University of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401The Unlawful Israeli-U.S. Attacks on Iran in 2025: A Doctrinal Legal Analysis under International Law31936910600110.22059/wsps.2026.397613.1537ENMohammadrezaDehshiriProfessor of International Relations, School of International Relations, Tehran, IranZahraAhmadiPhD Candidate of International Relations, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.Journal Article20250626The fundamental norms of the United Nations Charter, particularly the prohibition on the use of force and the inviolability of state sovereignty, have been repeatedly challenged in the modern security landscape. The June 2025 military attacks by Israel, with direct support from the United States, on Iranian territory and its safeguarded nuclear facilities represent a critical juncture in this historical context, testing the resilience of the international legal order. This article aims to provide a comprehensive legal assessment of the legality of these actions under international law. Employing a doctrinal legal research methodology, the study conducts a systematic analysis of primary legal sources, including the UN Charter, ICJ jurisprudence, and non-proliferation treaties, integrated with secondary scholarly commentaries and institutional reports. Findings demonstrate that the attacks constitute a manifest act of aggression in violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and the <em>jus cogens</em> rule prohibition on the use of force, as they were undertaken without Security Council authorization or a valid claim to self-defense under Article 51. Furthermore, the targeting of IAEA-safeguarded nuclear facilities breached the NPT and the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, eroding the global non-proliferation regime. The study also concludes that Iran’s defensive response was a legitimate exercise of its inherent right to self-defense. In conclusion, the attacks underscore a profound crisis in the UN collective security system, exacerbated by the Security Council's paralysis. The article ends with normative recommendations for upholding accountability and reinforcing the integrity of international law against unilateral militarism.https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_106001_06a399112224ef6864f448f6bbbd6071.pdfUniversity of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401Investigating Israeli Democracy with a Focus on the Situation of Palestinians Residing in the Territories Occupied since 194837140710555810.22059/wsps.2026.385747.1473ENTaherehGoodarziM.A. in West Asian Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranJavadSharbafAssistant Professor of West Asian and South African Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranJournal Article20250121The Palestine issue and the Israeli regime's occupation are among the most crucial matters on the global stage. The situation of Palestinians in the territories controlled by this regime, referred to as the 1948 territories, holds significant importance. Western countries have consistently aimed to present the Israeli regime as a democratic model, using the status of residents in the 1948 areas as evidence. This article utilizes a qualitative and comparative approach to address the query: What is the situation of Palestinians residing in the occupied territories of 1948 within the Israeli democracy? The hypothesis posited is that while Israel exhibits some elements of democracy based on recognized criteria, reliable statistics suggest that the Arab community does not benefit from this purported democracy to the same extent as the Jewish community, calling into question the foundational principle of the Israeli democracy. By examining reports from Israeli and international authorities, this article concludes that the Israeli regime cannot be deemed a democratic regime for all its citizens. Furthermore, the respect for human rights within this regime, particularly for the indigenous minority residing in the occupied territories, is nothing but a myth.https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_105558_3cc8af9410a2341f26202fbeb6fe7fc4.pdfUniversity of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401The U.S. Securitization and Desecuritization of Iran: An Analysis of the American Presidential Rhetoric on Post-Revolutionary Iran (1979-2021)40948510281210.22059/wsps.2025.386955.1480ENFarzadMohammadyariPhD in North American Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranZeinab GhasemiTariAssociate Professor of American Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranSeyed Mohammad KazemSajjadpourProfessor of Diplomacy and International Relations, School of International Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tehran, IranJournal Article20250217This article examines the U.S. presidents’ securitization and desecuritization of post-revolutionary Iran. Employing securitization theory as its theoretical framework and qualitative content analysis as its research method, it analyzes 104 paramount instances of U.S. presidential rhetoric including State of the Union addresses, speeches delivered during the United Nations General Assembly's General Debates, and National Security Strategy reports. The analysis shows how successive U.S. presidents have framed Iran as an existential threat across multiple security sectors—military, political, societal, economic, and emerging cybersecurity—to justify their extraordinary policies regarding the country. A key finding of the research is the distinction between U.S. presidents’ securitization of the Iranian state and the Iranian nation, which first emerged during George W. Bush’s first term. Moreover, the study identifies both continuity and change in U.S. securitization and desecuritization of Iran over the past four decades, conceptualizing them into two overarching frameworks: the Realist approach and the Constructivist approach. This research introduces the novel concept of Positive Securitization, or Desecuritizing Securitization, as a new addition to the theoretical framework of securitization theory, and highlights its application during the Obama administration. Positive securitization refers to the use of securitizing discourse to justify the desecuritization of dialogue and political engagement within a specific context. It does so by claiming that even extreme exceptional measures—military or economic—would prove inadequate in addressing a perceived threat, thereby presenting diplomacy as the only viable solution. The article offers a comprehensive exploration that provides a detailed understanding of U.S. presidential rhetoric and the gradual construction of Iran’s image as a threat.https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_102812_85861f0e5145d1b68b0afdc1348aff89.pdfUniversity of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401Recognizing the Antecedents of the Iraqi Council of Ministers' Cultural Diplomacy48751910627110.22059/wsps.2026.403571.1557ENEyamAbd Sarhan SarhanPhD Student, Department of Public Administration, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, IranSaeidSharifiAssociate Professor, Department of Cultural Management and Planning, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, IranSaharFaeghiAssistant Professor, Department of Cultural Management and Planning, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, IranAli HameedHandi Al AliAssistant Professor, College of Management and Economics, University of Kufa, Kufa, IraqJournal Article20251028This study aims to identify the antecedents, preconditions, and enabling factors required for the Iraqi Council of Ministers to formulate and implement an effective cultural diplomacy strategy. The research methodology was based on an inductive approach, using thematic analysis technique outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006). Data were gathered from semi-structured interviews with 12 experts in cultural diplomacy and analyzed using MAXQDA software. Validity was established through a two-step process member checking and an external audit. This research showed that Iraqi government organizations can implement cultural diplomacy strategies in Iraq more optimally through the identified components in the organizational, national, and international dimensions, and in the framework of the cultural diplomatic antecedents of the Iraqi Council of Ministers. This paper provides an important framework for analyzing cultural diplomacy antecedents in cultural heritage, paying particular attention to regional dimension for strengthening internal cohesion that moves beyond a siloed approach by explicitly integrating national, organizational, and international factors into a single, actionable model, offering a structured roadmap for Iraqi policymakers to translate latent cultural power into tangible diplomatic influence.https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_106271_f251dabe91914ae07f5cc32c82513af9.pdfUniversity of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401The Feeling of Ontological Insecurity: The United Kingdom's Conflict-Seeking Foreign Policy (1998–2003)52156310216910.22059/wsps.2025.386027.1477ENSiavashChavoshiAssistant Professor of European Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran0000-0002-1387-2997Journal Article20241226By the advent of the New Labour government in 1997, under Prime Minister Tony Blair, the UK became actively involved in various international conflicts, including the war in Kosovo (1998), Afghanistan (2001), and Iraq (2003). This article seeks to explore why the New Labour government under Blair engaged in multiple wars and conflicts, often experiencing limited material gains for its efforts. By focusing on social factors such as the desire for recognition and a sense of ontological security, the article hypothesizes that New Labour’s conflictual stance stemmed not solely from material considerations, but significantly from the UK government’s feeling of ontological insecurity within the international society. This article argues that once a state's sense of ontological security is disrupted, whether temporally or spatially, it often pushes states to prioritize reclaiming its lost national identity over safeguarding material gains and interests, aiming to restore its ontological security. Highlighting the determination of elite policymakers to stand closely aligned with the United States, the study will use a content analysis approach to analyze three key conflicts involving the New Labour government. Ultimately, the findings suggest that a profound sense of ontological insecurity played a crucial role in driving the UK government toward conflict-oriented behaviors.https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_102169_b7a5d73eb375fd71c093167501a4fd9a.pdfUniversity of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401Identity Construction and Historical Narratives: (Mis)Representation of Iran in the Awakening the Great Seljuks56560310248610.22059/wsps.2025.388321.1494ENMaedePoorsafaeePhD Student of Peace and Conflict Resolution Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranMohammadSoltaninejadAssociate Professor of West Asian and North African Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranJournal Article20250107While existing research highlights the role of drama in shaping Turkish national identity, the veracity of the narratives conveyed through plays has not been investigated. The present study fills this gap through examination of the portrayal of Iran in the play <em>Awakening: The Great Seljuks</em>. This focus is critical, given that Iran constitutes a contrasting other for Turkey, against which Turkish national identity and political narratives are reinforced. Using a narrative analysis, the study identifies and examines discrepancies in the portrayal of time and location, characters, and concepts. The research aims to analyze whether the drama series’ depiction of Iran aligns with historical accounts or reinterprets them through a contemporary lens to serve political-ideological purposes and to fit the series’ narrative agenda. The findings reveal a disregard for Iranian history and figures, often recast or appropriated to serve Turkish narratives, with Iranian characters reinterpreted and/or historical ideas reframed through a contemporary lens. This representation of Iran and Iranian elements is further underscored by the selective deployment of mythological motifs.https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_102486_3d86769b897aa5fc69075a9c290acdcb.pdfUniversity of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401Opportunities and Challenges of Regional Integration in the Americas and the Middle East: Comparative Dynamics of the Organization of American States and the League of Arab States60565710608410.22059/wsps.2026.394674.1519ENElahehNourigholamizadehAssistant Professor of American Studies,
University of Tehran, Tehran, IranMahdiJarbanM.A. in Latin American Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranJournal Article20250524Regionalism, a phenomenon much older than globalization, has long promoted the individual and collective interests of countries. Accordingly, American and Middle Eastern nations have sought to advance their interests within integration frameworks such as the Organization of American States (OAS) and the League of Arab States (LAS). In this context, Ernst Haas’s neofunctionalist theory provides a useful lens to examine these blocs, focusing on four key categories: supranationality, the shift in elite loyalties, the collective decision-making process, and most importantly, the spillover effect. This study applies the neofunctionalist approach and uses qualitative content analysis to examine collected data from both above-mentioned organizations. By reviewing internal regulations, resolutions, and the contemporary political contexts of member countries, the research compares the OAS and LAS to highlight their similarities and differences. The study finds that while the LAS struggles with foreign interference and internal rivalries among members competing for leadership in Arabism, the OAS is shaped by the hegemonic dominance of the United States and the ideological polarization across the Americas, where conservative and progressive governments alternate in power. The dynamic traps the continent in a vicious cycle that must be broken.https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_106084_353a6d55f8707219e5c05e8904ce9e1d.pdfUniversity of Tehran
Published jointly with Iranian World Studies AssociationJournal of World Sociopolitical Studies2588-311910220260401Post-war Victimization in Israeli Aggression against Iran (2025) From the Perspective of Cultural Criminology65969510656010.22059/wsps.2026.409406.1571ENMahdiKhaghani EsfahaniAssistant Professor of Criminal Law and Criminology, The Institute for Research and Development in Humanities (SAMT), Tehran, Iran.Journal Article20250804The Israeli aggression against Iran in June 2025—targeting defense infrastructure, military personnel, civilians including scientists, children, and women, as well as hospitals, schools, and national media—was not merely a military confrontation but a turning point in the collective and psychological victimization of Iranian society. The ensuing fear, urban displacement, partial economic collapse, and existential anxiety fractured Iran’s cultural and moral fabric, creating conditions for new forms of post-war violence. This study examines how collective victimization reproduces violence and breaks norms in the post-war context both at cultural and psychological levels, and explores the relationship between symbolic violence in media, political discourse, and everyday life (routine activity criminology). The central premise posits that aggression —and the enduring fear of its recurrence—erodes social cohesion, normalizes aggression, and embeds violent cultural patterns into civic life, generating a cyclical process of victimization and offending, wherein society itself perpetuates violence. From a cultural criminological perspective, this cycle reflects a normalization of deviance and a redefinition of social power through violence. Breaking it requires a shift in Iran’s criminal policy from a security-based to a cultural and restorative approach at legislative, judicial, and executive levels—prioritizing the symbolic reconstruction of trust, hope, and meaning alongside structural post-war recovery.<br /><br />The central hypothesis posits that aggression —and the enduring fear of its recurrence—erodes social cohesion, normalizes aggression, and embeds violent cultural patterns into civic life, generating a cyclical process of victimization and offending wherein society itself perpetuates violence. From a cultural criminological perspective, this cycle reflects a normalization of deviance and a redefinition of social power through violence. Breaking it requires a shift in Iran’s criminal policy from a security-based to a cultural and restorative approach at legislative, judicial, and executive levels—prioritizing the symbolic reconstruction of trust, hope, andhttps://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_106560_dc24c2a7dbbe9a7753e9b79f587b7dac.pdf