محمدرضا مجیدی

The Strategic Plan for the Management of Social Transformations (MOST) is a mid-term framework introduced by UNESCO in 2016, aiming to guide member countries in addressing social development issues aligned with the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. This article employs a qualitative content analysis to identify the social issues highlighted in the MOST program, extract the proposed solutions, and critically evaluate the program. The central research question explores what social issues and solutions are presented in the MOST strategic plan and what criticisms arise from these proposals. The hypothesis suggests that the program adopts a positivist approach, treating the world as an object to be shaped by predetermined goals through strategic planning, which generates societal problems. The influence of globalization, cultural hegemony, and a drive for global unification through education and culture to facilitate world management and coordination is evident. The study analyzes the policymaking cycle within the program, including agenda-setting, operational mechanisms, policy support, and capacity building for implementation and evaluation. Key social issues covered in the program include women's and girls' rights, poverty eradication, governance, peace, urbanization, environmental challenges, migration, gender equality, digital technologies, and growing inequalities. The conclusion reinforces that the MOST program reflects a positivist stance, aiming for societal transformation based on globalized ideals of control and coordination, reinforcing the hegemonic role of education and culture.

This research seeks to address whether the European Union (EU) has successfully maintained its strategic autonomy in managing key global issues and crises, a critical element in its decision-making process and a fundamental aspect of the institution itself. The study's conceptual framework centers on the notion of the EU's strategic autonomy, which is analyzed through three case studies: Iran's nuclear issue, the war in Ukraine, and the Gaza crisis. The hypothesis posits that the EU's responses to Iran's nuclear program and the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza reveal a deficiency in its strategic autonomy. Iran's nuclear issue, after two decades of extensive negotiations and agreements that ultimately failed, represents a key instance where the EU's inability to assert strategic autonomy is most evident. Moreover, the EU's handling of the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts, marked by inconsistencies in its application of soft power and moral-value-based leadership, has further cast doubt on the Union's strategic autonomy. The research findings, derived from these case studies, suggest that without political coherence and a unified diplomatic and political strategy—critical elements of strategic autonomy—the EU will continue to be perceived as a dependent and subordinate actor. This condition is commonly referred to in the academic literature as a "strategic autonomy deficit" or a "political and military sovereignty deficit." The methodology of this research is descriptive and analytical, utilizing data collected from a range of sources, including books, peer-reviewed journal articles, online databases, and authoritative expert opinions.