Velayat-e faqih

The views and thoughts of Imam Khomeini indicated that his political thought is undoubtedly inspired by Shia faith and Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), i.e., the school of the Qur'an and Etrat. However, we should not ignore the impact of socio-political conditions and developments in society on their formation because using the teachings of the Qur'an and Etrat as well as Ijtihad, Shia jurisprudence can be flexible following various events and conditions of the community. The present study aimed to explain the reasons for the change and evolution of Imam Khomeini's views over time by comparing his views on the political system and the role of fuqahā (Islamic jurists) in the system building. To this aim, two important works of Imam have been studied, namely "Kashf al-Asrar," written in the early 1320s SH and "Velayat-e Faqih" introduced in the late 1340s SH. Based on the theoretical framework of Spragens’ crisis, the hypothesis of the study says that although Imam Khomeini has faced a similar crisis in each period, in his view, the severity of the crisis and, most importantly, the causes of the crisis are completely different and have led to different solutions. Consequently, Imam Khomeini considers the inefficiency of the rulers as the cause of the situation in Kashf al-Asrar, and the key is the supervision of fuqahā. But in Velayat-e-Faqih, the cause of the problem is recognized as the political system's inefficiency. The answer is to overthrow the existing system and establish an Islamic government based on Velayat-e Faqih

Confrontation and contrast between tradition and modernity brings the intellectuals of Muslim communities into different intellectual, social, and political conflicts. Some of those believe that the only way to rescue from the status quo is sinking in the Western culture and its slavish imitation. Some others insist on the traditions of the past, which are mingled with a lot of superstition, and impurities in the path of events and historical developments and need for refinement and revision. Among these attitudes, Imam Khomeini as a prominent scholar and Islamic thinker has a remarkable view that can support both traditional and modern views. He, on the one hand, insists on the original, valuable, and divine teachings like Qur’anic decrees and the Holy Prophet (PBUH) methods through the theory of Velayat-e Faqih and, on the other hand, in encounter with the Western civilization, chooses some parts being in accord with the divine Shari’ah, people’s interests and development of the society and rejected some immoral parts leading to corruption. In this research, my attempt is to answer the questions, what strategy did Imam Khomeini propose to solve the problem? How Imam Khomeini could combine between the tradition and modernity? Which one will be in order of priority in his list, tradition, or modernity? A qualitative research is perfomed to achieve the aim of this research and answer the research questions.

This article investigates the evolving trajectory of Iran’s regional diplomacy in the aftermath of the Abraham Accords (2020), which marked a major shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics by initiating normalization between Israel and several Arab states. The central inquiry of this study is whether the Islamic Republic of Iran continues to uphold its long-standing doctrine of "strategic patience" or is transitioning toward a new, more adaptive diplomatic doctrine in response to emerging regional alignments. Drawing on a qualitative analysis of official policy statements, regional diplomatic developments, and doctrinal texts in Persian and Arabic, this study examines Iran’s evolving strategy through the dual lenses of geopolitical realism and Islamic theological frameworks—especially the doctrine of Velayat-e Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist). The article argues that Iran’s foreign policy posture reflects a hybrid model: while ideological commitments to anti-Zionism and Islamic solidarity remain strong, there are growing signs of pragmatic engagement, particularly in Iran’s overtures toward Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iraq. This pragmatic turn is framed within Shiite concepts such as maslahat (public interest) and hikmah (strategic wisdom), allowing Tehran to recalibrate without abandoning core ideological principles. The findings reveal a nuanced shift toward a dual-track strategy that combines deterrence with diplomacy, resistance with regional dialogue. This approach enables Iran to navigate its theological commitments while responding to shifting regional dynamics. The article contributes to the broader discourse on the intersection of religion and foreign policy in the Middle East and offers insights into how revolutionary states adapt in a transforming international environment.