armed struggle

This study examines the reproduction of discursive and political conflicts in contemporary Iranian society and the necessity of reevaluating their intellectual heritage. Given that these conflicts are an integral part of social and historical processes, analyzing the socio-political positions of influential groups and movements in modern Iranian history is of particular importance. The Liberation Movement of the People of Iran (JAMA) is one such influential movement that, during a critical period in Iran's history, presented specific views and strategies for socio-political and economic changes within a distinct discourse. Therefore, analyzing the positions of JAMA not only addresses the academic need to gain deeper insight into this movement but also serves as a tool for understanding and interpreting historical and intellectual transformations in modern Iran. The main focus of this research is to analyze JAMA's socio-political positions and to study the transformations these positions underwent within historical and discursive developments. This study aims to identify and explore the roots, characteristics, and impacts of JAMA’s discourse in modern Iranian history. Additionally, the research seeks to explain the evolution of these positions from a theistic-socialist discourse to an Islamic one during the period leading up to the Islamic Revolution.

This study employs a historical research method to collect and verify data, while adopting Quentin Skinner’s contextualist and intentionalist hermeneutics for the analysis and interpretation of texts. Following Skinner’s approach, which argues that interpreting a text and understanding its meaning is only possible through studying texts in their social and political context with an emphasis on “speech acts” or “performative acts,” this research endeavors to elucidate JAMA’s positions and the transformations they underwent. Skinner’s context-driven and intentionalist hermeneutics hold that the meanings of terms, concepts, and propositions are dependent on and limited to their specific historical period. To achieve this, intellectual currents, prevalent arguments, and the questions and answers of that era must be thoroughly investigated. Accordingly, attention has been given to historical events, as well as the intellectual and practical backgrounds of the movement’s organizers as historical subjects.

Based on its periodic analysis, JAMA assessed Iranian society as being on the brink of a social transformation and promoted a program centered on an ideology aimed at realizing this transformation. The ideology in question was theistic socialism, which emphasized moral and humanistic socialism while grounding itself in a religious identity with a monotheistic framework. Politically, JAMA sought to overthrow the monarchy and establish a democratic system characterized by justice and labor. Socially and economically, it aimed to achieve a socialist transformation that prioritized securing the fundamental rights and freedoms of the people. Its strategy for transition was rooted in the belief that the old regime was incapable of meeting the people's demands and that traditional social classes were unable to seize power through conventional means. Therefore, it proposed that a revolutionary political group must, through widespread and sustained armed struggle, seize political and governmental power from the ruling class, replace it, and bring about comprehensive social transformation. In the final years leading up to the Islamic Revolution in 1979, during the second phase of its activities, JAMA redefined and pursued its stated socio-political positions within an Islamic discourse framed by revolution and Islamic governance.

The socio-political and intellectual transformations in JAMA’s positions were significantly influenced by the linguistic-discursive and intellectual-social context, as well as the prevailing political-historical conditions. Key factors included the failure and overthrow of the national government via a coup, escalating political tensions, polarization between supporters and opponents of the monarchy, traditional-modern discursive conflicts, the ineffectiveness of conventional political approaches, suppression of protests, the pivotal events of June 5, 1963, the turn to assassination plans by revolutionary groups, the establishment of radical organizations, the spread of armed struggle ideologies, and the growth of the clerical movement. These elements collectively shaped and transformed JAMA's socio-political positions over time.

Imam Khomeini, in the arena of the Pahlavi regime, has always faced an issue of armed struggle as a fateful challenge. The maximum reliance on the Pahlavi regime to the element of the armed suppression of political opponents and the launch of bloody killings in Kouran Movement, with a spectrum of political fighters in the application of an armed struggle, which occasionally entered the field of religious basis and sometimes with the backing of religious foundations. In these conditions, the leadership of the movement has always been exposed to the question of the nature of the armed struggle.Representation of the Imam Sira around the armed struggles depends on some fundamental questions, including whether Imam agreed with armed movements? If he was opposed, why did he not rule out the likelihood of 'declaration of jihad' in their formal political literature, but also against it? In the present article, while describing the positions and political signs of Imam Khomeini during the struggle, his approach surrounding the 'declaration of armed jihad' as one of the jurisprudential capacities to advance political struggles, is reviewed and with descriptive analytical approach, it will be proven that Imam in the same time Avoiding the approval of armed struggles and refraining from pragmatic approaches and ideas has always addressed the 'declaration of jihad' as a political task to disturb enemy expectations

What international law gives as the definition of liberation fightings is not comprehensive enough. In fact, as opposed to terrorism, this concept is divisive in any relevant international forum, preventing an integrated definition of this concept. Although it has been referred to in important documents, a few of states are still deeming it as illegitimate. This writing, while studying the legitimacy of the mentioned category from the perspective of international law, has set out to point out the resistance movements’ right to wage an armed struggle to exercise their right to self determination, explained the difference between the concept of resistance and that of separatism and … which are introduced as terrorist actions, and explored the confusion between these two.