Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies

Abstract Israel's foreign policy at times diverges from realist expectations based on rationality, proportionality, and prudence. This article argues that Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon exemplifies such divergence, driven by what Ernst Cassirer terms "mythical thought," or a myth-based discourse that constitutes the mindset of Israeli policymakers. Within this discourse, quantity and quality acquire specific characteristics, resulting in maximalist goals, voluntarism, reactive strategies, and disproportionate actions in foreign policy. Initially, Israel’s stated aim was a limited security operation; however, influenced by myth-based discourse, the mission expanded dramatically, seeking the elimination of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the expulsion of Syrian forces, and the establishment of a pro-Israeli government in Lebanon—goals far exceeding Israel’s strategic capabilities. Ultimately, encountering international structural constraints forced Israel to retreat and recalibrate its objectives temporarily. Employing discourse analysis of statements and texts produced by Israeli decision-makers during this war, the article illustrates how mythical thinking enabled unrealistic and expansionist elements to shape Israel’s foreign policy.

Abstract The chronic problem of police brutality against Black communities prompted the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Rising protests revealed that the killings of African Americans were not isolated events, but symptoms of a system of racial injustice. Literature, in this respect, emerged as an important locus through which marginalized groups voice counter-narratives that oppose hegemonic racial logics and stereotypical representations of Blackness as criminality. While the sociopolitical implications of BLM have been thoroughly analyzed, there has been relatively less scholarly focus on how African-American Young Adult Literature (YAL) engages with, rearticulates, and negotiates these discourses. This article bridges that gap by subjecting Angie Thomas’s The Hate U Give to the hotly debated Critical Race Theory to examine how the novel engages with the ideas of BLM and illuminates the structural dimensions of racism in America. The critique indicates that Thomas constructs a counter-narrative revolving around systemic racism, racial profiling, police brutality, white privilege, implicit bias, and the intersection of race with other forms of marginalization. Situating the novel in literary and activist contexts, this study highlights YAL’s potential to mirror, challenge, and redefine cultural consciousness, thus positioning the genre as an essential site of contemporary social justice activism.

Abstract This paper reexamines the economic security dynamics of the Persian Gulf by applying a neoliberal institutionalist framework to the evolving relationship between Iran and the United States, with particular attention to recent geopolitical shocks, including the 12-day war between Iran and Israel and the US's direct involvement in that conflict. The study explores how shifting patterns of sanctions, trade disruptions, and maritime security risks affect regional economies, particularly those of Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states. Using process tracing, the analysis identifies causal pathways linking US policy changes to Iran’s economic resilience and the adaptive strategies of Persian Gulf actors. Special emphasis is placed on the mediating and stabilizing role of Qatar, whose neutral diplomacy has grown in importance amid heightened tensions. Findings suggest that economic interdependence, institutional cooperation, and pragmatic mediation—especially by Persian Gulf states like Qatar and Oman—offer pathways to mitigate conflict and preserve economic stability in a region increasingly shaped by sanctions, oil market volatility, and asymmetric warfare. The paper concludes with actionable policy recommendations for Iran to improve regional integration, crisis response, and economic diversification under ongoing US pressure.

Abstract These days, celebrities play an extensive role in people’s lives. They have entered cultural, social, economic—and also political—spheres and influence their audiences. One area that, over recent decades, has been affected by and entangled with celebrities’ involvement is elections in various countries. By endorsing a like-minded candidate, celebrities call on their audiences to support that person and thus advocate for them.



This study, using a comparative approach and Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis method, examines how celebrities expressed support during Iran’s 2017 election and the United States’ 2016 election at the candidates’ campaign rallies. To that end, three celebrities from each country were selected for analysis: Beyoncé, Katy Perry, and Demi Lovato from the U.S., and Sahar Dolatshahi, Baran Kosari, and Leili Rashidi from Iran. The findings indicate that in both countries, celebrity discourse is shaped by the political, cultural, and social context. Iranian celebrities tended to present themselves as aligned with the people and sharing their vote, criticizing existing structures, the previous government, and obstacles to civil liberties, with a stronger emphasis on reform. American celebrities, by contrast, focused more on the values of freedom and on welfare issues.

Abstract This study investigates the evolving crisis of national sovereignty in the context of artificial intelligence and the expanding power of transnational technology corporations. Drawing from over thirty peer-reviewed academic and policy sources published between 2018 and 2025, this paper critically examines how traditional concepts of sovereignty—particularly data, digital, technological, and normative sovereignty—are being redefined by global AI infrastructures and the algorithmic authority of private firms. Employing a qualitative, interdisciplinary methodology grounded in law, political theory, and ethics, the research reveals growing asymmetries between state authority and corporate influence over digital infrastructures, data governance, and regulatory norms. Our findings highlight divergent policy responses, including efforts to reassert sovereign control through data localization, the pursuit of strategic autonomy, and emerging international cooperation frameworks. The study also evaluates normative debates surrounding legitimacy, democratic oversight, and algorithmic accountability. The study concludes that sovereignty in the AI era must be reconceptualized beyond territorial jurisdiction to include infrastructural and ethical dimensions, necessitating hybrid governance models that integrate states, civil society, and corporations, while prioritizing democratic legitimacy and public interest.

Abstract This study investigates the way in which public discourse on social media reflects and shapes global power dynamics surrounding AI. Leveraging a corpus of approximately 21,000 English-language posts from Platform X (2021–2025), this study utilizes a computational linguistics framework—incorporating topic modeling, sentiment analysis, emotion classification, and named entity recognition—to analyze the construction of AI, interrogating its thematic narratives and affective investments across geopolitical contexts. Findings reveal a discourse shaped by U.S.–China technological rivalry, AI militarization, and infrastructural sovereignty, with strong currents of fear, anger, and skepticism. While Western powers and corporate actors dominate the narrative space, alternative discourses from the Global South emphasize digital dependency, exclusion, and justice. The emotional intensity and thematic complexity of the discourse suggest that publics are not simply reacting to geopolitical developments, but actively construct contested imaginaries of AI’s role in world order. This research contributes to a growing body of literature that recognizes public discourse as a critical site of informal geopolitics and underscores the need for more inclusive, responsive, and ethically grounded AI governance frameworks.

Abstract Over the past century, the United Kingdom has transitioned through various international roles, from a global superpower during its imperial era to a key partner within the European Union. Brexit, however, has triggered what many scholars describe as a foreign policy ‘identity crisis’. This paper challenges this conventional narrative by applying an ontological security framework to investigate how EU membership and the European integration process themselves represented an identity crisis for many Britons. The analysis explores the emotional motives behind Brexit by examining how Euroscepticism, combined with a desire to reclaim Britain’s ‘islandness’ identity, contributed to the decision to leave the European Union. Employing a thematic narrative analysis, the research examines the interaction between identity-based motivations and broader political and historical contexts to reveal new understandings of the multifaceted factors driving Brexit and its enduring effects. By investigating ontological security concepts such as existential threat, continuity disruption, and the restoration of narrative identity, the paper argues that EU integration itself, rather than Brexit, was perceived by many as the principal threat to Britain’s biographical narrative and national identity. These insights contribute to understanding how identity-based anxieties influence major political decisions and carry implications for policymaking and EU–UK relations moving forward.

Abstract This 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.

Abstract This study presents a systematic literature review of 24 academic and policy-focused sources published between 2020 and 2025, synthesizing how AI literacy is conceptualized, operationalized, and integrated into national and regional strategies. Using the PRISMA framework, this study identifies recurrent challenges—such as infrastructural disparities, linguistic exclusion, and policy fragmentation—and highlights innovative, context-sensitive initiatives in countries like India, Kenya, and South Africa. The findings highlight that AI literacy as a multidimensional construct that encompasses technical proficiency, civic engagement, ethical reasoning, and digital sovereignty. The study reveals that national strategies often mirror Global North paradigms, risking misalignment with local epistemologies and socio-economic conditions. As a corrective, the review underscores the need for regionally grounded, community-informed, and equity-driven approaches that position AI literacy as a foundational right and development tool. By treating AI literacy as a cross-sectoral policy issue rather than a narrow educational objective, this research contributes to the emerging discourse on inclusive, democratic, and fair digital transformation.

Abstract The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris brought together 195 countries to reach an agreement. Regardless of the environmental issues discussed and agreed in the conference, what seems significant is the global role that France played as the conference hosting nation. The country managed to promote itself as "the" eligible place among many European cities to host the conference, creating a diplomatic prestige for itself, provoking new environmental ambitions worldwide and presenting Paris as the home city, whose name is attached to the agreement forever. Yet, environmental issues have not always been a driving force for diplomatic efforts and public policy initiatives in France. Indeed, environmental protection grew to appear in the national agenda throughout decades and developed as a notion worthy of political and diplomatic attention in a long-term process, the study of which is noticeable in the European context. Utilizing Issue Ownership and Green Soft Power theories, the research employs Theory-Testing Process Tracing method to analyze France’s environmental contributions resulting in its leader role in the Paris Agreement. Ultimately, this study seeks to illuminate how environmental concerns gained public and political attention in the French society and politics, leading to the country's position in the agreement process. The author argues that an interplay of domestic and external factors let France present itself as a responsible actor in environmental affairs, strengthen its soft power on the international stage, and reinforce both national policy and international influence on the issue of the agreement.

Abstract The increasing expense of healthcare creates substantial difficulties for individuals, especially those from disadvantaged economic backgrounds who frequently encounter obstacles in obtaining prompt and adequate medical treatment. This study investigates how artificial intelligence could revolutionize healthcare by reducing these disparities and controlling costs. AI-powered medical services—such as remote consultations, diagnostic aids, and customized health advice—possess the ability to make healthcare information more widely accessible and improve early detection of preventable diseases. These technologies offer scalable, cost-effective solutions to bridge gaps in healthcare delivery, especially in underserved communities. However, the paper also examines the potential downsides of AI health systems, such as privacy concerns, biases in AI algorithms, and the risk of over-reliance on automated systems at the expense of human oversight. Despite these challenges, we argue that the integration of AI into healthcare is not only inevitable, but essential for the future of global health. Rather than dismissing these innovations, efforts should focus on developing ethical frameworks, robust governance, and equitable distribution mechanisms to maximize their benefits.