 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page . (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
The United States Cultural Diplomacy in Iran refers to the use of soft power of cultural diplomacy by the US government towards Iran in order to achieve its own interests.
Iran and the United States began political relations in 1856, but due to the isolation of US foreign policy and the lack of clarity on Iran's strategic interests, the level of relations did not upgrade to the embassy level until 1944. During World War II, the United States deployed more than 30,000 troops in Iran from December 1942 to early 1944. This massive presence marked the beginning of the discovery of the true importance of Iran. One of the most important aspects of attention to Iran was economic issues, especially oil. That is, the Americans, while protecting their oil interests in the Saudi Arabia, also looked to Iran's oil resources. From 1920, the Americans began their quest for oil concessions in northern parts of Iran. [1] It was in the second half of the 1940s that the United States actively competed with British and Soviet companies and governments on Iranian oil. [2] The first signs of the Cold War emerged during the aftermath of World War II, particularly the US-Soviet conflict over oil in northern Iran and the so-called US ultimatum for the Soviet withdrawal from Iran. [3] To secure its interests from Iran, the United States paid ransom to the Shah of Iran (Mohammad Reza Pahlavi) and continued to interfere in Iran's internal affairs to the point that it led to the active participation of the United States in the 1953 Iranian coup d'état. [4]
From 1953 onwards, US-Iranian relations entered a new phase; The US Embassy in Iran gradually became the largest US diplomatic mission in the Middle East. [5] In a way, the CIA called Washington's interest in the US embassy in Tehran exceptional. [6] On the one hand, the Shah of Iran insisted on Iran becoming a regional superpower using advanced equipment based on US military training, [7] and on the other hand, the United States sought to keep oil prices low because of the need for Iranian oil and tried to moderate its profits by restoring oil payments by selling military weapons to Iran. [8] [9]
By the late 1960s, the Shah of Iran's blackmail had reached its peak, and the US government was at a standstill in its relations with the Shah. [10] [11] In 1961, with the coming to power of John F. Kennedy as President of the United States, the Shah of Iran was again supported. [12] As a result, the Shah's pressure on the Iranian people increased and political suffocation ensued in Iran. Many US officials protested the US government's support for the Shah of Iran, calling it a violation of democracy. [13] [14] The US government's dual behavior with democratic scheme but utilitarian policies toward Iran eventually led to the massacre of the Iranian people in the 1963 demonstrations, which was the result of US cultural diplomacy in Iran. [15] While the United States was greedy for Iran's oil resources, as the pressure on the Iranian people increased, a revolution was expected to take place in Iran, as in Cuba. [16] In 1967, opposition from US Democratic senators to the authoritarian actions of the Shah of Iran reached its peak. [17] However, the United States government continued to defend the tyrannical government of the Shah of Iran because it better and more supported their interests than a constitutional government. [18]
Despite all US support for Mohammad Reza Shah and even the introduction of reforms known as the White Revolution in Iran, the Iranian people did not remain under the burden of this exploitation. After Ruhollah Khomeini came to political prominence in 1963, the struggle of the Iranian people continued until the 1979 revolution, when the Iran's government system was transformed into the Islamic Republic. [19] Since then, Iran's relations with the United States have been severely strained and the exploitation of Iran by the United States and other colonial powers has stopped. [20]
After the 1979 revolution and the cut off US access to Iran's oil resources, the US government has always spread a kind of cognitive parasite towards Islamic Republic of Iran in the world. [21] Today, the most important ranking criterion of countries and world powers is the extent of influence and diversity of media activities of these countries. [22] In this regard, the United States, with its media power, has always pursued a kind of cultural diplomacy towards Iran, in which it creates a bad mentality among the people about the Iranian government, because the Iranian government has always been opposed to the colonial temperament of the US government in Iran and the Middle East. [23]
The soft power created by the United States through the media and cultural diplomacy has played an important role in creating the demands of the people who want democracy, human rights, and economic and social justice. But at the same time, the rise of popular uprisings in the Muslim and Arab worlds has challenged the United States actions. [24] Useful aspects of the United States cultural diplomacy include: [25]
The United States cultural diplomacy leads to the formation of discourses, discourse practices, social processes, and knowledge systems through which meanings are generated, recorded, analyzed, and social relations, social identities, subjects, and their capacities become important through it. [26] In the discourses of US cultural diplomacy, different societies share their latent views as a system of shared beliefs and knowledge. US cultural diplomacy is promoted by individuals and social actors, in obedience to the meanings, concepts, values, and norms perpetuated in these discourses and systems of meaning. [27] Therefore, the United States cultural diplomacy covers the following actions: [28]
But cultural diplomacy in the form of soft power (unlike war, which is hard power) is being used by the US government as a major project against opponents of its colonialism. Therefore, among the unhelpful aspects of the United States cultural diplomacy are: [30] [31]
The goals of the United States cultural diplomacy in Iran can be considered as a set influenced by the national identity and national interests of this country. In the introduction to the 1964 report, the cultural exchange program was cited as a foreign policy tool, citing the psychological goals of US policy in Iran: US foreign policy and its psychological goals in Iran will be implemented through the cultural exchange program. To achieve these goals, the US Embassy in Iran must show that Iran, with US assistance, is taking rapid steps toward modernization. [32] [33]
In the 1962 performance report of the Iran-US Commission on Cultural and Educational Exchanges, these goals were explicitly stated, explicitly referring to the "role of cultural programs in advancing US policy goals." These goals were as follows: [34] [35]
In addition, in the following years, with the continuation of the goal-setting process in the document related to the 1964 program for cultural and educational exchange with Iran, goals have been mentioned much more explicitly and with the ability to measure and move: [36] [37]
By carefully reviewing the existing set of documents, in addition to the above-mentioned goals, other aspects of the United States cultural diplomacy in Iran that have been explicitly or implicitly considered can be extracted and the following list can be named as its practical goals: [38]
During the reign of Mohammad Reza Shah on Iran, the US government used cultural diplomacy to secure its oil interests, although it also had benefits for the development of Iranian society. But these benefits were insignificant compared to the price paid by Iranian society. [39] Therefore, the Iranian society left this kind of relationship with the United States forever and demanded its isolation and independence (not easily, but with blood and gore [40] [41] [42] [43] ): So the Iranian Revolution of 1979 happened. Since the change of government in Iran to the Islamic Republic in 1979, the United States has been recognized as the country's number one cultural enemy. [44]
With the outbreak of the Islamic Revolution of 1979 in Iran, the Iranian people, led by Ruhollah Khomeini, found new hope and called for the development of their country. [45] The Iranian people, who were mostly poor at the time, wanted to improve their lives and the future by controlling their national resources (especially oil). [46] But the US government never left Iranian society free. Early in the formation of the Islamic Republic of Iran, despite US support for Iranian insurgent groups and even US provocation of Iraq to fight Iran, [47] Iranian society still maintained its purpose and hope and pursued the country's development with empathy. Cultural and political conflicts between the governments of Iran and the United States have diminished this will and empathy. On the other hand, by imposing sanctions on Iran, the United States made the economic situation in Iran difficult. [48] Today, after more than four decades of the Islamic Republic of Iran, what is left of the United States cultural diplomacy in Iran is like a kind of cultural aggression. The US government, by supporting Iranian separatist groups and their mass media, has opened a trail of discontent and protest to Iranian public opinion. [49] [50] [51] [52] [53]
US cultural diplomacy in the form of US soft power towards the Islamic Republic of Iran includes: [54]
Varoujan Hakhbandian, mostly known as Varoujan was an Iranian composer, songwriter and arranger of Armenian descent.
Criticism of the United States government encompasses a wide range of sentiments about the actions and policies of the United States.
Saint Sarkis Cathedral (Armenian: Սուրբ Սարգիս մայր տաճար, Surp Sarkis mayr tachar, is an Armenian Apostolic church in Tehran, Iran, completed in 1970 and named after Saint Sarkis the Warrior. It is the cathedral of the Armenian Diocese of Tehran, one of three Armenian dioceses in Iran, whose prelate is archbishop Sepuh Sargsyan.
Saint Mary Church, Holy Mother of God Church or Surp Mariam Asdvadzadzin Church is an Armenian Apostolic church in Tabriz, East Azerbaijan Province, Iran completed in 1785. It is the largest and oldest Christian church in Tabriz and a notable centre for Armenian national and religious ceremonies held by the Armenian community of Tabriz.
Ahmad Khan Daryabeigi was an Iranian military officer and educator.
The Isfahan National Holy Association was the main political and decision-making bureau of Isfahan, Iran during the first Persian Constitutional Revolution period. The members of the council were elected by the people of Isfahan and Nurollah Najafi Isfahani chaired the council. The association was formed between years 1906 and 1908, namely from the migration of Qom to the 1908 bombardment of the Majlis at the Fort of Chehel Sotoun in Isfahan.
Mohammad Doroudian is an Iranian writer, historian, researcher and theorist. Doroudian was born on 1959 in Tehran, and actively writes about the history of the Iran-Iraq War. He holds a BA in History from Shahid Beheshti University. More than seventeen books have been published by Mohammad Doroudian so far. He is one of the elect of the 31st Iran's Book of the Year Awards and the winner of the 8th Holy Defense Year Book Award.
Saints Thaddeus and Bartholomew Church of Tehran,, is an Armenian Apostolic church in Tehran, Iran. It is the oldest church in Tehran.
Fathollah Mojtabaei is an Iranian author and historian. He is a permanent member of Academy of Persian Language and Literature and a member of the faculty of the Center for the Great Islamic Encyclopedia.
Bibliography of Rasul Jafarian is a list of books published by Rasul Jafarian, cleric, translator, writer and researcher of Iranian history.
The De-escalation policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is a strategy in Iran's foreign policy that began during the second term of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's presidency and with the presidency of Mohammad Khatami since 1997, special attention was paid to this strategy. Hassan Rouhani also mentioned the de-escalation policy as his top priority during his presidency.
Seyyed Qutb al-Din Mohammad Neyrizi was a prominent Iranian mystic of the Safavid period. He was 32nd Qutb of Zahabiya genealogy. All historians have written his name as Mohammad and his title as Qutb al-Din. In addition to his high position in the history of Shiite mysticism, he was one of the most important and influential political thinkers of the late Safavid period.
The British occupation of Bushehr or Bushire under British occupation refers to the three times British forces entered Bushehr and occupied this area in Iran during the rule of the Qajar dynasty, before and during World War I.
Islamic Philosophy from its Origin to the Present: Philosophy in the Land of Prophecy is a book by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Iranian philosopher and University Professor of Islamic studies at George Washington University. The book is a history and overview of Islamic philosophy covering its origins in the 9th century to the modern era.
This article deals with people's slogans during the 1979 Iranian revolution
House with Open Door is a book by Kameel Ahmady that examines the social phenomenon of cohabitation, called "white marriage" in Iran, in which couples live together without legal marriage.
Forbidden Tale was written by Kameel Ahmady, a British Iranian social researcher and anthropologist, and published by Mehri Publishing House in 2020 in London. The book is based on Ahmady's research from 2017 to 2018, which aimed to investigate the challenges and attitudes towards the Iranian transgender and homosexual community. The book later become available in Persian, Kurdish, French, Spanish, and English.
A House on Water is a book that explores the social and psychological impacts of temporary marriage and religious concubinage in Iran, researched and coordinated by Kameel Ahmady, a British-Iranian anthropologist and social researcher. The book is based on a research project that Ahmady and his team conducted between 2017 and 2018 in three major cities of Iran: Tehran, Isfahan, and Mashhad. The book aims to provide a historical overview of temporary marriage in Iran and the world and to examine its prevalence among different social groups and its consequences for those who choose this type of marriage.
Echo of Silence is a book related to the issue of women's studies in Iran. Kameel Ahmady, a social anthropologist and researcher, supervised a research book titled "Echo of Silence", which is a study about child marriage in Iran. It was published on October 11, 2016, which is also the International Day of the Girl Child. The book is based on research that Ahmady and his colleagues conducted in seven provinces of Iran between 2015 and 2016. They aimed to understand the nature of child marriage in Iran and provide suggestions for social and cultural policymakers. The farsi version of this book was published by Shirazeh Publishing House and unveiled national in library and the English version published in 2017 by Nova publishing in USA.
A research study named From Border to Border was by Kameel Ahmady, a British Iranian anthropologist and social researcher, and his colleagues to examine the challenges and opportunities of ethnic and local identities in Iran and the interaction of the political system with various ethnic groups and local identities between 2019 and 2021 in 13 provinces of Iran. The results of this research were published in a book with the same title by Mehri Publishing House in London in 2021. The book was later reprinted by Avaye Buf publishing house in Denmark. This book has been published in three languages Persian, English and Kurdish.
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
ترجمه فروزنده برلیان، سال ۱۳۷۱
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
سال ۱۳۶۰
سال ۱۳۶۰
سال ۱۳۶۰
سال ۱۳۶۰
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
Volume XII, Documents 260-305
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
ترجمه فروزنده برلیان، سال ۱۳۷۱
ترجمه فروزنده برلیان، سال ۱۳۷۱
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
ترجمه فروزنده برلیان، سال ۱۳۷۱
Volume XXII, Documents 1-325
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
سال ۱۳۷۷، شماره ۲۴، مترجم: سید رضا میر موسایی
دوره ۶، شماره ۲۱ - شماره پیاپی ۲۱، شماره ۲۱ و ۲۲ در یک جلد، اسفند ۱۳۸۸
سال چهاردهم، بهار ۱۳۹۷، دوره ۱۴، شماره ۵۰، از صفحه ۱۳۹ تا صفحه ۱۶۸.
سال چهاردهم، بهار ۱۳۹۷، دوره ۱۴، شماره ۵۰، از صفحه ۱۳۹ تا صفحه ۱۶۸.
سال چهاردهم، بهار ۱۳۹۷، دوره ۱۴، شماره ۵۰، از صفحه ۱۳۹ تا صفحه ۱۶۸.
دوره ۴۱، شماره ۳ - شماره پیاپی ۳، مهر ۱۳۹۰، صفحه ۱۸۹-۲۰۳
سال دهم، شماره ۳۹، بهار ۱۳۹۷، صفحات: ۹۵ تا ۱۱۲
بهار ۱۳۹۰، دوره ۱۴، شماره ۱ (مسلسل ۵۱): از صفحه ۵ تا صفحه ۳۰.
Translated by Shevidan Smith
سال دهم، شماره ۳۹، بهار ۱۳۹۷، صفحات: ۹۵ تا ۱۱۲
بهار ۱۳۹۰، دوره ۱، شماره ۱، از صفحه ۱۱۹ تا صفحه ۱۶۰.
سال دهم، شماره ۳۹، بهار ۱۳۹۷، صفحات: ۹۵ تا ۱۱۲
جنگ نـرم، جلد ۵، سال ۱۳۸۷
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
پیاپی ۹ (پاییز ۱۳۸۴)، صفحات ۹ تا ۴۵
شماره ۲۵، پاییز ۹۵، صفحات ۱۲۹ تا ۱۸۲
سال دهم، شماره ۳۹، بهار ۱۳۹۷، صفحات: ۹۵ تا ۱۱۲
سال اول، شماره ۳، بهار ۱۳۹۰
2nd Edition
| Roles |
| ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Offices | |||||||||||||||||
| Types | |||||||||||||||||
| Topics | |||||||||||||||||
| Documents | |||||||||||||||||
| Other topics | |||||||||||||||||
