The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has been one of the most important political and legal treaties in the history of the Islamic Republic of Iran and one of the most influential treaties on the international relations of Iran. Overall, reflections on this agreement in Iran fit into two main competing political discourses of Reformism and Principlism, and it was represented in two different forms. Throughout this research, we have analyzed and discussed two media discourses of Reformism and Principlism, using Discourse theory which has its roots in the theories of Foucault, Laclau and Mouffe. Moreover, the used method in this research is Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis which includes three stages of Description, Interpretation and Explanation. Also, the resource of research data has been JCPOA concerned news headings of the newspapers belonging to the Principlist and the Reformist factions. For this purpose, the news headings that have been of cognitive value, regarding the subject of the research, have been chosen purposefully and have been analyzed. According to the results of the analysis of findings, the Reformist and the Principlist discourses using techniques such as Antagonism and Integration have had different and opposing evaluations of JCPOA. The Principlist discourse considers JCPOA as a danger for “National Security” and holds the Reformist discourse responsible for JCPOA’s negative consequences. On the opposite side, the Reformist discourse considers JCPOA as a step forward towards “Peace” and “Opening up the economy” and attributes JCPOA’s positive achievements to itself.
- حق عضویت دریافتی صرف حمایت از نشریات عضو و نگهداری، تکمیل و توسعه مگیران میشود.
- پرداخت حق اشتراک و دانلود مقالات اجازه بازنشر آن در سایر رسانههای چاپی و دیجیتال را به کاربر نمیدهد.