Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract  
Introduction
The concept of the national dream plays a pivotal role in shaping collective identity, orienting social aspirations, and structuring patterns of governance. Rather than constituting a merely idealized vision, the national dream encompasses cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dimensions that, over time, organize both individual and collective action within a society. In the contemporary world, many states have consciously sought to redefine or reconstruct their national dreams in order to strengthen social cohesion, enhance political legitimacy, and increase collective action capacity.
Despite its significance, much of the existing scholarship has examined the national dream primarily through political, historical, or sociological lenses, while paying comparatively limited attention to its cognitive and mental foundations. In this context, cognitive science—an interdisciplinary field concerned with the study of mental, perceptual, and emotional processes—offers a novel and productive framework for understanding how national dreams are formed, stabilized, and transmitted. Concepts such as collective memory, social cognition, empathy, theory of mind, belief formation, and social decision-making provide powerful analytical tools for illuminating the internal and often invisible processes underlying the construction of collective dreams.
The importance of the present study lies in its attempt to draw on insights from cognitive science to explain the mental and neural foundations of the national dream, thereby addressing a notable theoretical gap in the literature. The central research question guiding this inquiry is: How does the national dream emerge from a cognitive science perspective, and what mental and social mechanisms contribute to its formation and durability? Accordingly, the objectives of the study include examining the role of collective memory in representing the past and linking it to national foresight; analyzing the function of social cognition in generating shared understanding among members of society; exploring the role of emotion and empathy in mobilizing collective participation; and investigating the contribution of theory of mind, belief, and desire to the alignment of individual actions with collective goals.
This research does not seek to test statistical hypotheses. Instead, adopting an exploratory approach, it aims to develop a conceptual framework for understanding the process of “collective dream formation.” The primary focus is on how dispersed cognitive processes at the individual level are transformed—through social interaction, shared narratives, and common experiences—into a coherent vision of the future capable of organizing social and political behavior.
Methodology
This study employs a qualitative research design and follows a descriptive–analytical approach, situating it within the realm of interdisciplinary research. Data were collected through documentary and library-based methods and include peer-reviewed journal articles, specialized monographs, and research reports in the fields of cognitive science, social neuroscience, social psychology, and national identity studies. The sources reviewed span the period from 2000 to 2024 and were selected based on their conceptual relevance, academic credibility, and currency.
The theoretical framework is grounded in key concepts of social cognition, including collective memory as a repository of shared historical experiences; theory of mind as the capacity to attribute mental states to others; empathy as an emotional mechanism linking individuals; and belief and desire as fundamental drivers of human behavior. In addition, the notion of the “social brain” and the neural networks associated with social interaction provide an explanatory basis for understanding why collective dreams are not merely discursive constructions, but are rooted in human cognitive and affective structures. Data analysis was conducted through thematic extraction and the systematic examination of relationships among core concepts, with findings presented in the form of analytical propositions.
Findings and Discussion
The findings indicate that the national dream emerges from the interaction between past-oriented collective memory and future-oriented imagination. Collective memory serves to stabilize common experiences, while cognitive processes transform these experiences into a meaningful vision for the future. Social cognition and empathy play a central role in the transmission and internalization of this vision; without emotional engagement and empathic resonance, even the most rationally articulated national dreams lack the capacity to mobilize society.
Moreover, the results demonstrate that theory of mind—the ability to understand the perspectives, beliefs, and intentions of others—is a necessary condition for the formation of integrated national dreams and for the reduction of intergroup tensions. Collective beliefs, consciously or implicitly, constitute the deepest layers shaping social behavior. Consequently, any attempt to reformulate or redesign a national dream is unlikely to succeed without a clear understanding of these underlying belief structures.
Conclusion
In sum, this study shows that the national dream is not merely a political or discursive construct, but a phenomenon deeply embedded in human cognitive and neural mechanisms. Attention to these underlying infrastructures can assist policymakers, educational institutions, and media organizations in designing cultural and social interventions that are both more realistic and more effective. The findings of this study contribute theoretically to the literature on social cognitive science and have practical implications for governance, social cohesion, and national foresight.

Abstract Introduction
Political parties and electoral systems are among the core institutions that shape governance and political development. They play a central role in political socialization, elite organization, public participation, and the overall policy-making process. By creating policy discourses and linking political elites with the wider public, parties can foster policy learning, strengthen the rationality of governance, and contribute to the formation of coherent national visions. In contrast, electoral systems, as mechanisms for power circulation and legitimacy renewal, enable fair competition and the presentation of alternative governance ideas.
Despite the presence of formal party and electoral structures in Iran, weak institutionalization, populist tendencies, lack of organizational cohesion, absence of party culture, and unstable electoral laws have prevented political parties from becoming effective actors in policy-making and national planning. The study asks why Iranian political parties have failed to act as learning and mediating institutions that generate sustainable, vision-driven policies, and what structural obstacles have constrained their performance.
A historical overview of Iranian parties shows that since the early post-revolution years, their capacity for discourse formation and doctrine development has steadily declined. Short-term electoral rivalries and populist slogans have replaced long-term policy thinking. This shift has widened the gap between policy-making institutions and society, weakening representation, policy accumulation, and the creation of shared national visions. The paper therefore argues that reforming Iran’s party and electoral systems is a prerequisite for better governance and more effective national policy-making.
 
Methodology
This study adopts a qualitative, descriptive–analytical approach based on documentary and library research. It reviews theoretical sources, legal documents, and comparative experiences to assess the role of political parties in designing and guiding policy processes. The research is exploratory rather than hypothesis-testing.
The theoretical framework rests on three interrelated components—political discourse formation, political marketing, and policy accumulation—which together form a “functional triangle of political parties.” This model explains how parties can promote national visions by creating and communicating policy discourses, marketing their programs within electoral systems, and ensuring continuity in pursuing long-term policies. The concept of policy entrepreneurship is also used to highlight the innovative role of parties in developing and implementing governance ideas.
Data were analyzed through two main steps: (1) tracing the historical and discursive evolution of parties in Iran from the 1970s onward, and (2) comparing party and electoral systems in countries that have successfully maintained coherent national visions. Using institutional and comparative analysis, the study identifies the main sources of dysfunction in Iran’s party system and proposes directions for reform.
 
Findings and Discussion
In developed political systems, parties act as key intermediaries and learning organizations that drive the formulation and implementation of stable policies. In Iran, however, weak institutional foundations and insufficient accumulative infrastructure have undermined such a role. Iranian parties face serious limitations in all three functional areas: discourse formation, political marketing, and policy accumulation.
In discourse formation, personality-based politics, lack of policy training, and weak connections between intellectual elites and party organizations have prevented the generation of lasting governance ideas. In political marketing, elections are dominated by broad, populist slogans rather than evidence-based programs. In policy accumulation, the absence of continuity and coherence in pursuing policies has blocked learning cycles and the systematic transfer of experience in national policy-making.
The country’s legal and institutional frameworks also fail to support party development. The lack of a comprehensive party law, weak financial oversight, poor linkages between parties and parliament, and overreliance on individual politicians have reduced parties to temporary electoral vehicles rather than stable policy institutions. Declining public trust and legitimacy have further weakened the organic connection between society and elites, eroding parties’ ability to inspire hope and articulate shared futures.
Comparative evidence from Germany, India, and China indicates that idea-driven, coherent, and consultative party systems—characterized by sustained interaction between parties and the state—are most capable of producing vision-driven policies. Fragmented systems lacking institutional accumulation, by contrast, struggle to build stable national visions. In Iran, the weakness of political parties not only hampers participatory policy-making but also diminishes the nation’s “political capital of hope.”
 
Conclusion
The analysis shows that Iranian political parties, constrained by structural weaknesses, inadequate legislation, personality-centered politics, and short-term electoral goals, have been unable to contribute effectively to policy-making or the shaping of national vision. As a result, the policy process has become fragmented, reactive, and largely detached from long-term learning and participation.
Revitalizing the role of parties requires action in three areas:
1.         Institutionalizing party culture through civic and political education;
2.         Reforming the electoral system to enhance transparency, competition, and accountability; and
3.         Strengthening the legal and institutional status of parties within the governance framework.
Parties must also reclaim their capacity to generate vision-driven policies grounded in national discourses and collective rationality. Continuous interaction among policy-makers, academics, and civil society can raise the quality of policy-making and rebuild political hope. Ultimately, without a restructured party and electoral system, effective governance, sustainable development, and a coherent national future will remain out of reach. Political parties can become genuine producers of national vision only when they move beyond short-term electoral competition and act as central actors in learning, decision-making, and the creation of development-oriented policy discourses.
 

Abstract Introduction
The relationship between Iran and the United States has been turbulent, especially following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have used different strategies to pressure Iran, making this one of the most complex relationships in international affairs. Examining this dynamic—particularly in light of major historical events like the 1953 coup and the post-1979 tensions—is a multi-layered challenge that goes beyond politics. It also involves sociology, economics, and security studies, reflecting the deep and evolving complexities of global power structures. However, over the years, scholars and analysts have studied the various strategies the U.S. has employed against Iran, identifying patterns of hostility. This paper focuses on the Biden administration’s approach, assessing how it builds on past U.S. policies while introducing its own methods in response to global changes.
Methodology
This study explores a key question: What framework defines the "Hybrid Containment" strategy used by the Biden administration against Iran? The main goal is to understand how the U.S. applies a mix of tactics to exert pressure on Iran. The research is both theoretical and practical, contributing to policy discussions while offering operational insights. It relies on documentary and library sources, combining deductive and inductive reasoning, and uses a descriptive-analytical approach for interpretation. Since the study is exploratory, it does not test specific hypotheses.
Discussion and Results
The study finds that the Biden administration’s approach to Iran falls under the concept of "Hybrid Containment in a Complex Environment." This strategy reflects the unpredictable and deeply interconnected nature of economic, security, and social factors influencing global relations today. Because of this complexity, two key aspects—planning and exploitation —are essential. The U.S. aims not only to structure a containment strategy for Iran but also to take advantage of unexpected developments and interactions.
Washington’s approach involves two main elements: deterrence (blocking Iran’s actions) and compellence (forcing Iran to comply). This strategy is shaped by broader shifts in global power dynamics, particularly the U.S. effort to manage its declining influence while countering emerging powers like China. Moreover, the foundation of U.S. policy toward Iran operates on two levels. The first level concerns Iran itself—its post-revolution identity and the nature of the Islamic Republic. The second level involves Iran’s geopolitical and economic significance, particularly its role in China’s Belt and Road Initiative and Russia’s access to southern trade routes. The Ukraine war has, in turn, increased Iran’s strategic importance in global trade.
To counter Iran’s influence, the U.S. has adopted two key strategies:

"Neither Negotiation nor Confrontation" – Keeping Iran in a frozen state diplomatically while minimizing its geopolitical relevance.
Undermining the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic – Portraying Iran as ineffective and creating social divisions.

Within these strategies, the U.S. and its allies employ various techniques. One common approach is gray-zone deterrence, applying pressure below the threshold of open war to limit Iran’s ability to respond. Specific tactics include:

Expanding economic sanctions, disrupting Iran’s oil exports, and interfering with financial transactions.
Supporting a network of terrorist groups and regional allies—including India, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel—as a counterweight to Iran’s axis of resistance and China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Using media and psychological tactics to weaken Iran’s domestic unity, polarizing society, and questioning the future of the resistance movement.

Conclusion
The Biden administration’s Iran strategy reflects a blend of historical precedents and modern geopolitical shifts. Its hybrid containment model operates within a deeply interconnected global environment, balancing deterrence with strategic exploitation. The U.S. aims to limit Iran’s regional influence while shaping a global order that preserves American power in an era of rising competition.