درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The analysis of the relationship between the people and the government and their roles and positions in governance is an age-old issue, with each school of thought and consequently each thinker presenting a framework for it. The people's political approach to governance in the context of the theory of religious democracy is both a product of the discourse of the Islamic Revolution and the lived experience of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Considering the governance experience of these two main theories in Iran, comparing their perspectives is key to solving many problems. By employing a selected theoretical approach and using a descriptive-analytical method, the authors have concluded that while there is a common discourse and approach between Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei, the theoretical development of this concept and the elaboration of its operational details are distinctive features of the Ayatollah Khamenei 's perspective on Imam Khomeini.

As one of the main goals of Iranian Islamic Revolution, achieving a modern Islamic civilization derived from Islamic rationality is faced with some challenges. As the most fundamental for an intellectual system, such intellectual challenged can be named “rationality”. On this basis, using attributional analysis type of the qualitative research method, this paper is to answer the following question: “Based on the Islamic revolution leaders’ viewpoints and at the regional level, which most fundamental intellectual challenge does the Islamic revolution face on its way for achieving its depicted high level goals, i.e., bringing up a modern Islamic civilization, and how could they be overcome? The findings indicate that “Takfiri rationality” is the most fundamental challenge at the regional level. Challenge gaps between Takfiri rationality and Shia rationality at the region can be worded as “adhering to texts versus narrations”, “opposing the reason“, “monotheism and accusing Islamic sects”, “believing in and relying on the Prophet companions’ fairness” as well as “opposing emulation”. Criticizing such a rationality, Shia rationality emphasized on “monotheism in Shia school of thought and being free of superstition”, “emphasizing on the necessity of empowering the Islamic revolution and the Islamic axis of resistance”, “the necessity of annihilating ISIS as the main promoter of Islamophobia all over the world”, “opposing any kind of violence and act of terrorism” as well as “denying whatsoever kind of dividing Islamic sects”. Hereupon, operational solutions for dealing with the challenge of Takfirism are proposed in three categories, namely intellectual-scientific, cultural, political and military-security.

The interaction between political elites and the general populace is a key subject of scholarly inquiry, receiving significant attention in academic discourse. This relationship can be seen as the relationship between the government and the people in one interpretation and the relationship between the government and society in another. In a general division, some people believe in the priority of the political elites, some in the people, and finally, the third group believes in the same priority of the political elites and the people. Islamic thinkers have also theorized in this regard. This research, based on the library and documentary methods and contextual interpretation methods, seeks to answer these questions: "What is the relationship between the people and the political elites in Islamic thought?" What are its most important features, and what are the obstacles to the participation of more elites? In order to achieve these goals, we first discuss the basics, and then, based on Islamic principles and values, we examine the role of the people with the political elites or the government. We point out the obstacles to the desired interaction and finally provide some recommendations.  

The United States have adopted competitive and even conflictive trade policies to redefine and rewrite the global political economy in the post globalization era. The prime movers of removing trade barriers and expanding trade concession, have adopted a restrictive theory of trade after terrorist attacks of 9/11, with a gradual shift from an easy international trade environment to a selective preferential trade relations with like- minded countries. New measures and technologies were developed to track movement of different goods. Logistics and international shipping industries were negatively affected due to national restrictive policies. The international financial crisis and Covid-19 were additional factors to push developed countries to adopt protective trade policies to neutralize the negative impact of the crisis in the absence of financial resources. Former trade partners were considered competitors and those with different trade theories or interests became adversaries. US trade disputes and conflicts surged in XXI century and international dispute settlement mechanisms were challenged by US foreign policy to obtain concessions. This article is meant to respond to the question that “What is the US practice in international trade in the post-globalization era and what would be the implications for the developing countries and global business environment”? The hypothesis is that “US trade policy and practice in the twenty first century has been affected by global geopolitics and geo- economics, where emerging poles of power are meticulously considered and long-term strategies are adopted. In this context; trade disputes, wars and sanction diplomacy might happen either for trade inequality concerns, optimal tariff theory, or politically painted economic objectives”. A qualitative analytical methodology is used to study roots and causes of re-globalization wars and to analyze consequences of antagonistic approaches for the multilateral trading system. A new liberal theoretical framework is used to analyze post- globalizations US trade practices.