نشریه جستارهای سیاسی معاصر
سال یازدهم شماره 3 (پیاپی 37، پاییز 1399)

This paper seeks to study the effects of tradition - modernism cleavage on the political stability in Saudi Arabia. For decades, Wahhabi scholars have promoted Salafi values and beliefs, and as a result have strengthened traditional and conservative tendencies in the Saudi society, despite the decades of efforts made by Saudi leaders to advance the process of modernization in order to consolidate their power and improve governance. However, despite some challenges, the management of the tradition - modernism cleavage by Saudi leaders have sustained political stability in the country. During the Reign of King Salman, a new and rapid process of modernization began under the leadership of MBS. This newly-emerged trend is accompanied by a number of dimensions, such as restriction of Wahhabi scholars, concentration on generational changes and also cultural and social reforms with a focus on women’s situation, raises important questions about Saudi political stability. This article makes two interrelated arguments; first, it contributes that the MBS reformist policies and new developments regarding tradition - modernism cleavage causes some challenges like declining the legitimacy of government and growing tendency of people towards extremist groups. Second, these development will not lead to fundamental changes in the Saudi political system.

As one of the most important countries in Southwest Asia, Saudi Arabia has had a tumultuous performance in the field of foreign policy at the regional level. After King Salman got into power in 2015, many changes have taken place in the country's foreign policy. One of these important changes is the change in the media policy towards other countries, and Israel is one of them. The issue of deal of the century in the 2018 by the United States President and the efforts of Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with the Zionist regime became the importance of Saudi diplomacy regarding the Zionist regime. This study aims to examine Saudi media diplomacy on Israel after the inauguration of Muhammad bin Salman (i.e. from 2017 to 2019); therefore, MBC (Middle East Broadcasting Center), one of the most important media centers in Saudi Arabia, which It has more than 15 satellite channels, was selected for this research.The research approach is a qualitative, the collection method is documentary with the thematic analysis. Sampling was also performed in a possible targeted manner. More than 200 samples were examined, which resulted in 6 comprehensive themes. Israel's security and military authority and the Zionist regime's rationality in defensive actions are part of the comprehensive themes. The representation of Israel on MBC is positive in general, and it represents Israel as a legitimate, powerful, and rational state.

Mohammad Ali Homayoun Katozian is one of the researchers and experts who has written about society and politics in Iran and in addition to producing important works, it has provided views and opinions focused on the history of Iran.There is no doubt that Katozian is a diligent and expert researcher, and because of this, there has been a lot of criticism of his books and opinions. Katozian's strong point is to problematize Iranian history and society and to present it in the "problematic aspect". He expressed his views and opinions are considered as theory by himself. Like the theory of Iranian despotism, the short-term society or the old society and the conflict between the state and the nation and etc. The findings say that Katozian critics do not consider his views as a theorist. Some describe him as merely a repeater and practitioner of the theories of Marx, Engels, and Wittfogel. Some associate his view with a lack of examples. Some see Katozian's view as limited to the realm of politics and government, which he has not seen in other realms. in general, they have introduced methodological and content problems into Katozian's views. In this article, these critiques are evaluated and analyzed by descriptive-analytical method.

In this article, we have attempted to investigate the emergence and spread of the Takfir phenomenon based on humiliation. Humiliation result in individual and collective emotions that can lead to violent behavior or reaction under particular circumstances. In some societies where there are unjustified social inequality, internal and external pressures and humiliations alongside conditions of despotism and blockage, the sense of frustration grows. Subsequently, within such social space, groups grow that are dissatisfied in this situation and strive to change it. These changes, according to their text, are along with hatred and violence. Within the situation of Iraq, identified idea is Takfiri Islam, an idea that has its own background and is against national identity. Based on the theoretical framework of social psychology, we try to answer the question of how humiliation has led to the rise and spread of Takfiri groups in the Middle East in general and in Iraq in particular. How do takfiri groups define their identity in opposition to national identity based on Islam?

one of the focal turning points in history of Islam is the" saqifah Gathering " in which the successor of prophet Muhammad was elected .Historically there has been three main discourses regarding the choosing of the caliphate which can be traced back to this event .we can examine these in the context of language and Discourse which is inspired by works of French philosopher Michelle Foucault .The question remains as how the advocacy of each three discourses can be associated to early Islamic society language, power structure and internal dynamics? Findings of this study shows that the pre-Islamic values and structures affected the notion of succession and leadership "Khilafah" in Islam and later paved the way to comprehend the notion of "khilafah' in a form of non-religious pattern.

Dr. Shariati is known as the ideologue of the Islamic Revolution and Imam Khomeini as the architect of the revolution and the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Comparing the l discourse of these two thinkers in order to discover the commonalities and differentiate them is of great theoretical and practical importance for the intellectual and political situation of the current Iranian society. Given the importance of the discourse of these two contemporary thinkers, this article has been written with the aim of answering the question "What are the similarities and differences between the discourse of Imam Khomeini and Dr. Ali Shariati based on the discourse analysis approach?". The conceptual framework of this paper is based on Laclau and Mouffe's theory of meaning and its method is discourse analysis approach.Accordingly, the discourses of Imam Khomeini and Dr. Ali Shariati in categories and dimensions of giving meaning to the world, focal signifier, superior signifier (identity), empty signifier, discourse minutes, political myth, subjects, positive and negative subjects according to logic Currency, distinction, and subject positions are compared. The findings of this study show that the political myth of Imam Khomeini's discourse is the denial of the status quo, the denial of the monarchy, the denial of the separation of religion from politics and government, and the denial of the apolitical nature of seminaries and clerics and the necessity of forming an Islamic government. The myth of Dr. Ali Shariati's discourse is the rejection of existing political myths (material and religious) and the introduction of Islamic democracy (guided) as a myth and a desirable political government for Iranian society.