Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 PhD Student of Political Science, Faculty of Law, Theology and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law, Theology and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/jppolicy.2025.101199

Abstract

In this article, the main subjects of strategic action in relation to Iran are Saudi Arabia and Turkey, which will have an effective ability to be effective in the surrounding environmet. Subjects are considered one of the signs of recognizing the power and threat of actors in the surrounding environment. Each actor, including Iran, is generally known for its distinct media, communication, and normative formats. The more countries understand the behavioral patterns and tactical actions of communication and strategic actors, the more power they will have to control threats. The main question of the article is the intertwined relationship between security subjectivization and the behavioral action pattern of actors in the field of "cognitive and media action." Therefore, it raised the question, "What are the characteristics of the media and normative policymaking of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey in their interaction with each other?" The hypothesis of the article refers to the fact that "media and normative policymaking in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey is based on competitive mechanisms and reflects a specific form of soft balance." The "Nassel soft balance" approach is used in the process of preparing the article.

Keywords

References

  1. Alcock, Peter, (2003), “The subject of social policy”, in P. Alcock, A Erskine and M. May (Eds), The Student’s Companion to Social Policy, 2nd Ed, Oxford: Blackwell.
  2. Azimi, Hooman (2019), Turkey in Sleep And Wake , Tehran: The Center for Media Studies Development.
  3. Bashirieh, Hossein (2005), Transformation from the Democracy: Overview of Political Mobilization Theory , Tehran: Faculty of Law and Political Science.
  4. Bourguignon, Frederick and Charles Morrison, (2002), “Inequality among world citizens 1820-1992”, American Economic Review, Vol. 92, no. 4.
  5. Castells, Manuel (2002), The Information Age: The Power of Identity , Translated by Hassan Chavoushian, Tehran, Tarhe-no.
  6. Castells, Manuel (2002), The Information Age: The Rise of the Network Society, Translated by Ahmad Aghilian anf Afshin Khakbaz. Vol 1, Tehran, Tarhe-no.
  7. Castells, Manuel (2015), Networks of Outrage and Hope, Translate by Mojtaba Gholipour, Second Edition, Tehran, Markaz.
  8. Dahl, Rabert and Stalin Brikner (2013), Modern Political Analysis, Translated by Darvish.
  9. Dean, Howard, (2003), “Welfare, Identity and the Life course”, in J. Baldock and Others, “Social Policy”, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. Deheshyar, Hossein (2013),Saudi Arabia; Arabia a Regional Actor in the Case of Special Relations, Journal of Foreign Relations, No 3, Vol 19, Autumn, Pp 41-65.
  11. Esmaeilzade Emamgholi, Yasser (2017), The dilemma of Regionalism in the Middel Est: The Changing Role of the Structure of International System , No 1, Vol 87, Spring, Pp 149-164.
  12. Eyestone, Robert, (1997), “Confusion, diffusion and innovation”, American political science Review, No. 71, pp. 441-7.
  13. Ghaffari, Gholamreza and Reza Omidi, (2012), Quality of Living: The Index of Social Development, Tehran, Shirazeh.
  14. Hashemi Jebeli, reza and jabbar Shojaei, (2024), Chinas Approach Towards Iran and Saudi Arabia with Focus on Détente policy.
  15. Hills, J. (2004), “Inequality and the State”, Oxford: Oxford University.
  16. Hobbi, Mohammad-bagher , Esfandiar Marzabadi and Reza nouri (2011), The Awareness of Methods of Psychological Warfare and Counter it by Providing Solutions for Military Awareness, Journal of Military Psychology, No 3.Autumn, Pp 73-79.
  17. Holsti, K.J (1994), Principle of International politics, Tehran: Foreign Ministry Publicatoins.
  18. Lewis, J., (2001), “Family change and Lone parents as a social problem”, in M. May, P. Page and E. Brunsdon (Eds), Understanding Social Problems: Issues in Social Policy, Oxford: Blackwell.
  19. Munoz, A (2012), “U. S. Military information operations in Afghanistan: Effectiveness of psychological operations 2001-2010”, Santa Monica, CA: RAND National defense research institute.
  20. Rogers, E., (2003), “The Diffusion of Innovations”, 5thedn, New York: Free Press.
  21. Rose- Ackerman, S (1992), “Rethinking the Progressive Agenda”, New York: Free Press.
  22. Rosenau, James (2005), Turbulence in Word Politics, Translate by Alireza Tayyeb, Tehran. Rowzneh.
  23. Sabatier, and Jenkins, Smith. H (1999), “The Advocacy Coalition Framework: an assessment”, In “Theories of the Policy Process”, ed. P. Sabatier. Boulder, Colo: Westview.
Iranian Journal of Public Policy
Volume 11, Issue 1
March 2025
Pages 188-201

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics