دانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220Anarchy in Cyberspace: A Constructivist Analysis of Iran-Israel Cyber RivalryAnarchy in Cyberspace: A Constructivist Analysis of Iran-Israel Cyber Rivalry12173600310.27834/CSIW.2510.596.4.40.1FAMehdiAbbaszadeh FathabadiAssociate Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Theology, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran0000-0003-1893-2132MosayyebRostami KhanmakaniMaster in Political Science, Shahid Bahonar , University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran0009-0009-8184-8014Journal Article20251005This study examines the Iran–Israel cyber rivalry through a constructivist lens, arguing that existing analyses underestimate the social and narrative logics that shape cyber conflict in Southwest Asia. While conventional approaches emphasize capabilities and deterrence, they often overlook how cyber operations acquire meaning through identity, discourse, and ontological security dynamics. Addressing this gap, the article shows that incidents such as the Stuxnet operation functioned as discursive turning points that reinforced Iran’s pre existing self perception as an active cyber actor and intensified a long standing rivalry rather than transforming its identity. Drawing on qualitative analysis of official statements, policy documents, and public narratives from 2010 to 2024, the study finds that ambiguous cyber norms enable both actors to interpret operations as challenges to implicit red lines, producing cycles of reciprocal action and narrative escalation. These patterns extend competition into domains of symbolic signaling, perception management, and the strategic production of ontological insecurity. The article contributes to cybersecurity scholarship by demonstrating how identities and social meanings structure cyber interactions, and by highlighting the need for trust building measures and norm development mechanisms to mitigate spiraling instability in the region.This study examines the Iran–Israel cyber rivalry through a constructivist lens, arguing that existing analyses underestimate the social and narrative logics that shape cyber conflict in Southwest Asia. While conventional approaches emphasize capabilities and deterrence, they often overlook how cyber operations acquire meaning through identity, discourse, and ontological security dynamics. Addressing this gap, the article shows that incidents such as the Stuxnet operation functioned as discursive turning points that reinforced Iran’s pre existing self perception as an active cyber actor and intensified a long standing rivalry rather than transforming its identity. Drawing on qualitative analysis of official statements, policy documents, and public narratives from 2010 to 2024, the study finds that ambiguous cyber norms enable both actors to interpret operations as challenges to implicit red lines, producing cycles of reciprocal action and narrative escalation. These patterns extend competition into domains of symbolic signaling, perception management, and the strategic production of ontological insecurity. The article contributes to cybersecurity scholarship by demonstrating how identities and social meanings structure cyber interactions, and by highlighting the need for trust building measures and norm development mechanisms to mitigate spiraling instability in the region.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736003_610a21bf237a77d65051053a817d1c1d.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220Strategic Linkages: Explaining the Tacit Security Regime in the Relations between the Israel and Saudi ArabiaStrategic Linkages: Explaining the Tacit Security Regime in the Relations between the Israel and Saudi Arabia225073600410.27834/CSIW.2510.1610.4.40.2FAAmirrezaMoghavemiPh.d. in International Relations, Researcher and Lecturer at Imam Hossein Comprehensive University, Tehran, Iran0000-0001-7139-7234Journal Article20251115This article examines the relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel within the framework of the concept of a tacit security regime. Methodologically, the study employs trend analysis as its research method, relying on qualitative research, and utilizes documentary and library-based data collection (including official statements, declassified documents, memoirs, and secondary sources) to gather empirical evidence. Through this approach, the research explores the historical developments, behavioral patterns, and driving factors that have shaped the interactions between these two actors. The findings indicate that a shared perception of threat—particularly from Iran, resistance movements, and the rise of Sunni political Islam in the region—has gradually facilitated a cautious rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Israel. This convergence has been manifested in intelligence cooperation, covert diplomatic coordination, shared stances on regional issues such as the Iranian nuclear agreement (JCPOA), as well as secret economic and technological collaborations. However, internal constraints (such as public opinion sensitivities in Saudi Arabia and the rise of far-right groups within Israel), external limitations (notably the Palestinian issue), as well as political frictions and mutual distrust, have hindered the full normalization of relations. The article argues that, within a tacit security regime—contrary to liberal functionalist perspectives—convergence begins with security-oriented concerns and subsequently extends to other issue areas. Accordingly, the relations between these two actors have developed not through formal treaties but on the basis of mutual interests and geopolitical necessities, and due to existing constraints, have not yet evolved into a formalized arrangement. By emphasizing the regional dynamics of the Middle East, this study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of unconventional cooperation among seemingly adversarial actors.This article examines the relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel within the framework of the concept of a tacit security regime. Methodologically, the study employs trend analysis as its research method, relying on qualitative research, and utilizes documentary and library-based data collection (including official statements, declassified documents, memoirs, and secondary sources) to gather empirical evidence. Through this approach, the research explores the historical developments, behavioral patterns, and driving factors that have shaped the interactions between these two actors. The findings indicate that a shared perception of threat—particularly from Iran, resistance movements, and the rise of Sunni political Islam in the region—has gradually facilitated a cautious rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Israel. This convergence has been manifested in intelligence cooperation, covert diplomatic coordination, shared stances on regional issues such as the Iranian nuclear agreement (JCPOA), as well as secret economic and technological collaborations. However, internal constraints (such as public opinion sensitivities in Saudi Arabia and the rise of far-right groups within Israel), external limitations (notably the Palestinian issue), as well as political frictions and mutual distrust, have hindered the full normalization of relations. The article argues that, within a tacit security regime—contrary to liberal functionalist perspectives—convergence begins with security-oriented concerns and subsequently extends to other issue areas. Accordingly, the relations between these two actors have developed not through formal treaties but on the basis of mutual interests and geopolitical necessities, and due to existing constraints, have not yet evolved into a formalized arrangement. By emphasizing the regional dynamics of the Middle East, this study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of unconventional cooperation among seemingly adversarial actors.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736004_c72b194a5f438a0fee17cf00be84dc2a.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220International Corridors and Iran's Geo-economic IsolationInternational Corridors and Iran's Geo-economic Isolation518073600510.27834/CSIW.2511.1625.4.40.3FAMahdiMohammad NiaAssociate Professor , Department of Political Science, Faculty of ,Humanities, Ayatollah Borujerdi University, Borujerd, Iran0000-0002-0381-6756SaharKhosravi VahidMaster of Political Science, , Faculty of Humanities, Ayatollah Borujerdi University,, Borujerd, Iran0000-0002-0381-6756Journal Article20251116The creation of integrated, multi-modal transport corridors represents the modern equivalent of building empires and spheres of influence. The emergence of corridors such as the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor, the Middle Corridor, the Zangezur Corridor, the India–Middle East–Europe Corridor, the Lapis Lazuli Corridor poses a serious threat to Iran’s regional role and geopolitical standing, leaving the country exposed to geopolitical isolation. By being excluded from emerging corridors, Iran risks transforming from a strategic crossroads into a geopolitical cul-de-sac—resulting in outcomes such as a weakened regional role, reduced influence, growing isolation, and a shift in power toward a coalition of its rivals. Despite its favorable geographical position as a natural hub for transit connectivity, Iran has been systematically excluded from key trade corridors. This marginalization is largely the result of ongoing international sanctions and ineffective policymaking in leveraging the country’s geopolitical and geoeconomic potential. The central question of this study is how Iran’s geoeconomic isolation—resulting from the expansion of alternative international corridors—could affect the country’s national security?” In<strong> </strong>response to this question, the following hypothesis has been proposed:<strong> </strong>“The development of alternative corridors in Iran's peripheral regions, as a serious geopolitical threat, could alter the regional balance of power by undermining Iran's geopolitical role, reducing its regional influence, and leading to the country's geo-economic and geopolitical isolation in regional trade and security equations.” This research was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method and relies on statistical data as well as library resources<span dir="RTL" lang="FA">.</span>The creation of integrated, multi-modal transport corridors represents the modern equivalent of building empires and spheres of influence. The emergence of corridors such as the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor, the Middle Corridor, the Zangezur Corridor, the India–Middle East–Europe Corridor, the Lapis Lazuli Corridor poses a serious threat to Iran’s regional role and geopolitical standing, leaving the country exposed to geopolitical isolation. By being excluded from emerging corridors, Iran risks transforming from a strategic crossroads into a geopolitical cul-de-sac—resulting in outcomes such as a weakened regional role, reduced influence, growing isolation, and a shift in power toward a coalition of its rivals. Despite its favorable geographical position as a natural hub for transit connectivity, Iran has been systematically excluded from key trade corridors. This marginalization is largely the result of ongoing international sanctions and ineffective policymaking in leveraging the country’s geopolitical and geoeconomic potential. The central question of this study is how Iran’s geoeconomic isolation—resulting from the expansion of alternative international corridors—could affect the country’s national security?”<strong> </strong>In<strong> </strong>response to this question, the following hypothesis has been proposed:<strong> </strong>“The development of alternative corridors in Iran's peripheral regions, as a serious geopolitical threat, could alter the regional balance of power by undermining Iran's geopolitical role, reducing its regional influence, and leading to the country's geo-economic and geopolitical isolation in regional trade and security equations.” This research was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method and relies on statistical data as well as library resources<span dir="RTL" lang="FA">.</span>https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736005_a95fd716a22ef75acf04e0592b9b914e.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220Charting future horizons amid regional crises: Saudi Arabia’s strategic thinking and maritime policyCharting Future Horizons amid Regional Crises: Saudi Arabia’s Strategic Thinking and Maritime Policy8110273600610.27834/CSIW.2511.1633.4.40.4FASalimAl-QassmiPh.D. candidate in Political Science, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran0000-0001-9570-4542YousofQorashiAssociate Professor, Department of Political Science,, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran0000-0001-9570-4542HallGardnerProfessor of Political Science, History and Politics Department, American University of Paris, Paris, France0000-0001-9570-4542EbrahimAbbassiAssociate Professor, Political Science Department, , Faculty of Law and Political Science, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran0000-0002-1420-9556Journal Article20251128This article critically analyzes Saudi Arabia’s evolving strategic thinking and maritime policy in the context of persistent regional crises and shifting global dynamics. Moving beyond descriptive accounts, the study investigates how the Kingdom’s ambitious Vision 2030 can be reconciled with the acute security threats proliferating in its neighboring waters. It evaluates the critical role of Saudi Arabia’s geographic location, at the nexus of major global maritime routes, in shaping its aspirations to become a regional logistics hub, while also addressing the vulnerabilities exposed by ongoing instability. By applying SWOT framework, this study assesses the impact of recent policy shifts and identifies strategic opportunities and challenges facing the Kingdom. The findings indicate that by accelerating the implementation of an integrated National Maritime Policy, strengthening multilateral and regional maritime security cooperation, prioritizing the sustainability of the blue economy and the expansion of protected areas, enhancing technological development and workforce localization within the maritime sector, and diversifying partnerships along with improving infrastructure resilience, Saudi Arabia’s maritime strategy can explore new opportunities amidst uncertainty and transformation.This article critically analyzes Saudi Arabia’s evolving strategic thinking and maritime policy in the context of persistent regional crises and shifting global dynamics. Moving beyond descriptive accounts, the study investigates how the Kingdom’s ambitious Vision 2030 can be reconciled with the acute security threats proliferating in its neighboring waters. It evaluates the critical role of Saudi Arabia’s geographic location, at the nexus of major global maritime routes, in shaping its aspirations to become a regional logistics hub, while also addressing the vulnerabilities exposed by ongoing instability. By applying SWOT framework, this study assesses the impact of recent policy shifts and identifies strategic opportunities and challenges facing the Kingdom. The findings indicate that by accelerating the implementation of an integrated National Maritime Policy, strengthening multilateral and regional maritime security cooperation, prioritizing the sustainability of the blue economy and the expansion of protected areas, enhancing technological development and workforce localization within the maritime sector, and diversifying partnerships along with improving infrastructure resilience, Saudi Arabia’s maritime strategy can explore new opportunities amidst uncertainty and transformation.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736006_a24ad9b666e7671efdba1dd5fcd79ddb.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220Legitimation Strategies in News Coverage of the Iran-Israel Conflict; the Case Study of 12-Day WarLegitimation Strategies in News Coverage of the Iran-Israel Conflict; the Case Study of 12-Day War10312873600710.27834/CSIW.2512.1638.4.40.5FAMasoumehMehrabiAssociate Professor, Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities
, Ayatollah Boroujerdi University0000-0003-4852-1334Abdul MajidSeifiAssociate Professor, Department of Political Science,, Faculty of Humanities, Ayatollah Borujerdi University0000-0002-0458-3595Journal Article20251206This study looks into how some international news organizations established credibility through their headline coverage of the 12-day Iran-Israel conflict in June 2025. Using Van Leeuwen's (2007) legitimation paradigm, the study examines 35 headlines from major English-language media outlets, including Fox News and Reuters. This study employs qualitative discourse analysis to determine how headlines support or contradict military and political actions during the conflict by using mythopoesis, moral evaluation, authorization, and justification. The results show that while evaluative and emotionally charged word choices create moral narratives of threat, victimhood, and triumph, headlines often cite institutional and expert authority to justify political and military operations. While mythopoesis creates both positive and negative narratives, portraying players as either heroes or criminals, rationalization techniques are frequently instrumental or theoretical, connecting events causally to justify reactions or results. The study highlights the intricate interactions between language choices, ideological positioning, and media framing in modern conflict reporting and demonstrates how headline discourse is a strategic site for building legitimacy, influencing public perception, and mediating interpretations of geopolitical events. The findings indicate that <strong>rationalization and authorization</strong> are the most dominant legitimation strategies, reflecting the strong tendency of headline discourse to justify conflict-related actions through causal reasoning and appeals to institutional or expert authority. <strong>Moral evaluation</strong> is also frequently employed through evaluative lexical choices that construct polarized narratives of threat, victimhood, and legitimacy. In contrast, <strong>mythopoesis</strong> appears less frequently, suggesting that narrative-based legitimation is less central in short headline formats. Overall, the study concludes that headlines function as a strategic discursive site where legitimacy is actively produced and contested, shaping public perception by presenting political and military actions as reasonable, necessary, and morally defensible.This study looks into how some international news organizations established credibility through their headline coverage of the 12-day Iran-Israel conflict in June 2025. Using Van Leeuwen's (2007) legitimation paradigm, the study examines 35 headlines from major English-language media outlets, including Fox News and Reuters. This study employs qualitative discourse analysis to determine how headlines support or contradict military and political actions during the conflict by using mythopoesis, moral evaluation, authorization, and justification. The results show that while evaluative and emotionally charged word choices create moral narratives of threat, victimhood, and triumph, headlines often cite institutional and expert authority to justify political and military operations. While mythopoesis creates both positive and negative narratives, portraying players as either heroes or criminals, rationalization techniques are frequently instrumental or theoretical, connecting events causally to justify reactions or results. The study highlights the intricate interactions between language choices, ideological positioning, and media framing in modern conflict reporting and demonstrates how headline discourse is a strategic site for building legitimacy, influencing public perception, and mediating interpretations of geopolitical events. The findings indicate that <strong>rationalization and authorization</strong> are the most dominant legitimation strategies, reflecting the strong tendency of headline discourse to justify conflict-related actions through causal reasoning and appeals to institutional or expert authority. <strong>Moral evaluation</strong> is also frequently employed through evaluative lexical choices that construct polarized narratives of threat, victimhood, and legitimacy. In contrast, <strong>mythopoesis</strong> appears less frequently, suggesting that narrative-based legitimation is less central in short headline formats. Overall, the study concludes that headlines function as a strategic discursive site where legitimacy is actively produced and contested, shaping public perception by presenting political and military actions as reasonable, necessary, and morally defensible.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736007_618a5b5dfeaeddd65b0f07473463c24b.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220Dual Framing and Gatekeeping in Crisis Coverage: Anaalyzing BBC and CNN's Strategic Narratives of the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital IncidentDual Framing and Gatekeeping in Crisis Coverage: Anaalyzing BBC and CNN's Strategic Narratives of the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital Incident12915273600810.27834/CSIW.2510.1595.4.40.6FAJavadAlipoorAssistant Professor, Department of Communication, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran0000-0001-5527-4509HatefPourrashidiAssistant Professor, Department of Communication, University of Religions and Denominations, Qom, IranJournal Article20251002This study examines the news approach adopted by BBC World Service and CNN in their coverage of the bombing of al‑Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza and seeks to identify the dominant news frames that shaped the representation of this event by the two media outlets. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of Agenda‑Setting, Framing, and Gatekeeping, the research analyzes how bias, selection, and emphasis were applied in the construction of news narratives related to the incident. The study population includes all news reports and articles published by BBC World Service and CNN in the immediate aftermath of the incident on October 17, 2023. A qualitative content analysis method was employed, using the Thematic Analysis technique to identify and interpret both explicit and implicit themes present in the selected media coverage. The analysis resulted in the extraction of four main organizing themes: reflecting the facts, attributing the explosion to the role of the resistance, emphasizing Israel’s responsibility for the explosion, and casting doubt on the causes and contributing factors of the incident. These themes reveal distinct editorial strategies used by each media outlet. The findings indicate that BBC World Service attempted to preserve its claimed neutrality by presenting contradictory narratives and accommodating opposing viewpoints, a strategy characterized as “playing a double game.” In contrast, CNN’s coverage concentrated on questioning established accounts of the incident and generating uncertainty, thereby advancing a strategy described as “countering reality and creating ambiguity.” Overall, the study highlights how different framing and agenda‑setting practices influenced the construction of meaning and public understanding of the al‑Ahli Arab Hospital bombing within international news discourse.This study examines the news approach adopted by BBC World Service and CNN in their coverage of the bombing of al‑Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza and seeks to identify the dominant news frames that shaped the representation of this event by the two media outlets. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of Agenda‑Setting, Framing, and Gatekeeping, the research analyzes how bias, selection, and emphasis were applied in the construction of news narratives related to the incident. The study population includes all news reports and articles published by BBC World Service and CNN in the immediate aftermath of the incident on October 17, 2023. A qualitative content analysis method was employed, using the Thematic Analysis technique to identify and interpret both explicit and implicit themes present in the selected media coverage. The analysis resulted in the extraction of four main organizing themes: reflecting the facts, attributing the explosion to the role of the resistance, emphasizing Israel’s responsibility for the explosion, and casting doubt on the causes and contributing factors of the incident. These themes reveal distinct editorial strategies used by each media outlet. The findings indicate that BBC World Service attempted to preserve its claimed neutrality by presenting contradictory narratives and accommodating opposing viewpoints, a strategy characterized as “playing a double game.” In contrast, CNN’s coverage concentrated on questioning established accounts of the incident and generating uncertainty, thereby advancing a strategy described as “countering reality and creating ambiguity.” Overall, the study highlights how different framing and agenda‑setting practices influenced the construction of meaning and public understanding of the al‑Ahli Arab Hospital bombing within international news discourse.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736008_08abb05dc7127720080b4dce3a55ac00.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220The Role of Home-Based Enterprises in Strengthening Economic Resilience during Crises: Evidence from the West BankThe Role of Home-Based Enterprises in Strengthening Economic Resilience during Crises: Evidence from the West Bank15317473600910.27834/CSIW.2510.1605.4.40.7FARoohollahKohanhoosh NejadAssistant Professor, Department of west Asian Studies, Faculty of World Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran Iran0000-0003-4871-6588Journal Article20251015This study aims to evaluate the role of Home-Based Enterprises (HBEs) in enhancing economic resilience in the West Bank by assessing their economic contribution, identifying the challenges they face, and analyzing their potential to support households and communities during crises. To what extent do HBEs strengthen economic resilience in the West Bank, and how do structural, financial, and institutional factors shape their performance and sustainability? HBEs function as key adaptive mechanisms that bolster economic resilience by creating income-generating opportunities, especially for women, and sustaining localized production during periods of political and economic instability—despite operating within a constrained and vulnerable environment. A mixed-method design integrates: 1) Quantitative analysis of the 2022 Informal Sector and Informal Employment Survey (PCBS), covering 104,169 informal projects, including 14.3% HBEs. 2) Qualitative SWOT analysis assessing internal strengths/weaknesses and external opportunities/threats influencing the sector. HBEs contribute approximately 7% of West Bank GDP (around USD 1.2 billion) and provide livelihoods for 185,000 individuals, with women representing over 60% of participants. Their low-cost and flexible nature enables them to endure economic shocks. However, HBEs face significant barriers: limited access to finance (69%), poor infrastructure, technological gaps, informality (98.8% unregistered), and restricted market reach. Opportunities identified include new legal reforms, expanded microfinance, and digital marketing. HBEs are essential socio-economic institutions that enhance economic resilience in crisis-prone contexts. Strengthening this sector requires targeted policy interventions focused on improving financial access, infrastructure, digital capabilities, and supportive regulatory environments.This study aims to evaluate the role of Home-Based Enterprises (HBEs) in enhancing economic resilience in the West Bank by assessing their economic contribution, identifying the challenges they face, and analyzing their potential to support households and communities during crises. To what extent do HBEs strengthen economic resilience in the West Bank, and how do structural, financial, and institutional factors shape their performance and sustainability? HBEs function as key adaptive mechanisms that bolster economic resilience by creating income-generating opportunities, especially for women, and sustaining localized production during periods of political and economic instability—despite operating within a constrained and vulnerable environment. A mixed-method design integrates: 1) Quantitative analysis of the 2022 Informal Sector and Informal Employment Survey (PCBS), covering 104,169 informal projects, including 14.3% HBEs. 2) Qualitative SWOT analysis assessing internal strengths/weaknesses and external opportunities/threats influencing the sector. HBEs contribute approximately 7% of West Bank GDP (around USD 1.2 billion) and provide livelihoods for 185,000 individuals, with women representing over 60% of participants. Their low-cost and flexible nature enables them to endure economic shocks. However, HBEs face significant barriers: limited access to finance (69%), poor infrastructure, technological gaps, informality (98.8% unregistered), and restricted market reach. Opportunities identified include new legal reforms, expanded microfinance, and digital marketing. HBEs are essential socio-economic institutions that enhance economic resilience in crisis-prone contexts. Strengthening this sector requires targeted policy interventions focused on improving financial access, infrastructure, digital capabilities, and supportive regulatory environments.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736009_90c8848b1d8e4d7ccab1996ccf9ca981.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220Rethinking the Foundational Assumptions of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Research on Middle Eastern Arab Countries A Critical and Constructivist ApproachRethinking the Foundational Assumptions of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Research on Middle Eastern Arab Countries A Critical and Constructivist Approach17520073601010.27834/CSIW.2509.1587.4.40.8FAHamidrezaAkbariAssociate Professor of International Relations, Institute for humanities and cultural studies (IHCS)0000-0002-2425-1889HannanehAkbariMaster of International Relations, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran0000-0002-2425-1889Journal Article20250920Over recent decades, Iranian scholarship on Arab countries has expanded significantly, yet it remains deeply anchored in specific epistemological assumptions. Using a mixed theoretical framework of constructivism and critical sociology, this study analyzes the underlying cognitive structures of Iranian regional studies. Through a qualitative content analysis of 50 academic articles and expert interviews, the findings reveal a predominant Hobbesian strategic culture in which 70% of the literature prioritizes security threats and 55% perceives Arab nations as existential rivals. The research argues that this othering process has led to an epistemological impasse, where even cooperative efforts are interpreted as temporary tactical maneuvers. This paper concludes that to reduce the cognitive costs of foreign policy, a paradigm shift is required—moving from an "absolute security-oriented" approach toward a connecting political economy and shared regional identity. Finally, the study suggests that institutionalizing "joint scientific diplomacy" is essential for replacing institutionalized mistrust with a framework of sustainable development and collective security.Over recent decades, Iranian scholarship on Arab countries has expanded significantly, yet it remains deeply anchored in specific epistemological assumptions. Using a mixed theoretical framework of constructivism and critical sociology, this study analyzes the underlying cognitive structures of Iranian regional studies. Through a qualitative content analysis of 50 academic articles and expert interviews, the findings reveal a predominant Hobbesian strategic culture in which 70% of the literature prioritizes security threats and 55% perceives Arab nations as existential rivals. The research argues that this othering process has led to an epistemological impasse, where even cooperative efforts are interpreted as temporary tactical maneuvers. This paper concludes that to reduce the cognitive costs of foreign policy, a paradigm shift is required—moving from an "absolute security-oriented" approach toward a connecting political economy and shared regional identity. Finally, the study suggests that institutionalizing "joint scientific diplomacy" is essential for replacing institutionalized mistrust with a framework of sustainable development and collective security.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736010_e5ec8216cb0dc63a287f5032e3a2b922.pdfدانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)بحران پژوهی جهان اسلام2981-110412520260220Crisis of Elite Migration in the Islamic World: Causes and ConsequencesCrisis of Elite Migration in the Islamic World: Causes and Consequences20122673601110.27834/CSIW.2512.1640.4.40.9FAMajidBozorgmehriProfessor, Department of Political Science, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin. Iran, Visitor Scholar. York University. Toronto0000-0002-2715-8997Journal Article20251208Elite migration—defined as the transnational mobility of highly educated professionals, intellectuals, technocrats, scientists, and entrepreneurial actors—has become one of the most consequential demographic and political transformations affecting Muslim-majority societies during the past four decades. In contrast to large-scale labor migration, the emigration of highly skilled individuals directly influences state capacity, shapes trajectories of institutional reform, restructures patterns of socio-economic stratification, and affects national systems of knowledge production and innovation. This study examines the structural, economic, political, and socio-cultural determinants that drive elite emigration from Muslim-majority states and evaluates the broader implications of this phenomenon for governance, economic development, social cohesion, and relations between states and their diasporic communities. The central objective is to identify the principal drivers and adverse consequences of this persistent migratory pattern—frequently conceptualized as “brain drain”—and to demonstrate why it has evolved into a serious and intensifying crisis across large parts of the Islamic world. The impact of elite migration is not uniform across Muslim-majority countries. In certain hydrocarbon-rich states of the southern Persian Gulf, elite mobility may generate selective benefits through circular migration and transnational capital flows. In many other contexts, however, sustained outflows of highly skilled individuals have produced significant developmental and institutional costs. Building upon existing theoretical and empirical scholarship, the study employs an analytical framework that contrasts pessimistic and optimistic interpretations of skilled migration. While some perspectives emphasize potential gains through remittances, knowledge transfer, and diaspora engagement, the findings of this research indicate that persistent elite outflows are predominantly driven by weak governance structures, political repression, systemic insecurity, and limited avenues for professional advancement. Methodologically, the study relies on qualitative content analysis supplemented by statistical data drawn from academic and research institutions.Elite migration—defined as the transnational mobility of highly educated professionals, intellectuals, technocrats, scientists, and entrepreneurial actors—has become one of the most consequential demographic and political transformations affecting Muslim-majority societies during the past four decades. In contrast to large-scale labor migration, the emigration of highly skilled individuals directly influences state capacity, shapes trajectories of institutional reform, restructures patterns of socio-economic stratification, and affects national systems of knowledge production and innovation. This study examines the structural, economic, political, and socio-cultural determinants that drive elite emigration from Muslim-majority states and evaluates the broader implications of this phenomenon for governance, economic development, social cohesion, and relations between states and their diasporic communities. The central objective is to identify the principal drivers and adverse consequences of this persistent migratory pattern—frequently conceptualized as “brain drain”—and to demonstrate why it has evolved into a serious and intensifying crisis across large parts of the Islamic world. The impact of elite migration is not uniform across Muslim-majority countries. In certain hydrocarbon-rich states of the southern Persian Gulf, elite mobility may generate selective benefits through circular migration and transnational capital flows. In many other contexts, however, sustained outflows of highly skilled individuals have produced significant developmental and institutional costs. Building upon existing theoretical and empirical scholarship, the study employs an analytical framework that contrasts pessimistic and optimistic interpretations of skilled migration. While some perspectives emphasize potential gains through remittances, knowledge transfer, and diaspora engagement, the findings of this research indicate that persistent elite outflows are predominantly driven by weak governance structures, political repression, systemic insecurity, and limited avenues for professional advancement. Methodologically, the study relies on qualitative content analysis supplemented by statistical data drawn from academic and research institutions.https://journals.abru.ac.ir/article_736011_83fd368785f3a7e4d7e46f5eb115855a.pdf