درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Objective:After nearly three decades since the formation of the Council for the Islamicization of Universities, it is necessary to examine the policy of Islamicization of universities from various angles and dimensions. In this regard, the research question is: what theoretical and practical challenges does the policy of Islamicization of universities face in Iran?Method: To answer this question, qualitative analysis and content analysis of available sources, especially the views of policymakers and experts in this field, have been used, and the necessary investigation has been conducted by analyzing the themes of these views.Results:After nearly three decades since the formation of the Council for the Islamicization of Universities, it is necessary to examine the policy of Islamicization of universities from various angles and dimensions. The research hypothesis is that "the lack of a common understanding of the necessity and possibility of religious science and the Islamic university and its negative policy consequences, the accumulation of policies and the multiplicity and overlap of the duties of decision-making institutions in the matter of Islamicization of universities, the abstract nature of executive assignments, the weak communication between policymakers and stakeholders and actors at the operational level, and the lack of an efficient mechanism for monitoring and evaluating the policy of Islamicization" are among the most important theoretical and practical challenges of the policy of Islamicization of universities.Conclusion: The results indicate that stakeholders do not have adequate participation in decision-making related to this policy. Furthermore, five different institutions are responsible for guiding and overseeing the implementation of the policies, which this institutional multiplicity and policy density creates problems. It is also unclear exactly what guidance and oversight each of these institutions should provide. In reality, there is no clear distinction between the different natures of oversight, for example, macro oversight, executive oversight, etc. At the level of monitoring and evaluation, the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, the Council for the Islamization of Universities, and the Steering Committee for the Comprehensive Scientific Map of the Country have not yet published any monitoring reports or evaluations of the policies for the Islamization of universities. This approach prevents the strengths and weaknesses from being revealed and hinders the possibility of benefiting from the corrective suggestions of researchers and scholars.

The international order is undergoing profound transformations, ushering in a transitional period marked by instability and redefined power structure. This global transition has created a power vacuum in the Middle East, where regional actors, including Iran, Turkey and Israel, are pursuing unilateral strategies to establish dominance. However, these efforts have intensified rivalries and instability, while events such as the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, Hezbollah’s involvement in the conflict, escalating tensions in Syria, and the eventual fall of Bashar al-Assad have further exacerbated regional instability. This study explores a pivotal question: What strategy can safeguard Iran’s national interests amidst the dynamic transitions in the international and regional order? The research posits that Iran, as a pivot state, should adopt a paradigm shift to an issue-based foreign policy. This strategic shift enables Iran to move beyond a security-driven, survival-focused paradigm toward becoming a constructive middle power balancer. By prioritizing multilateral cooperation, addressing critical regional issues, and fostering diplomatic engagement, this approach enhances Iran’s ability to manage tensions, strengthen its influence, and promote stability. Ultimately, this redefined role aligns Iran’s national interests with broader regional and global frameworks, ensuring a more resilient and impactful foreign policy stance.

The conflict between Palestinians and the Jews has been ongoing for seven decades. Despite numerous proposed solutions from the United Nations, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and various countries involved in the issue, the crisis persists. The past three decades of right-wing leadership in Israel have shown that supported by major European powers and the US, meaningful negotiations are not anticipated from Israel. Meaningful talks would involve agreements on recognizing Palestine, affirming Palestinian sovereignty, establishing an independent Palestinian state, allowing for the return of displaced populations and determining the status of Jerusalem as the capital. The ascension of the extreme right in Israel has clouded the prospects for peace, augmenting the Israeli demands for more privilege, while sidelining those of the other side. This article posits that Israel's negotiation approach under the right-wing is built on a zero-sum mentality, with minimal concessions offered to the Palestinians. Moreover, its various political, security and economic pressures on Palestinians, along with sustained US and EU sanctions and its military superiority, render any peace model unattainable. This uncompromising approach, intended to impose unilateral conditions and prolong talks to thwart the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, accounts for the recurrent failure of negotiations. Israel's aim in these talks appears to demoralize the Palestinians and prevent the realization of their aspirations by imposing “the real”.