Journal of World Sociopolitical Studies

Abstract

Abstract Objective: Barack Obama entered office, promising engagement with Tehran; by the end of his first term, his administration had assembled an exceptionally broad multilateral sanctions regime. This article explains that reversal; it uses the case of Iran’s nuclear program to extend the Copenhagen School's theory of securitization in two ways. First, it treats sanctions and institutional measures not just as consequences of a completed securitization but as part of the securitizing process itself: the UN Security Council Resolution 1929, the IAEA's November 2011 report on possible military dimensions, and the 2012 oil embargo each reset the discursive ground and enabled the next move, so discourse and material action co-produced one another. Second, it theorizes the target state's responses as a structural enabling condition of securitization rather than a factor external to it. Method: Using explanatory-outcome process tracing, the analysis follows the campaign through four stages - discursive entrapment (2009), institutional coalescence around Resolution 1929 (2010), scientific validation through the November IAEA (2011), and the normalization of sanctions (2012) - and identifies the United States and its allies as the securitizing actors. Results: Iran's legalism, its missed diplomatic openings, and the timing of its enrichment disclosures emerge as conditions that facilitated the campaign without being its cause.

Abstract Objective: Intelligence challenges such as weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), terrorism, and cyber threats create uncertainty and incomplete information for the decision makers and people. This uncertainty could be managed by a country’s president through persuasive communication. This article examines the way in which Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama employed rhetorical strategies to persuade domestic and international audiences regarding intelligence-related affairs.
Method: The study draws on a qualitative content analysis of presidential speeches based on a new seven-category persuasion framework consisting of 25 subcategories that expand the traditional Aristotelian modes of ethos, pathos, and logos. This framework offers a more systematic framework for capturing the complexity of presidential persuasion strategy.
Results: The analysis revealed clear differences in presidential approaches: Bush consistently relied on pathos, using fear appeals, urgency, and moral clarity to justify preemptive actions related to WMD and rally public support, whereas Obama focused on logos and ethos, appealing to reason, institutional trust, and credibility, while framing responses as collaborative and strategic in cases involving technological intelligence activities.

Abstract Objective: The article examines the representation of the political rival in conflicts on Persian X, asking when such representation moves beyond disagreement over positions and ordinary boundary-making. The analysis centers on the relationship that the text constructs with the political rival. Three cases are examined: Iran’s 2024 presidential runoff (1403 SH), the dispute over the enforcement of the Chastity and Hijab Law, and whether Iran should negotiate with the United States. Method: The research design is qualitative, text-centered, and processual-comparative, with the interactional-discursive cluster serving as the main unit of assessment. This version relies only on evidence clearly traceable in the attached data file and correspondence table; the core argument rests on six explicit and auditable evidentiary packages. Results: The three cases differ in more than the intensity of conflict. In the election case, the relationship with the rival hardens mainly through appeals to legitimacy and belonging. In the hijab case, the dominant pattern takes shape through moralization of conflict and judgments about coercion, humiliation, and harm to everyday life. In the negotiation case, the evidence is more dispersed and supported only by a limited evidentiary segment in which strategic suspicion approaches the moral framing of compromise and surrender. In none of the three cases is the evidence sufficient to establish political hatred as the dominant logic. Understanding online conflict therefore requires distinguishing between the intensification of language and the transformation of the relationship constructed with the rival; in the documented data, this distinction is more defensible at the cluster level than through single-post reading.

Abstract Objective: This article discusses the digital performance of cultural identity by Rishi Sunak, Britain’s first Prime Minister of Indian descent, through thematic analysis of 50 strategically selected X (Twitter) posts spanning his political ascendancy (2020-2025).
Method: Employing Hall’s representation theory, the analysis reveals a deliberate curation of Indian identity privileging ceremonial multiculturalism (Diwali commemorations, UK-India diplomatic exchanges) alongside neoliberal meritocratic narratives, while systematically excluding engagement with the history of colonialism or structural inequities.
Results: The analysis particularly highlights how UK-India diplomatic exchanges became a strategic site for Mr. Sunak to perform his hybrid identity. The project then advances the framework of “controlled visibility” to elucidate the dual mechanisms of such phenomenon in digital representation: strategic self-presentation by political actors intersecting with platform governance policies. The research contributes to an emerging field at the intersection of digital politics, ethnic studies, and British political discourse by highlighting how ethnic identity can be subtly embedded or strategically leveraged in the digital sphere.

Abstract Objective: Iran–Russia relations remain contested in Iranian foreign policy, situated between strategic partnership and interest-based cooperation. Although shared concerns over Western pressure and cooperation in regional security, energy, and multilateral institutions have strengthened strategic convergence, persistent differences over issues such as the Caspian Sea, energy competition, the JCPOA, and Russia’s relations with the Persian Gulf states reveal important constraints on bilateral ties. Despite extensive scholarship on Iran–Russia relations, existing studies have predominantly emphasized geopolitical and material factors, while paying comparatively less attention to the role of identity, historical experiences, and policymakers’ perceptions in shaping cooperation and disagreement.
Mehtod: This study addresses this gap by examining Iran–Russia relations through constructivism as its primary theoretical framework, complemented by insights from cognitive diplomacy. Employing a qualitative research design based on documentary analysis and case studies, the study examines the geopolitical-security dimension through the Zangezur Corridor and the economic dimension through energy cooperation.
Results: Findings indicate that, although Iran and Russia have expanded cooperation across several strategic areas, their relationship does not constitute a comprehensive strategic alliance. Rather, it is better understood as interest-based cooperation characterized by selective convergence, pragmatic coordination, and persistent constraints arising from divergent interests, historical experiences, and differing perceptions.

Abstract Objective: Israel's radical policy in the War on Gaza is dehumanizing and absolutely contrary to international norms and standards. Dehumanization refers to the deprivation of humans and other groups of all their basic rights. Method: This article argues that Zionist discourse has enabled Israel's radical policy through the reproduction of dehumanizing narratives. Such narratives are influenced by Western anthropological perspective, which values Western lives more highly than non-Western ones. Zionist discourse enables such radical policy for Israel by reproducing narratives such as Legitimizing Self and Delegitimizing the Other, Denial of Coevalness, Viewing the Other as an Object, Representation of a Superior Extended ‘We’, and Belonging to a Different Place. Results: This radical policy includes elements such as diplomatic weakness, voluntarism, disproportionality between capabilities and actions, maximalism, and reactive behavior. This policy has deviated from realist elements such as prioritizing diplomacy to secure national interests, avoiding risk-centered approaches, respecting the vital interests of others, and operating within the framework of power. Using discourse analysis methodology and examining texts reproduced by Israeli officials and leaders, this article seeks to explain Israel's dehumanizing narratives and radical policy in the War on Gaza.