Nuclear power has for the most part dominated Western media and academic analyses concerning Iranian foreign policy in recent years. This focus, however, can be misleading, especially as regards the early presidency of Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005). In a riposte to Samuel Huntington's 'Clash of Civilisations' theory, Khatami proposed that there ought to be a 'Dialogue among Civilisations'. In this book, Edward Wastnidge examines Khatami's proposition, derived from the contemporary Iranian polymath Dariush Shayegan, not as a philosophical suggestion, but as a real foreign policy tool that enabled Khatami to make overtures towards the US. Across bi-lateral and multi-lateral examples, he explores its specific application and how it was used to create foreign policy and aid diplomacy. Furthermore, by placing the development of the idea within Iran's domestic political context, Wastnidge is also able to shed light onto the rise of the reform movement during this period. Based on extensive research, Diplomacy and Reform in Iran is a timely contribution to scholarship, and important reading for students and researchers of contemporary Iran and the complexities of Iranian foreign policy.

This book examines the dynamics of relations and the substance of the negotiations between the international community and Iran over the latter's nuclear programme. Iran’s nuclear programme and the alleged threat to international peace and security remains one of the most important issues in the United States, as well as in European foreign affairs. In the US, Iran has dominated the political discourse for over three decades and Europe has spent considerable political capital in finding a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear ambitions. While relations between both states remain subject to mutual hostility, the EU remains a channel of communication and since 2003 has maintained a multilateral negotiation framework. By and large, the narrative on nuclear negotiations is dominated by constructivist and realist literature, portraying relations between the US and Iran in ideological terms as a prolonged struggle for regional influence. Embedded within conflict resolution and diplomatic theory, this work attempts to bridge this gap. Drawing upon primary documents and interviews, the text examines negotiation behaviour, and strategies and tools of statecraft, as well as analysing technical aspects of initiatives concerning the nuclear programme. This book will be of much interest to students of nuclear proliferation, international diplomacy, Middle Eastern politics, security studies and IR in general.

The United States’ commitment to non-proliferation often propels its foreign policy rhetoric. In 2002, George W. Bush framed his goal of preventing the spread of nuclear weapons within the context of the global war on terror, accusing Iran of being part of the “Axis of Evil.” Iran’s nuclear program was declared an intolerable threat to global peace and stability. This approach however showed the conflict between the rhetoric of good vs. evil and the need for a pragmatic and measured approach to non-proliferation in the Middle East. The book explores this divergence between the alarmist rhetoric of the Bush Administration’s public diplomacy and its actual non-proliferation policy toward Iran. It shows how the two policy directions, the war on terror and negotiations over the nuclear issue, were often at odds. Further, the Administration’s desire to change the regime in Iran undermined efforts to find a diplomatic solution to the nuclear issue. Ultimately, the policies implemented failed both to shut down Iran’s nuclear program and bring significant democratic reform within the Islamic Republic. The book also examines this legacy and how Obama’s approach differs or follows that of his predecessor. Lastly, the implications for non-proliferation policies beyond Iran are discussed, as nuclear proliferation remains a key concern in a Middle East plagued by instability.

The Politics of Architectural Pedagogy in Iran explores the evolution of architectural pedagogy during two significant socio-political upheavals in Iran: The White Revolution (1963) and the Islamic Revolution (1979). It examines how these transformative periods influenced the field, providing valuable insights into the intersection of architectural education and broader socio-political shifts in Iran. By examining the critical role of education in achieving geopolitical objectives during the Cold War, this book explores architectural pedagogy as an agent for resistance and revolution. It highlights how architectural pedagogy not only reflects radical ideologies but also actively engages in socio-political transformation. The book uncovers how architectural pedagogy became one of the mechanisms to accomplish revolutionary goals. This is evident in initiatives like the "Pedagogical Revolution" during the White Revolution (1963), aimed at modernizing educational institutions, and the "Revolutionary Pedagogy" during the Islamic Revolution (1979), which sought to serve the masses and the religious revolutionary society. In this way, the book adds a new geopolitical perspective to the contemporary discourse of radical pedagogies. This book explores the intricate connections between architectural pedagogy and politics through a transdisciplinary approach. It analyzes original multilingual documents, including political agendas, cultural agreements, curricula, teaching methods, student works, exhibitions, and conferences. It will be of interest to architectural historians and architecture students, particularly those interested in Global South development, modernism, architectural pedagogy, international relations, and Middle Eastern studies.

It is nearly impossible to separate contemporary Iranian cinema from the Islamic revolution that transformed film production in the country in the late 1970s. As the aims of the revolution shifted and hardened once Khomeini took power and as an eight-year war with Iraq dragged on, Iranian filmmakers confronted new restrictions. In the 1990s, however, the Reformist Movement, led by Mohammad Khatami, and the film industry, developed an unlikely partnership that moved audiences away from revolutionary ideas and toward a discourse of reform. In Reform Cinema in Iran, Blake Atwood examines how new industrial and aesthetic practices created a distinct cultural and political style in Iranian film between 1989 and 2007. Atwood analyzes a range of popular, art, and documentary films. He provides new readings of internationally recognized films such as Abbas Kiarostami's Taste of Cherry (1997) and Mohsen Makhmalbaf's Time for Love (1990), as well as those by Rakhshan Bani, Masud Kiami, and other key Iranian directors. At the same time, he also considers how filmmakers and the film industry were affected by larger political and religious trends that took shape during Mohammad Khatami's presidency (1997-2005). Atwood analyzes political speeches, religious sermons, and newspaper editorials and pays close attention to technological developments, particularly the rise of video, to determine their role in democratizing filmmaking and realizing the goals of political reform. He concludes with a look at the legacy of reform cinema, including films produced under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose neoconservative discourse rejected the policies of reform that preceded him.

The end of the Qajar era in Iran, despite the accepted narrative of decline, was in fact an occasion of modern and forward-thinking nationalism. Iran developed an imperial nationalism, which was informed by its experiences under British and Russian hegemony and the absorption of Western modern ideas and practices, and which now looked towards a future as a sovereign and independent state within the foundational framework of its previous Empire. Emboldened by post-WWI notions of self-determination and the development of international institutions devoted to peace, Iran spearheaded its new-found diplomacy by sending a delegation to the peace talks in Paris in 1919. This book shows how Iran's immediate post-war diplomacy came about, the conduct of Iran's delegation to Paris, frustrations with the Anglo-Persian Agreement, and ultimately how Iran's progress became the victim of British imperialism. Throwing a spotlight on an under-researched period of Iranian history, it will be of interest to readers of Iranian history, and those interested in the Paris Peace Conference of 1919.

In Donald Trump’s Digital Diplomacy and Its Impact on US Foreign Policy Towards the Middle East is well-blended marriage of history and politics. Even though Trump’s actions have often been rash and chaotic - some of his foreign policies were successful in the Middle East.

Rumour and speculation in Iran have been rife for generations that the BBC has had a hand in every political upheaval in the country. In this vein the BBC has become a notable element in the complex and tortured narrative of Anglo-Iranian relations. The BBC Persian Service was initially developed in 1940 to prepare and broadcast British war-time propaganda. And it has since been seen by many in Iran as an integral part of British policy-making in the region. Thirty years ago, the Shah of Iran regarded the BBC Persian Service radio as his 'enemy number one' and held it responsible for promoting the revolution of 1979. Only a couple decades earlier, the BBC Persian Service was widely accused for having been complicit in the CIA-led 1953 coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Musaddiq. And a decade earlier, the BBC Persian Service was strongly linked to the British-planned removal of Reza Shah in 1941. The BBC Persian service has frequently been perceived as an entity which was not simply a vehicle to record the changes occurring in Iran and throughout the Middle East, but rather an active agent of change. In this book, Annabelle Sreberny and Massoumeh Torfeh track the history of the BBC Persian Service, critically analysing both the assumptions that the BBC is a standard bearer for objective reporting and representations of it as a simple tool of Western interests. Also examining the history of relations between the Foreign Office and the BBC Persian Service, they demonstrate that these have never been pre-defined or rigid. Instead, they explore how both institutions have moved from an interest in what can crudely be called state-orchestrated 'propaganda' to a more subtle advocacy of fair and balanced journalism as the best agent of British values and influence.