Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract Introduction
The issue of dual citizenship remains one of the main policy challenges in the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is largely due to the absence of a comprehensive and strategic approach, as well as differing governmental views on the subject. In contrast, many other countries have developed practical policies to manage the legal, political, and social dimensions of dual nationality.
This study examines the experiences of selected countries and evaluates their approaches to dual citizenship through the lens of national power. The central question is: “What lessons can Iran learn from other countries’ approaches to dual citizenship to improve its policymaking?”
The main hypothesis proposes that, while some countries still reject dual citizenship as a threat to their national power, many others have adopted a more pragmatic and positive view. These countries have reformed domestic laws and used international legal frameworks to minimize potential risks while turning dual citizens into a strategic asset for strengthening their national power.
 
Methodology
Where traditional perspectives tend to treat nationality and dual nationality in rigid legal or political terms, this study adopts a modern and qualitative approach. Using library-based research—including books, scholarly articles, and legal documents—it traces the evolution of attitudes toward nationality and dual nationality within the broader concept of national power, understood as the combination of a nation’s material and immaterial capabilities within its political and geographic boundaries.
 
Findings and Discussion
A review of global perspectives reveals a broad range of attitudes toward dual citizenship, from restrictive to permissive. Some countries, including China, Russia, and Japan, do not permit dual citizenship for their nationals, emphasizing the decisive role of population in national power. These countries often impose penalties, such as banning dual nationals from holding government positions.
In contrast, some countries argue that population size is no longer the primary determinant of power or security in the modern world. Consequently, they impose no restrictions on their citizens acquiring foreign citizenship. Indeed, global shifts in power structures, the expansion of digital communication that transcends borders, and the growing competition for human and financial capital have all prompted many states to reconsider their policies.
Today, many countries have adopted a more open approach to dual citizenship. On the one hand, they now recognize it for their citizens and have even amended domestic laws to facilitate this process. On the other hand, they have created internal legal frameworks and drawn upon international legal mechanisms to prevent potential political and legal complications arising from dual citizens. Recognizing the individual right to hold dual nationality, revising laws to ease travel and investment for dual citizens, and allocating parliamentary seats to citizens living abroad—many of whom hold dual nationality—are among the measures taken by countries with a balanced and pragmatic stance toward this phenomenon. At the same time, in terms of legal deterrence, these countries have sought to rely on internationally accepted doctrines and principles—such as the principle of state non-responsibility, the rule of primary nationality, and the theory of effective nationality—to manage potential political and legal challenges posed by dual citizens.
In Iran’s case, despite having between five and eight million citizens living abroad—many of whom are dual nationals—the country still lacks a unified policy on the issue. Although recent initiatives have taken a more moderate stance, inconsistencies remain. For instance, Iranian law prohibits dual nationals from public employment but allows them to serve as advisors, creating legal ambiguity and policy inefficiency.
Nevertheless, Iran’s recent approach signals a gradual shift toward engaging Iranians abroad as part of its broader strategy to enhance national power. Given that power today encompasses economic, cultural, and social dimensions—not only military and political ones—the Iranian diaspora can play a constructive role in countering anti-Iran sentiment and promoting international cooperation.
 
Conclusion
Dual citizenship has become a global phenomenon affecting nearly every country. States can broadly be divided into two categories: those that perceive it as a national threat (negative view) and those that see it as an opportunity (positive view). In Iran, although a negative attitude has long dominated, policymakers have increasingly recognized the need for reform. Recent years show a slow but clear movement toward acceptance and engagement with dual nationals as potential contributors to national development and diplomacy. Thus, while security concerns persist, the prevailing trend in Iran is shifting toward a more balanced and constructive view of dual citizenship as part of its national power.
Given these considerations, it is evident that formulating a coherent and strategic policy to address the issue of dual-national Iranians requires drawing upon the experiences of other countries. As the study findings indicate, although some nations—similar to the prevailing perspective in Iran—still view dual citizens as a potential threat to national cohesion and power, many others have recognized dual citizenship as a global reality. By moving beyond a purely negative or positive perception and adopting strategic policies aimed at maximizing engagement within a secure framework, these countries have managed to transform the challenges into a political, economic, and social opportunity both domestically and internationally.
In this regard, to address the question of dual-national Iranians while safeguarding national interests, Iran could initially follow the example of countries that regard dual citizenship as a personal matter, and subsequently establish mechanisms for mutual interaction between the government and dual citizens, paving the way for a comprehensive resolution of this issue.
 

Abstract In the era of globalization, there has been a tremendous transformation in both the sources of threats and the types of threats and the tools used. Threats in the era of globalization are not state-oriented and the focus on military threats has become less. Since the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, Iran has been involved in the harsh aspects of threats such as imposed war and terror but with the emergence of new aspects of these threats such as genetically modified crops, the country's security has undergone many threats and transformations. This research tried to answer the question that what are the harms of policies related to new biological threats against Iran? Therefore, this research was looking for the pathology of G.A.'s policies against new biological threats, focusing on transgenic products. Based on the research findings; Policies in this area have been made in the form of codified laws or under the country's development plans, but the lack of comprehensive policies or the weakness of the current policies, as well as their lack of diagnosis, have caused disagreements or gaps in this field, so the current laws need to be updated. In addition to that, in some areas, the existing deficiencies must be compensated with new legislations. The results of the research have divided the existing harms in the country's policy into four categories of functional, structural, contextual and communication factors. In this research, the qualitative content analysis method was used to analyze the data.

Abstract Models of studies of politics are conceptual models which can be used in analysis of Public Policy. This paper focuses on analysis of Public Policy through the prism of institutional, process, group, elites, rational, game theories, public choice and systems. This paper shows whether each model and theory provides rather practical possibilities for the officials or they are useful instruments for analysts of social problems. This discussion also shows which of them can assist us in understanding of various activities involving in Public Policy and which one is appropriate for evaluation and criticism of the process of policy making. Finally, the author offers some general criteria which can be constructive in recognizing efficacy of these concepts and models as well as their evaluation through framework of Public Policy.