جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « حکمرانی امنیت ملی » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

Intertwining is one of the interdisciplinary topics in strategic literature. Intersection of institutions in assigned tasks, intervention of institutions in each other's affairs and lack of coordination between executive authorities are areas of functional intertwining and interference. The emergence of this situation in the field of national security, causes inefficiency and incurs exorbitant costs. The main question of this article is what are the effects and consequences of intertwining on national security governance in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Four hypotheses of increasing public expenses, decreasing political stability, increasing security holes and filling the functional gap of national security institutions have been presented in response to the above question. This paper by using descriptive method and using case study, analyzes the findings. The results of the article show that if the issue of intertwining is not paid attention to, there is a possibility of increasing public expenses for the political system, increasing security holes and increasing political instability. At the end, some recommendations have been provided to treat this situation in the country's governance system.

This article seeks to theoretically examine the national security governance in the discourse of the Islamic Revolution. The author believes that the word governance comes from the context of liberal thought and its use in the intellectual field of the Islamic Republic requires its adaptation to the security authority in the discourse of the Islamic Revolution. The author distinguishes between the security refference and the reffrent object of security and believes that the security refference is manifested in the discourse of the Islamic Revolution in a longitudinal series from God to the Supreme Leader.  So that the rule of national security in the Islamic Republic based on the common meaning of good governance, which originally seeks or prioritizes the authority of society and the people, is rejected. To provide the basis for drawing the national security governance of the Islamic Republic, author tries to describe and categorize reffrent objects of security and the security reference in Iran.

Politicization in the general sense refers to the involvement and preference of political and group motives and interests in judgments and decisions. In the field of governance, politicization is the non-observance of neutrality in policy-making and decision-making and the interference of political views, tendencies and biases in professional affairs; which may occur at different levels and patterns. Although politicization is one of the most important harms and inefficiencies in all areas of governance, it has more destructive consequences in the field of national security governance. In such a case, agents, political actors, and strategic and intelligence analysts intervene in their political preferences at various stages, such as: subject selection, data collection, information processing and analysis, and report production. They abandon objectivism in favor of political interests. This study examines the prominent trends and events in the field of national security governance in Iran, examines the dimensions and effectiveness of this issue and its findings show that politicization in forms such as polarization, influence, parallelism and disclosure or leakage of information entails significant political and security costs. Accordingly, suggestions have been made for controlling politicization or managing its harmful consequences.

This article studies the role of legislature branch in creating security and recounting the causes and roots of inefficiency of parliaments in performing their securing functions and recognizes the necessary conditions for parliament to govern national security and how to achieve these conditions. In this regard, the role of the Islamic Consultative Assembly in good security governance in Iran will also be discussed. Parliaments need institutions such as free, fair and frequent elections, freedom of expression, alternative sources of information, independent organizations, and integrated citizenship to consolidate national security. Economic progress, the absence of a wide gap in economic and social inequalities, the existence of democratic cultural foundations (such as tolerance of dissent, consensus on the democratic method, etc.), non-preference of individual, ethnic and group interests over national interests and lack of foreign intervention are some tools for the continuity and proper functioning of parliament in order to strengthen national security. Until the aforementioned conditions and equipment are provided, no parliament, including the Islamic Consultative Assembly, will be able to perform its functions optimally in order to increase the national security coefficient.

Strategic surprise occurs when the national security system is unable to fully preventa crisis or of a priori management of the situation to reduce the damages caused bythe crisis. National security governance also means the activism of certaininstitutions of the country's political structure that have a specific mission in thefield of national security by law. Accordingly, the main question is what effect doesstrategic surprise have on the governance of national security in the IslamicRepublic of Iran? The results of this article show that the occurrence of strategicsurprise postpones the national security decision-making process and increases thecosts of security. While increasing cognitive bias, ambiguity in the role ofthreatening actors, keeping national security officials busy, reducing the stability andinfluence of national sovereignty, doubts about security priorities, increasinginsignificant signals and increasing public distrust of the national security system aresome examples of the impact of strategic surprise on the national securitygovernance. This article suggests ways to reduce these surprises.

National security, in modern definitions, in addition to the classical components ofsecurity such as the absence of external threats, is closely interacting with the stabilityand survival of the political system and governance and includes components thatfocus on citizens, such as civil rights, public trust, political legitimacy and Economicefficiency. On the other hand, in looking at this concept, the ratio of each of the pillarsof sovereignty should be measured and adjusted with it, and the judiciary is one of thepillars of sovereignty. Given the main function of the judiciary in establishing justice,it can be considered the most important element of governance in achieving politicallegitimacy, protection of citizens' rights and the efficiency of executive institutions, allof which lead to the establishment and strengthening of national security. The presentarticle, by emphasizing this position of the judiciary, examines its performance inproviding national security. Accordingly, the judiciary, on the one hand, will helpstrengthen national security by providing judicial security, which requires the rule oflaw, judicial independence and respect for civil rights, and all of which are modernrequirements of national security. On the other hand, the role of this power ingoverning national security has been studied during a phenomenon called policyjudicialization. The connection of the concept of judicial oversight with the executiveand political processes in the world has led to the formation of the phenomenon ofjudicial legalization. In the present article, the relationship between the judicializationof politics and the expansion of the oversight powers of the judiciary to achieve greaterand stronger national security has been examined.

Although the discourse of the Islamic Revolution had an epistemologicaldisconnection with the discourse of Pahlavism as "other discourse" and had acoherence within itself, but over time and in confronting with different epistemologicaldiscourses, it was affected by changes and many sub-discourses were formed, each ofwhich had a special impact on the governance of national security in Iran. In thisarticle, focusing on the differences between the sub-discourses formed within thediscourse of the Islamic Revolution, the question has been raised that what are theeffects of these sub-discourses on the national security governance? In response to thisquestion, using library resources and analysis of existing relevant secondarydocuments, while examining developments in the discourse of the Islamic Revolution,the principles and foundations as well as the effects and consequences of each subdiscourseon the national security governance in Iran are analyzed. The hypothesisexamined in this article is that the evolution of the discourse of national securitygovernance in the Islamic Republic of Iran, despite the development of a specificgovernance model of the Islamic Republic, weakens consensus and forms polarizationand conflict in society and also national security structures and institutions.