Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract The sociopolitical conditions of the Muslim World took shape in the Medieval Ages when security became the main concept in the justification of overcoming and domination politics. In this period, various schools of thought appeared due to sociopolitical requirements which shared the idea of justifying absolute government according to the concept of security and necessity of removing anarchy. Such conception of politics and government became so extreme that the main principles emphasized by Islam in politics such as justice, equality, and morality were fully marginalized. In this article, examining the grounds and causes of this situation, major characteristics of dominant perception of security are explored and the opinions of a number of thinkers like Imam Moahmmad Ghazzali, Ibn Valid Tartoushi and Khajeh Nazam ul-Mulk are analyzed. As the author argues, the Islamic though in the Middle Ages gave absolute authority to Sultan in order to establish order either in the framework of Siasat-Nameh or Shariat-Nameh. It considered the preservation of religion as an important aspect of establishing security as possible through this authority. Therefore, although Sultan was not legitimate according the religious texts, the Ulema obliged people to obey him for the sake of preservation of religion.

Abstract In the analysis of security questions and challenges in multi-ethnic countries like Iran, ethnic inconsistency and national fragmentation are considered as the main causes of political insecurity and instability, and security strategies are designed and suggested accordingly. Criticizing this viewpoint, this research holds that ethnic diversity and national incoherence cannot be eliminated with a reductionist approach and while recognizing and respecting differentiation and discrepancies among the Iranian ethnicities, they should be integrated under a legitimate political system. What helps to consolidate and stabilize the political systems in Iran is not the negation of distinct ethnic identities but the emergence of legitimate political structure. In other words, if political systems acquire sufficient legitimacy in the society, ethnic diversity will not be able to interrupt their continuity and stabilization.   In verifying this hypothesis, reference can be made to the effects of the Pahlavi regime’s legitimacy on the degree of national cohesion and indicated that how ethnic questions and their appearance are conditional on the legitimization or illegitimization of the political system rather than otherwise would be correct. In other words, the activation of ethnic conflicts and low level of national cohesion result from the low level of confidence in the political system and its legitimacy.