نشریه حکومت اسلامی
سال بیست و دوم شماره 3 (پیاپی 85، پاییز 1396)

According to the jurisprudential ‘rule of obligation’, the ShiÝi people can make other Muslims with whom they transact, obliged to implement the precepts they have accepted. The most important reason behind this rule is the existence of the traditions which are originated in the issue of divorce. However, certain expressions included in these traditions and some others suggest the inclusion of this rule in various jurisprudential discussions.
At first appearance, the mentioned rule is peculiar to the transactions which can be carried out between ShiÝi people and Sunni people, but with much deliberation on the traditions with respect to the rule in question as well as on the instances to which faqihs refer in their discussion of the rule, it is made clear that this rule can be applicable to non-Muslims and accordingly the Islamic state can rely on it in its foreign relations and thereby can meet a part of Muslims’ interests.

The contemporary history of Iran has witnessed the presence of different political ideologies, including liberalism, socialism, and nationalism, in conjunction with Islam. Referring to competing ideologies, this article deals with Islam, as the established ideology of the Islamic Revolution, and the reasons why the Islamic Revolution succeeded in achieving its goals. The common elements between the above-mentioned ideologies are their being non-native, foreign, imitative, and incompatible or incongruent with religious thinking and culture. Due to the presence of inspiring and epoch-making doctrines of Islam like leadership and the guardianship of the Muslim ShiÝi jurists in the Occultation period, the idea of taking despotic rules illegitimate and the congruity of the political thought of ShiÝism and religious and national culture of Iran, the Islamic thought, despite its ups and downs throughout history, has been the most effective ideology in making changes in the contemporary history of Iran, especially in the Islamic revolution.

Developments in discourses and metanarratives bring about some transformations or/and changes in the quality and quantity of soft power sources. From this perspective, the significance of power sources in various world-views and schools of thought is different. The divine world-view with its doctrinal manifestation in Islam introduces a set of fundamental religious beliefs and values which altogether makes a distinction between the attractive sources of the Islamic system in terms of its variety, scope and prolonged duration and the sources of soft power in materialistic schools. In answering the basic question that ‘What role do monotheism and belief in One God, as the most fundamental religious belief, play in the Islamic Republic in the process of producing soft power in the realm of international politics?’, this research work seeks to present a precise image of the position and role of the element ‘monotheism’ in politico-social engineering trying to establish that monotheism and belief in One God along with attracting the human pure nature, promoting attractive international ideals, etc. play a significant role in producing soft power for the Islamic government.

Identity is of utmost significance in the way we think. One of the main aspects of the Islamic Revolution which has an effect on both domestic and foreign policies is the identity that the new government has assumed. The most important component of the Islamic Revolution is the attempt to establish the Islamic government worldwide and the other constituent elements serve the same purpose and thus each may occupy a position depending on the role they play to achieve this purpose. This identity in the plane of foreign policy determines its own definition, its position in the international community, definition of other things, and the way in which it treats others. The question that arises here is “What position do the foundations of ideological identity occupy in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran?” The answer to this question is that ‘it is supposed that after the advent of the Islamic Revolution and the establishment of the new government, the Islamic identity has taken a pivotal role in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran.’ The present article seeks to cast light on the role this important element plays in the formulation and implementation of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Drawing upon the analytic-descriptive research method and making reference to the first-hand sources and arguments, the article studies the concept of identity and ideology among various theories and goes on to deal with the role they play in the construction of the identity of the Islamic-revolutionary government and its foreign relations in respect to such categories as world government, support, negation of dominance, justice, etc.

One of the most important issues in every system of economy is the question of ownership and the existing approach(es) to it. For it is the structure of ownership that affects on the way in which production, distribution, and consumption is done. It also determines and defines the criteria and standards of each of the three areas mentioned above. ‘Kinds of ownership’ is taken to be one of the most challenging issue in this regard. The fact that the ShiÝi fiqh and hence the judicial system of Iran each has recognized three forms of ownership: private, state and public, and that ownership in Islam and the judicial system of Iran is twofold, that is, there exist two kinds of ownership, are the issues in question. Likewise, the main question in this research seeks to explain why ownership in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is taken to be twofold or trifold and to cast light on the jurisprudential approach on which these divisions are made. Drawing upon an analytical approach, the research explores the subject in question, examining the two main ShiÝi viewpoints in fiqh as regards different kinds of ownership and explaining the adopted approach to ownership in the judicial system of Iran. The findings of the research suggest that in ShiÝi jurisprudential (fiqhi) system, the adoption of dual ownership (private and public) is faced with no problem. As far as the Constitution of Iran is concerned, the judicial system of Iran also has taken the same approach. However, this approach is subject to certain ambiguities in relation to laying down some common laws and regulations.

Given the fact that there is vast literature with regards to political legitimacy, this research is conducted to show the construction of a paradigm of political legitimacy of certain kind from the perspective of the traditions received from the Infallibles by referring to al-Kafi drawing upon a new method called grounded theory. To do this, direct reference is made to the relevant traditions as the documents and research data, and a conceptual framework (conceptualizing) is used on the basis of both connotation (signification of complete accord) and implication (signification of partial accord) in three stages of coding (open coding, axial coding and selective coding) which result in constructing a paradigm of political legitimacy from the viewpoint of traditions. Based on this, political legitimacy is taken as the axis and nucleus of this paradigm around which the conditions (causal, intervening, grounded) and action theory revolve and gain their significance. Having analyzed the data on the political legitimacy, the research shows that the stability and instability of political system gains its significance in terms of political legitimacy.

The concept of wilÁyah or guardianship as depicted in the Holy Qur’Án has a wide scope and is of various referents as it is expressed itself in all instances of individual, familial, social lives as well as in political, economic, and juridical planes in religious and non-religious societies, divine and profane systems, and dictatorial and democratic regimes. Thus, it can be divided into different categories in various ways. However, what is worth noticing here is its comparative division into various referents of guardianship. This makes clear the relations between them and the duty which we have towards each of them. From this angle, guardianship can be divided into ‘conflicting guardianships’ (mutaÝÁriÃ), ‘contrasting guardianships (mutaqÁbil)’ and ‘convergent or consistent guardianships’ (mutawÁfiq). However, in this article, we deal with the first form of guardianship, that is, the conflicting guardianship, in order to clarify the characteristics of each, in addition to making clear the effects they may have on our lives. In doing so, we seek to enjoy their positive effects in meeting the interests of our lives and avoid their negative effects.