دورۀ قاجار، به‌عنوان آغازگاه رویارویی فکری جدی میان ایران و غرب، تا چه حد با دعاوی این نظریه همخوانی دارد؟ واکاوی این پرسش مستلزم بررسی نظری و مطالعۀ تاریخی است تا بتوان با اتکا به نقد نظری و مطالعۀ موردی تاریخی، خوانشی نقادانه از شرق‌شناسی داشته باشیم. بدین‌سان، ضمن در پیش نهادن روش تحلیل مضمون برای تفسیر نظری و نقادی تاریخی، در دو بخش پیشینه و مبانی نظری، نقدها و ملاحظاتی بر شرق‌شناسی روا داشته می‌شود و در بخش تاریخ، با مبنا قرار دادن روایت غربیان از ایران دورۀ قاجاریه، به‌عنوان نمونۀ مهمی از جهان شرق، روایتی تحلیلی و تاریخی‌نگر از کاستی‌های شرق‌شناسی مطرح می‌شود. همچنین برای گام نهادن در چارچوب پژوهشی منسجم، می‌توان این فرض را مبنا قرار داد که وارسی نقادانۀ نظریۀ شرق‌شناسی ادوارد سعید چنین می‌نماید که او تفسیری غیرتاریخی، کلی‌گرا و تعمیمی دربارۀ رویارویی غرب و شرق دارد و روایت غربیان از ایران دورۀ قاجاریه، به‌مثابۀ کهن‌سرزمین جهان شرق، در موارد بسیاری باژگونۀ دعاوی شرق‌شناسی است.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107452_71706e831155501e61abf8fde8ed52e5.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 Theoretical Reasons for Deterrence Failure (Case Study: Israel’s 2025 Attack on Iran) دلایل نظری شکست بازدارندگی، مورد مطالعه: حملۀ ژوئن 2025 (1404) اسرائیل به ج.ا.ایران 460 431 107453 10.22059/jpq.2026.405320.1008471 FA الهام رسولی ثانی آبادی دانشیار روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکدة حقوق، علوم سیاسی و تاریخ دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران. سعید عطار دانشیار روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکدة حقوق، علوم سیاسی و تاریخ دانشگاه یزد. یزد، ایران. Journal Article 2025 11 10 Introduction Deterrence failure occurs when an attacker state launches a military strike against a defender state (thereby changing the status quo), or when the defender retreats from its demands (thus maintaining the status quo) as a result of threats from the attacker. Conversely, successful deterrence means that the attacking actor withdraws from its planned attack, leaving the status quo unchanged. In other words, the goal of deterrence is control—specifically, controlling the behavior of the opposing state—and the condition for its success is the avoidance of war. In this regard, the central question of this research is: What were the most important theoretical reasons and causes for the failure of deterrence in Iran-Israel relations, particularly regarding Israel's military attack on Iran in 2025? To answer this question, the theoretical explanations for deterrence failure are examined through multiple lenses: levels of analysis, the constituent elements of deterrence, perceptual and cognitive approaches, rational approaches, and semantic and discursive approaches. Methodology Deterrence studies encompass several categories: theoretical studies, game theory analyses, statistical studies of various deterrence cases (including both failures and successes), and specific case studies of deterrence between two countries. This paper is a qualitative study that focuses on a single case study and applies theory to that specific case. In other words, as an explanatory study, it seeks to identify which theoretical causes (independent variables) explain Israel's attack on Iran (the dependent variable) based on theories of deterrence failure. Data collection relies on theoretical sources accessed virtually, and data analysis is conducted through the application of theory to the case. Results and Discussion The Iran-Israel conflict is often characterized as an asymmetric conflict, meaning that the two sides have employed conventional but uneven means throughout their confrontation. The deterrence in question is unilateral and immediate: we are faced with an attacking or challenging actor on one side and a defending actor seeking to maintain the status quo on the other. In Israel's war against Iran, the strategy of "limited military operations for limited goals" has been employed. The research findings indicate that Israel's attack on Iran can be explained through various theoretical frameworks, including rational models of deterrence (classical, sequential, and perfect models), cognitive models (prospect theory and ontological security), and the "power cycle" model. Within rational deterrence models, the conflict is viewed as a game between two rational actors with different stages. At each stage, each actor decides how to act in the next stage based on rational choice and the calculation of benefits and losses, taking into account the possibility of different scenarios at each stage of the game. In contrast, the cognitive model of prospect theory focuses on the attacker's perceptions of the current situation and expected utility. Unlike rational theory, prospect theory holds that actors tend to be risk-averse when choosing between greater gains, but risk-seeking when facing greater losses. Conclusion Based on the research findings, the Islamic Republic of Iran has four scenarios for responding to the situation of deterrence failure resulting from a military attack. These scenarios include: 1.Withdrawing from international agreements and norms and becoming a nuclear weapons state (converting conventional deterrence into nuclear deterrence) 2.Strengthening missile capabilities 3.Halting missile activities as a factor that creates and intensifies the insecurity dilemma 4.Increasing the credibility of its threats to deter future attacks شکست بازدارندگی به معنای حملة نظامی دولت مهاجم به دولت مدافع (تغییر وضع موجود) و یا عقب‌نشینی بازیگر مدافع از خواسته‌های خود (علی‌رغم تداوم وضع موجود) به‌دلیل تهدیدات بازیگر مهاجم است. در همین زمینه هدف اصلی این پژوهش پاسخ به این پرسش است که مهم‌ترین دلایل و علل نظری شکست بازدارندگی در روابط ج.ا.ایران و اسرائیل (حملة نظامی 2025 اسرائیل به ج.ا.ایران) چه بوده است؟ در پاسخ به این پرسش، چارچوب نظری پژوهش به دلایل نظری شکست بازدارندگی از منظر رهیافت‌های ادراکی/ شناختی، رهیافت‌های عقلانی و رهیافت‌های معنایی و گفتمانی می‌پردازد. بر اساس مبانی نظری، یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که حملة اسرائیل به ایران بر اساس مدل‌های عقلانی بازدارندگی (مدل کلاسیک، متوالی و کامل)، مدل‌های شناختی (نظریة چشم‌انداز و حفظ امنیت هویتی) و همچنین مدل چرخش قدرت، می‌تواند دلایل نظری متفاوتی داشته باشد. در پایان با استفاده از یافته‌های تحقیق، نتایج پژوهش سه سناریو را برای دولت ج.ا.ایران در مواجهه با وضعیت شکست بازدارندگی و بازداشتن حملات بعدی از سوی اسرائیل مطرح می‌کند. این سناریوها عبارت‌اند از: سناریوی خروج از توافقات و قواعد بین‌المللی (ایجاد بازدارندگی هسته‌ای)، سناریوی افزایش اعتبار تهدیدات و تقویت بیش از پیش توانمندی‌های موشکی به‌صورت توأمان (تقویت قدرت بازدارندگی متعارف)، سناریوی اعتمادسازی (توقف فعالیت‌های موشکی و هسته‌ای به‌عنوان عامل ایجادکننده و تشدیدکنندة معمای ناامنی).

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107453_ac98ef8a8f766a04ecb40b48f3fe8998.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 The Evolution of the Concept of the Independent State in Islamic Political Thought: From Organic Self-Sufficiency to Resistance-Based Civilization-Building تحول مفهوم دولت مستقل در حکمت سیاسی اسلامی: از خودکفایی ارگانیک تا تمدن‌سازی مقاومت‌بنیاد 488 461 107454 10.22059/jpq.2026.398674.1008389 FA هادی شجاعی استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، مؤسسة آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی ره، قم، ایران. 0009-0002-2721-3818 Journal Article 2025 07 21 Introduction The concept of the independent state has long been a central issue in political philosophy, and within Islamic political thought, it has undergone dynamic transformations reflecting shifts in historical contexts. Classical Islamic philosophers such as Al-Farabi and Ibn Sina viewed independence as self-sufficiency within an ideal society, while modern challenges including colonialism and globalization redefined it as a multidimensional principle of sovereignty. The Islamic Revolution in Iran further elevated independence into a civilizational framework, integrating it with resistance against hegemony. This study traces the evolution of independence from a philosophical ideal to a foundational paradigm in Islamic political thought, addressing gaps in existing literature by analyzing its conceptual development across different historical periods. Methodology This study employs an analytical-hermeneutical approach to examine the conceptual evolution of the independent state in Islamic political thought through systematic analysis of foundational texts from the classical to contemporary periods. The methodology combines textual interpretation with comparative historical analysis, focusing on how Muslim thinkers across different eras—from Al-Farabi and Ibn Sina to modern figures such as Imam Khomeini—have conceptualized independence in relation to justice, sovereignty, and self-reliance. By carefully examining primary sources within their specific intellectual and historical contexts, the research traces the transformation of independence from a philosophical ideal of organic self-sufficiency to a strategic paradigm of resistance-based civilization-building, while maintaining methodological rigor through comparative textual analysis and contextual interpretation. Results and Discussion The findings reveal a three-stage evolution of independence in Islamic political wisdom: foundational theorizing, practical implementation, and civilizational modeling. In the classical period, independence was conceptualized as organic self-sufficiency, in which the ideal city (al-Madina al-Fadila) functioned as a self-sustaining entity free from external dependencies. Thinkers such as Al-Farabi and the Ikhwan al-Safa (Brethren of Purity) emphasized internal cohesion and moral governance as the basis of independence, framing it as a natural outcome of virtuous rule rather than an explicit political goal. In the medieval era, practical manuals of governance, such as Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk's Siyasatnama (The Book of Government), translated philosophical ideals into actionable policies. Independence was now seen as requiring robust economic systems, military preparedness, and diplomatic acumen. This period marked a shift from abstract theorizing to pragmatic statecraft, in which independence became a measurable objective of political administration. The modern era witnessed the most significant transformation, as independence became a rallying cry against colonialism and cultural hegemony. Thinkers such as Imam Khomeini redefined independence as resistance to Western domination, integrating it into a broader project of Islamic civilization-building. The Islamic Republic of Iran's slogan "Neither East nor West" epitomized this shift, positioning independence as a non-negotiable principle of Islamic governance. Contemporary discourse, as articulated by Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei, further expands independence into a civilizational paradigm, emphasizing self-reliance in science, technology, and culture as prerequisites for Islamic revival. Conclusion The study reveals that independence in Islamic political thought has transformed from a classical ideal of virtue and self-sufficiency into an active principle of resistance and civilizational identity. While early thinkers linked it to internal governance, modern discourse reframed it as a dynamic force against colonialism and a foundation for Islamic political revival. This evolution demonstrates the adaptability of Islamic philosophy in reinterpreting core concepts to meet contemporary challenges, presenting independence as a civilizational alternative to Western hegemony. Future research could explore its implications for global justice, multiculturalism, and Islamic political engagement in international relations. دولت مستقل به‌عنوان یکی از کلیدی‌ترین مفاهیم فلسفة سیاسی، همواره در تقاطع مباحث نظری و چالش‌های عملی قرار داشته است. این مقاله با بررسی سیر تحول مفهوم دولت مستقل در تاریخ حکمت سیاسی اسلامی، به تحلیل جایگاه آن به‌مثابة یک مسئلة فلسفی-سیاسی می‌پردازد. ضرورت این پژوهش از آنجا ناشی می‌شود که استقلال، به‌رغم اهمیت بنیادینش در شکل‌گیری هویت سیاسی جوامع اسلامی، کمتر به‌صورت نظام‌مند در چارچوب حکمت سیاسی اسلامی بررسی شده است. پرسش اصلی این است که چگونه مفهوم دولت مستقل در تاریخ حکمت سیاسی به مسئله‌ای فلسفی-سیاسی تبدیل شده و چه تحولاتی را پشت سر گذاشته است؟ با روش تحلیلی-تأویلی و با تکیه بر منابع دست‌اول حکمت سیاسی اسلامی، یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که استقلال در دو دورة پیشامعاصر و معاصر از «خودکفایی درونی» به «مقاومت در برابر استعمار» و سپس به «اساس تمدن‌سازی اسلامی» تحول یافته است. در دورة کلاسیک، استقلال بیشتر در قالب خودکفایی مدینة فاضله مطرح بود؛ در دوران معاصر، تحت تأثیر فراگیری استعمار، به مفهومی چندبعدی (فرهنگی، سیاسی و اقتصادی) تبدیل شد و در نهایت، در گفتمان انقلاب اسلامی، به رکنی اساسی در تمدن‌سازی اسلامی ارتقا یافت. این تحقیق نشان می‌دهد که استقلال در حکمت سیاسی اسلامی نه صرفاً یک وضعیت سیاسی، بلکه ارزشی توحیدی و هویتی است که با عزت، عدالت و خودباوری پیوند خورده است.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107454_456871589192c058ad92c30fb25f6d97.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 The Paradoxical Impact of Digital Social Networks on Social Cohesion and Nationalism in Post-Conflict Societies: A Case Study of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq تأثیر دوگانة شبکه‌های اجتماعی دیجیتال بر انسجام اجتماعی و ناسیونالیسم قومی در جوامع پس از منازعه: مطالعة موردی کردستان عراق 513 489 107455 10.22059/jpq.2026.397720.1008382 FA لشکر علی اکبر هدایه مربی گروه جامعه‌شناسی، دانشکدۀ ادبیات، دانشگاه صلاح‌الدین، اربیل، اقلیم کردستان، عراق. Journal Article 2025 07 10 Introduction The concept of the independent state has long been a central issue in political philosophy, and within Islamic political thought, it has undergone dynamic Research Questions Main question: What is the contradictory impact of DSNs on social cohesion and nationalism in the KRI? Sub-questions: 1.How do DSNs contribute to strengthening bonding social capital and in-group identities? 2.What is the role of DSNs in intensifying social divides, spreading misinformation, and reinforcing exclusive ethnic nationalism? 3.Do DSNs have the potential to foster bridging social capital and promote civic nationalism in the KRI, and to what extent is this potential realized? Significance Theoretically, this study moves beyond simplistic views of DSNs by providing empirical evidence of their simultaneous capacity for bonding and bridging, with bonding being more prominent in the KRI's fragile post-conflict context. It also demonstrates how DSNs exacerbate ethnic nationalism through echo chambers and misinformation, thereby extending existing theories of nationalism. By focusing on the KRI, the research offers valuable empirical insights for cross-cultural sociological understanding of digital media's role in complex political transitions. Practically, the findings are crucial for policymakers, civil society organizations, and technology developers working in post-conflict societies. Governments and NGOs should recognize DSNs' potential to deepen existing cleavages and invest in initiatives that promote digital literacy, critical thinking, and media discernment to counter misinformation. Policies aimed at fostering inclusive civic nationalism must acknowledge the digital dimension of identity formation and work to counteract the online amplification of exclusive ethnic narratives. Research Objectives The overall aim is to analyze the dual role of DSNs in shaping social cohesion and nationalism in the KRI. Specific objectives include: identifying the mechanisms through which DSNs strengthen bonding social capital; explaining their impact on social divides and ethnic nationalism; assessing their potential for building bridging social capital and promoting civic nationalism; and providing theoretical and practical implications. Methodology This study employs a qualitative research methodology to explore the complex impact of DSNs. A qualitative approach is uniquely suited to examining the nuanced processes, interpretations, and meanings underlying the theoretical arguments, providing deep insight into how actors in the KRI use DSNs and how these interactions affect social cohesion and nationalism. The KRI serves as a critical case study due to its unique trajectory as a semi-autonomous entity emerging from prolonged conflict, facing ongoing state-building challenges and internal political divergence. The widespread adoption of DSNs, coupled with the fluidity of national identity and the prevalence of both civic and ethnic nationalist discourses, makes it an ideal environment for in-depth sociological exploration. A purposive sample of 40 participants was selected from Erbil and Sulaymaniyah based on active DSN engagement, diverse socio-political affiliations, educational backgrounds, and age groups, ensuring a broad range of experiences. Primary data were collected through semi-structured, in-depth interviews focusing on: perceptions of DSNs' impact on social bonds; examples of online polarization and bridging; experiences with online nationalist discourses; and perceived influence on political participation. Interviews were conducted in Kurdish or Arabic, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. A qualitative content analysis of approximately 200 selected public posts and discussions on prominent DSN platforms (Facebook, X, and Telegram) from January to December 2024 was also conducted to triangulate findings and observe natural online interactions. The qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis, which involved systematic data familiarization, initial coding, theme generation, review, and refinement. The analysis was inductive yet theoretically informed, with particular attention to identifying contradictory influences. NVivo software facilitated data analysis. Strict ethical considerations, including informed consent and anonymity, were maintained. Theoretical Framework The research draws on theories of social identity (SIT), social capital, digital public spheres, and contemporary approaches to nationalism. Social Identity Theory (SIT): Individuals derive self-concept from group membership. In post-conflict societies, DSNs can strengthen in-group solidarity while facilitating negative portrayals of out-groups and spreading misinformation, thereby intensifying inter-group tensions. Social Capital Theory: This refers to resources gained through social networks, comprising: -Bonding social capital: Strong ties within homogeneous groups that reinforce in-group solidarity. -Bridging social capital: Weaker ties among heterogeneous groups that facilitate access to diverse information. DSNs excel at fostering bonding social capital, but their ability to build bridging social capital is limited by algorithmic homophily and "echo chambers." Digital Public Spheres: Derived from Habermas's concept, DSNs offer potential for democratizing information and civic participation. However, they can also lead to fragmentation, polarization, misinformation, and superficial online discourse. Nationalism Theories: These distinguish between civic nationalism (inclusive, based on shared citizenship) and ethnic nationalism (exclusive, based on shared ancestry or culture). In post-conflict contexts, tension between these forms is high. DSNs can powerfully mobilize nationalist sentiments but also amplify divisive ethnic nationalist narratives, mobilize against "the other," and undermine fragile social cohesion. Conclusion The contradictory impact of DSNs on social cohesion and nationalism in the KRI can be understood through their capacity to simultaneously enhance bonding social capital and fragment the public sphere. This dynamic stabilizes in-group identities and potentially exacerbates exclusive forms of nationalism. While the potential for DSNs to foster bridging social capital exists, it may be constrained by algorithmic tendencies and the strategic use of DSNs for mobilization. شبکه‌های اجتماعی دیجیتالی بازیگران تأثیرگذار و نوینی در عرصة حیات بشری هستند که اثر سترگی بر تغییرات و تحولات اجتماعی داشته‌اند. جوامع مختلف و به‌ویژه دولت‌های پسامنازعه در سال‌های اخیر پذیرای تأثیرات متناقض و پیچیده‌ای از نقش‌آفرینی این پدیدة جدید بوده‌اند. کردستان عراق نیز به‌عنوان یک منطقة خودمختار در نوع مواجهه با شبکه‌های اجتماعی دیجیتالی تأثیرات چشمگیری را تجربه است. هدف آن است تا نقش دوگانۀ شبکه‌های اجتماعی دیجیتال در شکل‌دهی به انسجام اجتماعی و تقویت ناسیونالیسم در منطقة کردستان عراق بررسی و تحلیل شود. پرسش اصلی پژوهش آن است که شبکه‌های اجتماعی دیجیتال چه تأثیر متناقضی بر انسجام اجتماعی و ناسیونالیستی در منطقة کردستان عراق، به‌عنوان یک جامعۀ پس از منازعه، دارند؟ یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که این پلتفرم‌ها اغلب «سرمایة اجتماعی پیوندی» درون‌گروهی را تقویت می‌کنند. این فرایند از طریق ایجاد «اتاق‌های پژواک» و گسترش اطلاعات نادرست، روایت‌های ناسیونالیسم قومی انحصاری را تشدید کرده و مرزهای هویتی را سخت‌تر می‌سازد. در نتیجه، به‌جای انسجام اجتماعی گسترده، به قطبی‌سازی و تعمیق شکاف‌های موجود دامن می‌زند. هرچند پتانسیل محدودی برای شکل‌گیری «سرمایۀ اجتماعی پل‌زننده» و ناسیونالیسم مدنی مشاهده شد، اما این ظرفیت به‌دلیل پویایی‌های ذاتی قطبی‌کنندة فضای دیجیتال و بافت شکننده پس از منازعه، به‌شدت تضعیف شده است. این تحقیق نشان می‌دهد که شبکه‌های اجتماعی دیجیتال در کردستان عراق، مانع اصلی شکل‌گیری هویت ملی فراگیر و متحدکننده هستند. این پژوهش با به‌کارگیری روش کیفی مبتنی بر مصاحبه‌های عمیق با ۴۰ شرکت‌کننده و تحلیل محتوای فعالیت‌های دیجیتال در اربیل و سلیمانیه انجام پذیرفت.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107455_c209f55a4fe2b9bec6d379baee45bb1f.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 Necro-politics and the Decline of Dasein in the Geography of the Siege of Gaza نکروپولیتیک و زوال دازاین در جغرافیای محاصره غزه 537 515 107456 10.22059/jpq.2026.397809.1008383 FA الهام کشاورزمقدم استادیار روابط بین‌الملل،گروه روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0009-0005-1642-7281 امیرحسین علی‌خانی دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد روابط بین‌الملل، گروه روابط بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0009-0007-5990-2649 Journal Article 2025 07 08 Introduction The 2023 conflict in Palestine, particularly following the events of October 7, transcends conventional warfare, manifesting itself as a systematic exercise of necro-politics that redefines the existential conditions of Palestinian life. Drawing on Achille Mbembe's concept of necro-politics, this study frames the Israeli occupation as a regime of death, where life is suspended in a liminal state between existence and annihilation. By integrating Martin Heidegger's notion of Dasein (being-there), the research examines how Palestinian subjectivity is eroded through structural violence, economic blockade, and technological surveillance. This existential suspension—characterized by the obliteration of agency and temporality—transforms Palestine into a necropolitical space where death governs life. The study interrogates how Israel's calculated strategies, including targeted airstrikes, resource deprivation, and infrastructural destruction, disrupt the ontological foundations of Palestinian being, reducing Dasein to a state of perpetual precarity. Through a philosophical lens, the research posits Palestine not merely as a geopolitical conflict zone but as a site where the boundaries of life and death are strategically manipulated to negate Palestinian agency. This inquiry seeks to illuminate the mechanisms of ontological domination and their implications for subjectivity under occupation, offering a novel perspective on the intersection of necro-politics and existential philosophy in contemporary conflicts. Methodology This study employs a qualitative, interpretive approach, integrating Foucauldian genealogy, Ricoeurian hermeneutics, and Deleuzian philosophy of becoming to analyze the necropolitical dynamics in Palestine. Foucauldian genealogy uncovers hidden discourses of power, tracing the historical and structural evolution of death as a tool of governance. Ricoeur's hermeneutics interprets the lived experience of Palestinians, focusing on the suspension of meaning and agency. Deleuze's framework examines power as fluid, molecular flows that disrupt subjectivity. Data are drawn from library sources, including UN reports and academic literature, to contextualize the 2023 conflict and its existential impacts. Results and Discussion The findings reveal that Israel's necropolitical regime in Palestine, intensified in 2023, systematically dismantles Palestinian Dasein through structural violence and temporal disruption. The blockade—imposed in various forms since 1948 and significantly tightened after 2007—restricts access to essentials such as water and medicine, rendering life precarious and survival contingent. UNRWA reports indicate that over 80% of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank rely on humanitarian aid, underscoring a state of "suspended life" in which existence is reduced to bare survival. Targeted military operations, such as "Operation Cast Lead" in 2009 and the 2023 airstrikes, coupled with advanced surveillance technologies, transform death into a calculated instrument of control, stripping Palestinians of agency. Heidegger's Dasein, defined by authentic being-toward-death, is here inverted: death becomes an imposed, omnipresent condition rather than a chosen horizon. This suspension of temporality—wherein the future is erased and the present becomes a cycle of insecurity—aligns with Mbembe's notion of necro-politics, in which life is managed through death. Resistance, embodied by groups such as Hamas, emerges as an existential reclamation of Dasein, challenging the necropolitical order. Regionally, Iran's strategic support for certain resistance movements reframes Palestine as a symbol of anti-colonial struggle, destabilizing Israel's dominance and fostering transnational solidarity. This dynamic underscores a broader geopolitical shift, in which necro-politics provokes existential resistance, redefining subjectivity in the face of annihilation. Conclusion This study demonstrates that the 2023 Palestine conflict is not merely a military struggle but a necropolitical project that obliterates Palestinian Dasein. Israel's strategies—blockade, infrastructural devastation, and surveillance—construct a death-driven order, suspending life in a liminal state of precarity. By merging Mbembe's necro-politics with Heidegger's Dasein, the research reveals how Palestinian subjectivity is eroded, transforming individuals into objects within a matrix of control. The systematic denial of agency and temporality renders Palestine a necropolitical laboratory where death governs existence. Yet resistance movements, supported by Iran, challenge this order, reasserting Palestinian subjectivity as a global symbol of liberation. This analysis underscores the need to move beyond purely political or legal frameworks, advocating for an ontological lens to understand the profound existential violence of occupation. Palestine thus emerges as a critical site for rethinking justice and agency in the face of modern colonial domination, urging a philosophical reevaluation of power and resistance in global conflicts. نوار غزه در سال‌های اخیر، به‌ویژه در جریان جنگ ۲۰۲۳، به بستری برای اعمال نظمی مبتنی بر مرگ بدل شده است؛ نظمی که در آن، مرگ نه صرفاً به‌عنوان رخدادی زیستی، بلکه به‌مثابه سازوکار سامان‌دهندۀ حیات اجتماعی عمل می‌کند. این نظم، با فروپاشی مرزهای میان زیستن و مردن، دازاین فلسطینی را در وضعیت تعلیق وجودی نگاه می‌دارد و امکان تحقق سوژگی را از بنیاد مختل می‌سازد. پرسش اصلی آن است که چارچوب قدرت مبتنی بر نکروپلیتیک، چگونه با تعلیق هستی‌شناختی دازاین، فرایند تحقق سوژگی را در بستر اشغال و محاصره مختل می‌سازد؟ این پژوهش با بهره‌گیری از روش کیفی و تحلیل تفسیری، از رهیافتی تلفیقی مشتمل بر تبارشناسی فوکویی، هرمنوتیک ریکوری و فلسفه شدن دلوزی استفاده کرده است تا سازوکارهای الگوهای پنهان و روزمرۀ سلطه و استعمار هستی‌شناختی را در جغرافیای محاصره‌شدۀ غزه رمزگشایی کند. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که محاصرۀ ممتد، خشونت ساختاری و نظارت فناورانه، نه‌تنها بدن فلسطینی، بلکه زمان‌مندی وجودی او را هدف قرار داده و زیستن را به تجربه‌ای از حیات تعلیق‌شده میان مرگ و زندگی فرو کاسته‌اند. نتیجه‌گیری پژوهش تأکید دارد که غزه در نظم ژئوپلیتیکی مبتنی بر نکروپلیتیک معاصر، نه صرفاً میدان جنگ، بلکه زیست‌بوم مرگباری‌ است که در آن، خود امکان، به‌مثابۀ اساس سوژگی، حذف می‌شود.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107456_3e959a7a520d98b31d2ecf1313ccf778.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 An Examination of the Political Economy Challenges of Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai's Government: Crises and Inefficiencies بررسی چالش‌های اقتصاد سیاسی دولت اشرف غنی احمدزی: بحران‌ها و ناکارامدی‌ها 566 539 107457 10.22059/jpq.2026.394643.1008355 FA حمید رضا ملک محمدی استاد دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. سید ذکی فریاد دانش‌آموخته دکتری دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. 0009-0005-6894-8695 Journal Article 2025 05 13 Research Methodology This research adopts a qualitative, interpretive design and applies the theoretical approach of institutionalism. The analyses draw on government documents and reports, international indicators, and policy documents. The study examines both macro-structural variables and micro-policy variables to explain how the policymaking environment took shape during the Ashraf Ghani era. Findings The findings show that the Ashraf Ghani government, despite initial efforts to establish development-oriented, technocratic governance, in practice reproduced authoritarian patterns of rule. Power became increasingly concentrated at the presidential level, while oversight institutions such as parliament were marginalized. The government failed to institutionalize inclusive and participatory governance; instead, ethnic and political divisions deepened. This situation led to the exclusion of key political actors from decision-making processes. Additional factors contributing to the government's collapse included its heavy reliance on foreign aid and the creation of rent-based structures. These not only prevented the mobilization of domestic resources but also fostered systematic corruption and reduced administrative efficiency. The lack of oversight and accountability mechanisms severely weakened the government's legitimacy and paved the way for the Taliban's rapid return. Conclusion The Ashraf Ghani government failed to transition from a political order based on patrimonialism to a rules-based institutional framework. Although some development projects were initiated during his rule, the lack of political inclusiveness, weak institution-building, and the dominance of informal elite networks caused institutional reforms to fail. From a theoretical perspective, this research emphasizes the link between state-building and inclusive institutional frameworks as essential for preventing collapse in fragile states. In the case of Afghanistan, the lack of domestic legitimacy, overreliance on external support, and neglect of structural reforms ultimately accelerated the state's collapse. مقالۀ حاضر با تمرکز بر تحلیل اقتصاد سیاسی دولت اشرف غنی احمدزی (۲۰۱۴–۲۰۲۱)، به بررسی عوامل مؤثر در ناکارامدی ساختار حکمرانی و شکل‌گیری بحران‌های ساختاری در افغانستان می‌پردازد. پرسش اصلی تحقیق از چگونگی منجر شدن سیاست‌های اقتصادی و حکمرانی در این دوره، به ناپایداری، تضعیف نهادهای دولتی و فروپاشی سیاسی، و فرضیۀ پژوهش از عواملی نظیر تمرکزگرایی در قدرت، فساد گسترده، ضعف نهادسازی، وابستگی شدید به کمک‌های خارجی و تشدید شکاف‌های قومی و نژادی، زمینه‌ساز فرسایش مشروعیت حکومت و در نهایت سقوط آن سخن می‌گوید. در این پژوهش، با بهره‌گیری از چارچوب نظری نهادگرایی (دارون عجم‌اوغلو و جیمز ای. رابینسون)، با رویکرد توصیفی_تحلیلی و اتکا بر داده‌های کتابخانه‌ای، گزارش‌های نهادهای بین‌المللی و تحلیل‌های سیاستگذاری، به تحلیل رابطۀ میان ساختارهای سیاسی، اقتصادی و ناکارامدی دولت اشرف غنی احمدزی پرداخته شده است. یافته‌ها حکایت از آن دارند که ناکارامدی نهادهای دولتی به زایش بحران‌های مختلف اقتصادی، سیاسی و اجتماعی انجامید و دولت در بند چالش‌های مزمن همچون فساد، تبعیض و ناامنی، نتوانست راه نجاتی از این آوردگاه تاریخی بیابد و سرانجام، مانند اهداف خویش، راه سقوط را پیمود.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107457_8430968f86f408ad6e3b161501294ec0.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 Reflection on the concept of "Legal Politics" تأملی در خصوص مفهوم «سیاست حقوقی» 589 567 107458 10.22059/jpq.2025.393223.1008335 FA ابراهیم موسی زاده استاد حقوق عمومی، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. امین پژمان دانشجوی دکتری حقوق عمومی، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2025 04 29 Introduction In contemporary legal and political theory, the boundaries between law and politics have become deeply intertwined, giving rise to the concept of legal politics. This study aims to clarify the conceptual foundations of legal politics within the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It highlights the necessity of defining this concept in order to identify both the challenges and the mechanisms for its development within Iran's legal framework. Methodology This research adopts a descriptive-analytical approach based on library sources. The main research question is: What is legal politics, and how is it produced? The study explores this question through three targeted conceptual comparisons: (1) the relationship between law and politics; (2) the distinction between legal politics and legal science; and (3) the difference between legal politics and political law. Results and Discussion The article argues that legal politics emerges from the intersection of law and politics. It manifests itself in two principal processes: 1.Legalization of politics – the transformation of political intentions into enforceable legal norms (laws, regulations, and policies). 2.Political valuation of law – the use of political judgment in shaping or applying legal tools. These processes can produce legal outcomes that are enforceable either broadly (e.g., all legislation) or specifically (e.g., official policy documents). The paper distinguishes legal politics from legal science, which seeks an objective understanding of legal norms, and from political law, which focuses on the political dimensions of lawmaking and enforcement. Conclusion Legal politics serves as a crucial analytical lens for understanding the production and legitimation of legal norms within a politically embedded context. It reveals how political intentions are formalized into binding rules and how legal reasoning is influenced by political values. Recognizing legal politics as a distinct field helps clarify the dynamic relationship between the legal and political systems in Iran and underscores the importance of developing a coherent conceptual framework for its analysis. امروزه مرزهای «حقوق» و «سیاست» بسیار درهم‌تنیده شده است که از تلاقی این دو مفهوم، «سیاست حقوقی» پدید می‌آید. صورت‌بندی انگارۀ «سیاست حقوقی» به‌مثابة یک عنصر پارادایماتیک و تولید ادبیات پیرامون آن در جمهوری اسلامی ایران امری ضروری است تا بتوان آسیب‌ها و راهکارهای ارتقای آن را شناسایی کرد. این شناخت در وهلۀ اول نیازمند تبیین مفهومی در نظام سیاسی حقوقی است. نوشتار حاضر با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای کوشیده است تا تأملی دربارۀ پاسخ به این پرسش که «سیاست حقوقی چیست و چگونه تولید می‌شود»، داشته باشد. یافتۀ این نوشتار حاکی از آن است که سیاست حقوقی در یک معنا اولاً در نسبت دو مفهوم «حقوق» و «سیاست» و از دل فرایند «حقوقی‌سازی سیاست» و در قامت یک قاعدة لازم‌الاجرا خلق می‌شود. این قاعدة لازم‌الاجرا در معنای عام دربردارندۀ همۀ قوانین و مقررات است و در معنای خاص شامل قواعدی است که با عنوان «سیاست» یا نظیر آن وضع می‌شود. در معنای دیگر، «سیاست حقوقی» در نسبت این مفهوم با «علم حقوق» و «حقوق سیاسی» متمایز می‌شود که در معنای عام دربردارندة مجموعه‌ای از ارتکازات ذهنی در خصوص هنجارهای حقوقی است و با «ارزش‌گذاری سیاسی حقوق» تولید می‌شود و در معنای خاص، ماحصل «سیاست‌ورزی با ابزار حقوق» خواهد بود.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107458_ed3aed2785245dcb43252efaa3918f3b.pdf

دانشگاه تهران فصلنامه سیاست 1735-9678 56 2 2026 06 22 Trump’s Trade Geopolitics: From Tariffs to Alliance Tensions ترامپ و ژئوپلیتیک تجارت: از تعرفه تا تنش اتحادها 618 591 107459 10.22059/jpq.2026.397039.1008377 FA امیرحسین ویزان دانشجوی دکتری مهندسی شیمی، دانشکده مهندسی شیمی و نفت، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران. عباس ملکی استادیار، گروه مهندسی انرژی، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2025 07 08 Introduction The resurgence of Donald Trump in the 2025 U.S. presidential election marked a dramatic return to a nationalist and protectionist trade agenda. Building on the foundations of his first term (2016–2020), Trump's second term saw the reassertion of tariffs, withdrawal from multilateral agreements, and a direct challenge to the global trade order. This research critically examines how Trump's trade policies were used as geopolitical tools to reshape alliances, apply strategic pressure, and confront China's growing economic influence. The study addresses key questions about the erosion of multilateral institutions, the legal and economic implications of tariff policies, and the broader strategic vision behind Trump's "America First" doctrine. Methodology This study adopts a qualitative and comparative methodology grounded in international political economy (IPE) and geopolitical analysis. The research draws on primary sources such as official U.S. government documents, court rulings (from the Court of International Trade and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit), and policy papers from institutions including the IMF, WTO, and OECD, as well as secondary academic literature. It also integrates theoretical frameworks such as geoeconomics, strategic trade theory, hegemonic stability theory, and neorealism. The analytical approach is descriptive-analytical, focusing on causal relationships between U.S. trade policies and shifts in global economic and political alignments. Results and Discussion The findings reveal that Donald Trump's second-term trade policies triggered significant disruptions across the global economic and political landscape. Economic Impacts The widespread imposition of tariffs by the United States led to a measurable contraction in GDP—up to 0.9%—while consumer prices increased substantially in essential sectors such as food, electronics, and clothing. Simultaneously, the U.S. economy experienced considerable job losses, exceeding 700,000 in key industries like manufacturing and agriculture. These losses undermined the domestic labor market that Trump's policies had claimed to protect. Despite these aggressive measures, trade deficits with major partners such as China, Mexico, and the European Union remained largely unchanged, highlighting the limited effectiveness of the tariffs in achieving their stated goals. Legal Challenges On the legal front, the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as justification for tariff escalation was met with judicial resistance. U.S. federal courts, particularly the Court of International Trade and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, issued rulings questioning the legitimacy and scope of executive authority in this domain. These legal uncertainties contributed to a broader climate of unpredictability for international businesses and investors. Geopolitical Consequences Geopolitically, Trump's tariff strategy strained longstanding U.S. alliances. Countries such as Canada, Mexico, the European Union member states, Japan, and South Korea found themselves increasingly at odds with Washington, facing both economic pressure and strategic disillusionment. These tensions prompted many traditional allies to reassess their trade alignments, expand cooperation with China, and accelerate the diversification of their supply chains. In effect, the United States, through its aggressive economic unilateralism, inadvertently weakened the cohesion of the Western alliance system. Erosion of Multilateralism Furthermore, the research highlights how Trump's actions led to the deliberate erosion of multilateral trade frameworks. By blocking appointments to the World Trade Organization's Appellate Body and threatening to withdraw from the institution altogether, the United States undermined the rules-based international trading system. As a result, the world witnessed a resurgence of bilateralism and regionalism, with several countries pursuing alternative trade routes and partnerships to mitigate U.S. unpredictability. The Securitization of Trade A particularly striking outcome was the securitization of trade itself. Under Trump's leadership, economic tools—especially those related to technology and critical industries—were explicitly repurposed as instruments of geopolitical containment, particularly against China. Export restrictions targeting semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing were designed not merely for economic protection but as part of a broader strategic campaign. This signaled the arrival of a new era in global trade, one in which the lines between economic policy and national security have become increasingly blurred, and tariffs function as levers of geopolitical influence rather than tools of reciprocal commerce. Conclusion Trump's trade agenda in his second term represents a clear shift from liberal economic globalization to a fragmented, coercive, and geopolitically charged model of trade. While aiming to reassert U.S. dominance and address China's rise, the outcome was widespread economic instability, erosion of multilateral institutions, and the weakening of traditional alliances. The study underscores that tariffs, once merely economic tools, have now become instruments of strategic influence in a contested global order. It concludes that Trumpism, in its revived form, prioritizes sovereignty and strategic leverage over cooperative norms and mutual economic gain. have become deeply intertwined, giving rise to the concept of legal politics. This study aims to clarify the conceptual foundations of legal politics within the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It highlights the necessity of defining this concept in order to identify both the challenges and the mechanisms for its development within Iran's legal framework. Methodology This research adopts a descriptive-analytical approach based on library sources. The main research question is: What is legal politics, and how is it produced? The study explores this question through three targeted conceptual comparisons: (1) the relationship between law and politics; (2) the distinction between legal politics and legal science; and (3) the difference between legal politics and political law. Results and Discussion The article argues that legal politics emerges from the intersection of law and politics. It manifests itself in two principal processes: 1.Legalization of politics – the transformation of political intentions into enforceable legal norms (laws, regulations, and policies). 2.Political valuation of law – the use of political judgment in shaping or applying legal tools. These processes can produce legal outcomes that are enforceable either broadly (e.g., all legislation) or specifically (e.g., official policy documents). The paper distinguishes legal politics from legal science, which seeks an objective understanding of legal norms, and from political law, which focuses on the political dimensions of lawmaking and enforcement. Conclusion Legal politics serves as a crucial analytical lens for understanding the production and legitimation of legal norms within a politically embedded context. It reveals how political intentions are formalized into binding rules and how legal reasoning is influenced by political values. Recognizing legal politics as a distinct field helps clarify the dynamic relationship between the legal and political systems in Iran and underscores the importance of developing a coherent conceptual framework for its analysis. این مقاله به بررسی تأثیر سیاست تجاری «اول آمریکا» که در دوران ریاست ‌جمهوری دونالد ترامپ، به‌ویژه در سال ۲۰۲۵ تشدید شد، بر تجارت جهانی و ژئوپلیتیک می‌پردازد. پرسش اصلی این است که سیاست‌های تجاری ترامپ چگونه به ابزاری ژئوپلیتیکی برای بازتعریف نقش ایالات متحده در نظام بین‌الملل بدل شده و چه پیامدهایی برای اتحادهای سنتی و نظام چندجانبه تجارت جهانی داشته است؟ فرضیة پژوهش بیان می‌کند که ترامپ از تجارت نه به‌عنوان ابزاری اقتصادی بلکه به‌مثابة اهرمی ژئوپلیتیکی استفاده کرده است؛ راهبردی که در کنار آثار محدود اقتصادی مثبت، موجب تضعیف چندجانبه‌گرایی، افزایش هزینة مبادلات و تشدید تنش با متحدان و رقبا شده است. روش تحقیق بر پایة تحلیل کیفی اسناد سیاستگذاری، داده‌های نهادی مانند سازمان تجارت جهانی، صندوق بین‌المللی پول و احکام حقوقی آمریکاست و در چارچوب اقتصاد سیاسی انتقادی و تحلیل گفتمان انجام شده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که تعرفه‌های یکجانبه و تأکید بر توافقات دوجانبه علاوه بر کاهش تولید ناخالص داخلی، از دست رفتن مشاغل و افزایش هزینه‌های مصرف‌کننده، «مالیات عدم قطعیت» شایان را توجهی بر اقتصاد جهانی تحمیل کرده‌اند. از منظر ژئوپلیتیکی، این سیاست‌ها رقابت تجاری با چین را به سطح راهبردی ارتقا داده، به اتحادهای سنتی فشار وارد کرده و نهادهایی مانند سازمان تجارت جهانی را تضعیف کرده‌اند. نتیجه‌گیری مقاله این است که میراث سیاست‌های ترامپ آینده‌ای با تکه‌تکه‌ شدن اقتصادی، تنش‌های پایدار و کاهش پیش‌بینی‌پذیری نظم تجاری جهانی رقم می‌زند.

https://jpq.ut.ac.ir/article_107459_96cee851c677baa88f6c79e9a6aa7f07.pdf