فصلنامه مطالعات راهبردی
سال بیست و پنجم شماره 1 (پیاپی 95، بهار 1401)

Current developments in the social, political and economic spheres of Iranian society, especially from the second half of the 1390s onwards (developments such as the emergence of two major waves of protests in January 2017 and November 2017 and the expansion of trade union protests; increasing consumption of virtual social networks, The unprecedented impact of the stock market phenomenon and the ups and downs of the dollar price on the economic and social life of Iranians and social and economic impacts of Covid pandemic, shows the emergences of new waves which can deeply affect future Iranian society before entering the new century. This paper seeks to use the theory of "risk society" by Ulrich Beck, a contemporary German sociologist, and by proposing the idea of a "market risk society", a framework for understanding the process by which the future of Iran underlies sometimes disparate developments to overshadow and to open a new theoretical perspective on the future of Iran after 1400 before the eyes of policymakers and policy makers of the country.

The main question of the article is what is the good and appropriate basic discourse of the national security governance in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which can establish security in this system with the least cost, paradox and undesirable consequences? In response, the author argues that among the four discourses of "identity-based", "progress-based", "power-based" and "security-based", the basic and central discourse that is suitable for the Islamic Republic of Iran is the discourse of "identity Is the "basis" or identity. This central hypothesis or proposition of the article means that the pursuit of progress, equipping with power and building security is only in the light of the development of identity and belief that can bring maximum security in the Islamic Republic of Iran with minimum cost, paradox and adverse consequences. Of course, it is important that identity should be considered as the first and main priority which means that identity is not in the service of power, security and progress and is given priority over them. In this sense, turning away from the ideals of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, or in other words, secularization; means a situation in which identity serves power, security and progress or acquires a secondary status in terms of importance. In this case, even security will be fragile and unsustainable.

Discourses are always in conflict with each other, and in the meantime, sometimes they stand out and sometimes they go to the margins. Marginalization does not mean annihilation, but it means the loss of the power of political activism and dormancy. Marginalization does not always mean that there is always the possibility of losers returning and subjects leaving the status quo and regaining the power of political activism. Now the discourse of archeology is a representation of such a return and an exit that can be seen both in society and in the media; Thus, the present article tries to answer the question, "What are the grounds for the resurgence of this discourse in the contemporary Iran?" Using the theory of "identity security riddle" and the methodology of "discourse-cognition", it is shown that this revival is rooted in the monolithic identity of the Islamic Republic, discourse groupings, intercultural inequalities and feelings of self-denial and ontological fear of ancient culture. This resurgence can also be considered the configuration of resistance identity types.

In this study, using the method of documentary studies and significance-performance analysis 1, first the existing obstacles in the governance of the Islamic Republic of Iran are counted and in the next step, after nineteen interviews with officials, activists and experts in the field of governance and policy making and completing special analysis questionnaires. Significance - Performance, the importance and performance of these obstacles in the governance of the Islamic Republic of Iran have been studied and evaluated. Barriers such as "Sanctioning and Conditioning the Economy", "Corruption", "Lack of Transparency", "Weak e-Government", "Oil-Based Economy", "Privatization and Competitiveness", "Population Reduction and Window Closure" "Demographic" and "Defective budgeting system" have been considered by decision makers more than other cases, respectively. Also, based on the analysis and evaluation of the gap between the importance and function of obstacles, it is necessary to prioritize the obstacles of "political populism", "Accumulation of laws", "reduction of social capital" and "weakness in the planning system" respectively.

This article seeks to examine the role of intelligence agencies in state-craft. The authors define state-craft as an intrinsic act of the government and considers the philosophy of existence of intelligence institutions as playing a role in state-craft and believe that intelligence organizations have four cognitive, supervisory, safeguarding and executive roles in order to run an efficient state-craft. This paper considers the relationship between intelligence activity and governance as a developmental relationship and believes that intelligence activity is a requirement of governance and governance is not possible without intelligence activity. The author presents three historical theoretical approaches to information, including "information as the discovery of secrets", "information as the interpretation of secrets" and "information as a tool for creating the environment" regarding the role of information in governance.

Blockchain technology has been one of the most emerging and one of the most politically challenging new information-communication technologies. The structure of the Blockchain is such that it can at least theoretically overshadow some of the functions and capabilities of governments and, as a result, challenge their legitimacy. This technology has features that can become a factor of legitimacy or at least reduce the crisis of legitimacy of states by further empowering governments or assisting in the processes of strengthening democratic representation. In this article, we try to discuss the possible effects of this technology on the legitimacy of modern governments in the four areas of governance, political trust, efficiency, and democracy, by separating the two main approaches to the relationship between politics and the chain of forms (techno-politics: the chain of forms)

The development of science and technology, while having positive and peaceful effects, can also be used for military and non-peaceful purposes, and can challenge international peace and security. In the conflict between different approaches to national security and international security, the competition between disarmament and deterrence continues. One of the factors influencing the continuation of this is scientific and technological advances that, while contributing to development in various dimensions and levels, like many other phenomena in national security discourses in general and in disarmament circles in particular. The present article tries to examine the effects of the application of scientific and technological advances such as artificial intelligence, cyber, electromagnetism, aerospace, materials technology and finally the chemical and biological field in weapons and methods of warfare on the one hand and the relevant views and positions in Explain the form of disarmament and arms control on the other hand.

The present article is an attempt to understand how the transition to governance in political theory and analysis of its theoretical approaches occurs. Given that over the past four decades there have been significant changes in the face of power at the level of the political system and the performance of governments, so debates about the decline of government power and the emergence of various political and political actors and changes in governance as one of the main issues in the new era. Therefore, the present article is aimed at answering the fundamental question of what approach has contemporary political thought taken to the nature of the transition from government policy? In answer to this question, two possibilities of theoretical controversy are examined: The first view, or the mainstream of political thought, views the transition from government to governance, and in contrast to the critical current (the second view), doubts the positive approach of the mainstream from the different and emerging role of power here called governance. The present article expresses the views of their thinkers and explains the different dimensions of this debate by stating three theoretical approaches related to the transition in the way of governing and analyzing the three levels of government, governance and governance

By asking about security in Hobbes's political philosophy, this article addresses why power and security are intertwined in the modern state and the virtuous role of human beings in providing and promoting security in society has been neglected. In other words, insecurity in the contemporary era, and especially in the wake of the formation of global experiences of Leviathan as the only legitimate and effective power structure in societies and international relations, rather than resulting from power struggles between states are rooted in Hobbes's anthropology, which is itself the theoretical foundation of the modern state. Using this theory of critical reconstruction based on Hobbes's internal logic of anthropology, this study tries to introduce insecure and insecure sources in Hobbes's view of human beings and Identity. The results of this study show that Hobbes's anthropology, as the theoretical basis of the structure of today's modern state, makes man an inherently dangerous, anxious, selfish, and at the same time legitimate and justified being in achieving all his desires. This type of anthropology is the main source of insecurity production, the consequences and effects of which are reflected in Leviathan.