درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

As international relations develop into a network-like arena, new public diplomacy receives more attention, both in research and in practice. At the same time, with the increasing role of non-state actors in international relations, their significant roles and functions have come under substantial scientific analysis. While companies engage in business abroad,  unintended results may emerge, affecting the image of their country of origin. One of them is the effects that brands and products have on the perception of their home countries’ foreign policy. This article examines the role of brands in public diplomacy. The question is whether it is scientifically reasonable to assign a public diplomacy role to brands. While such a relation has not been treated in previous research, the authors of this article try to explore and analyze the various elements of this relation to find a well-founded answer. Our analysis uses the national image as a mediator concept between brands and public diplomacy. It starts with a definition of new public diplomacy and its differences with the classical one. It then continues along the concept of corporate diplomacy, national image, the country of origin (COO) effect, and its inverse version. In the end, the most possible and clear answer, according to currently available literature, will be discussed.

Negative socio-psychological repertoire about adversary exists in many societies plunged in conflicts. The challenge is how to make the structure of the society more flexible for a conflict resolution with enemies. This article examines the attempts of a pro-Iran-deal civil society, the - International Crisis Group, to change the negative societal beliefs regarding Iran, which exist in the American society. By using the unfreezing theory of Bar-Tal and Halperin (2011 b) as well as the NVIVO 12, which is qualitative content analysis methodology, this paper attempts to analyze this procedure from 2011 to 2016. The International Crisis Group made an effort to break the rigidity of barriers and remove their content in the American society. This trend of Iran unfreezing started in 2011 and increased in 2013, during the presidency of Hassan Rohani in Iran. Results indicate that the International Crisis Group fought against the rigid discourse that exists in the US about Iran through four main principles: removing the perception of Iran as a threat, legitimizing and humanizing Iran’s image, emphasizing the importance of the course of time, and expanding new information and alternative data about the US-Iran conflict. This new information aimed at justifying Iran’s actions and giving roadmaps for the future policies of the US toward Iran.

The Islamic Revolution of Iran in 1979 by the leadership of Imam Khomeini, the resulting discourse and its influence on the internal political and social structure, affected the Islamic world, the Middle East, and the Lebanese Shias. The rise of Hezbollah in Lebanon was a manifestation of the Islamic Revolution discourse on the Shia community regarding meaning and identity. With a critical approach, the present study aimed to answer the question ‘How close and different has Hezbollah to the discourse of the Islamic Revolution from the discoursive view, structural and identity?’. The issue was analyzed using the theory of Laclau and Mouffe's discourse analysis and operationalized by explaining the positions of the movement, its leaders and the function of Hezbollah and comparing it with the political thought and works of Imam Khomeini as the Islamic Revolution ideologue. It shows that the Islamic Revolution has been very influential in shaping Hezbollah's Islamic and revolutionary identity. Meanwhile, the sign of Shia political Islam is the central sign of the Islamic Revolution discourse, and the (Islamic) resistance is the primary sign of the Hezbollah speech. The result indicated similarities in most floating characters, namely Shia political Islam, belief in Velayat-e Faqih, justice-seeking, nationalism, independence, issuance of Revolution and revolutionary identity, and resistance (struggle against Israel and anti-Zionism, and anti-arrogance). However, there are some identity distinctions regarding the emphasizing Hezbollah on the Shia, Arab and Lebanese identity and the broad definition of some signs and, consequently, the attribution of some meanings to them, which should be considered from the pathology of future relations between Iran and Hezbollah. This issue regarding common counter-discourses such as Salafi-Takfiri, Liberal Democracy and the Akhavani is essential.