Islamic Governance Studies
Year:2025 | Volume:1 | Issue:2|Papers Count:14

no abstract

In the epistemological structure of Islam, the Noble Qur’an is not only a book of spiritual and moral guidance but also a comprehensive charter of human life in all its material and spiritual dimensions. One of the important aspects of the “Establishment of the Qur’an, ” which can be inferred from religious texts and the statements of eminent exegetes, is its “scientific establishment, ” that is, the continuous implementation of the Qur’an’s scientific teachings in individual and social life as well as in various fields of knowledge. According to this perspective, the Qur’an is the primary epistemic authority of Muslims and must govern the production of knowledge, theorization, and system-building, particularly in the field of the humanities. Nevertheless, the fundamental issue is that throughout the history of Islamic thought, two extreme approaches have emerged regarding the relationship between the Qur’an and the sciences: on the one hand, some, through subjective interpretations or the hasty alignment of verses with scientific hypotheses without observing the principles of understanding revelatory texts, have claimed the Qur’an’s scientific comprehensiveness to the extent of encompassing all empirical and natural sciences,on the other hand, others have entirely denied the Qur’an’s epistemic authority, restricting its domain to moral and eschatological exhortations. The absence of a scientific, methodological, and balanced approach that avoids both extremes has rendered the subject of the “scientific establishment of the Qur’an” and its boundaries in need of deep, well-documented, and ijtihād-based research. The present study aims to provide a precise explanation of the concept of the “scientific establishment of the Noble Qur’an, ” to examine the reasons for its necessity, and to delineate its actual scope in the individual and social life of Muslims. To this end, the study endeavors to: present a conceptual and terminological definition of “the establishment of the Qur’an” and, consequently, the “scientific establishment of the Qur’an”,analyze the status of knowledge and similar concepts in the Noble Qur’an,clarify the necessity of the scientific establishment of the Qur’an with reference to Qur’anic texts, prophetic traditions, and rational analysis,critique18                                                                      Islamic Governance Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2025and evaluate various views concerning the relationship between the Qur’an and the sciences,and, ultimately, propose a rational framework for utilizing the Qur’an’s potential in guiding and reforming the humanities and other epistemic fields. The methodology of the research is descriptive-analytical with an ijtihād-based approach. Data were collected from library sources, including the Noble Qur’an, authoritative exegetical works, writings of contemporary scholars, statements of the Supreme Leader, and sources on the philosophy of science and methodology. Data analysis was conducted in several stages: first, the extraction of key concepts from the Qur’an and authoritative sources,then, a comparative study of exegetes’ and thinkers’ views and approaches concerning the Qur’an’s scientific scope,thereafter, a systematic critique of existing extremist and reductionist approaches,and finally, the delineation of the actual scope of the scientific establishment of the Qur’an with due consideration of the ontological, epistemological, and methodological foundations of Islam. In this process, the method of “interpreting the Qur’an through the Qur’an” was employed to elucidate relevant verses, and analyseswere integrated with contemporary scientific considerations in the humanities and methodological debates. The findings indicate that the concept of “establishment” in both its linguistic and technical senses denotes upholding and fulfilling fully the rights of a matter until all its effects are realized,accordingly, the “establishment of the Qur’an” means the comprehensive implementation of the Qur’an’s doctrinal, ethical, practical, and scientific teachings at both individual and social levels. The “scientific establishment of the Qur’an” refers to the continuous application of its scientific teachings to diverse fields of knowledge and the orientation of the processes of knowledge production and evaluation based on revelatory foundations. The analysis of the terms “ʿilm” (knowledge) and related concepts in the Qur’an demonstrates that, from a revelatory standpoint, knowledge is synonymous with certainty, and the Qur’an categorically rejects adherence to non-knowledge, including conjecture, doubt, and illusion. Descriptions of the Qur’an as a “Book of Knowledge, ” “Light, ” “Proof, ” and “Wise” affirm the necessity of paying attention to its scientific dimension. These attributes indicate that the Qur’an’s teachings are inherently clear and firm, capable of accurately unveiling external realities. Examination of the Qur’an’s mission further shows that its guidance is not confined to eschatological and spiritual values but also encompasses the organization of worldly life, the establishment of a just social order, economic justice, the fight against corruption, preservation of unity and independence, and resistance to tyranny (ṭāghūt). Such a comprehensive approach renders the scientific establishment of the Qur’an one of the essential pillars of its overall establishment. From the perspective of approaches, extremist tendencies—such as those of exegetes who seek all natural and empirical sciences in the Qur’an—have erred due to lack of methodological rigor and disregard for the apparent meanings and contexts of the verses,conversely, reductionist tendencies, by neglecting the Qur’an’s unifying and comprehensive potential, present it merely as a book of ethics and the hereafter. Both approaches deviate from the correct foundation and have failed to provide a balanced and valid framework. The findings of this research reveal that the scientific establishment of the Qur’an requires the adoption of a disciplined scientific method that, while preserving the sanctity of the revelatory text, harnesses its potentialto enrich the sciences, especially the humanities. This method must acknowledge the interaction of reason, experience, and revelation, and avoid both the hasty imposition of scientific data upon the verses and the complete denial of the Qur’an’s relation to the sciences. Ultimately, the study concludes that the scientific establishment of the Qur’an is not merely a cultural recommendation but a strategic necessity for reviving the epistemic identity of the Islamic world and for generating Islamic humanities. This requires reengineering the educational and research system, fostering active connections between the seminary and the university, training interdisciplinary Qur’anic scholars, and establishing specialized institutions for comparative research between the Qur’an and the sciences. Such an approach can, while safeguarding the authenticity of revelation, liberate the sciences from purely materialist frameworks and guide them toward comprehensive human felicity—both worldly and otherworldly.

In the present age, desirable governance is not merely the distribution of power or the exercise of authority; rather, it is a dynamic, systemic, and multi-actor process that coordinates, formulates policy, delivers public services, and regulates diverse domains of society. Under conditions of globalization, problem complexity, rising citizen demands, and the expansion of transnational institutions, the inadequacy of traditional state-centric approaches has become evident. Consequently, “good governance” has emerged as an alternative paradigm emphasizing principles such as justice, consultation, transparency, accountability, participation, and effectiveness. In Islamic societies, the Noble Qur’an, as the authentic divine source, possesses rich capacities for developing governance models that define these principles not merely as ethical precepts but as operational and systemic functions. However, a core problem is that many existing governance systems—including in Islamic societies—do not employ these foundations in a structured manner and within an up-to-date systems model. Hence, benefiting from Qur’anic teachings in the field of governance requires a rereading of key concepts such as justice, qiṣṭ (equitable balance), shūrā (consultation), and trustworthiness, and their translation into the design of functions capable of aligning with the needs and challenges of contemporary governance, including transparency, citizen participation, and social justice. This research aims to conduct a systemic analysis of governance functions grounded in Qur’anic teachings and to present an indigenous–Islamic model for contemporary society. The principal goal is to derivea systematic framework that can redefine the value-based principles embedded in the Noble Qur’an as policy-making and regulatory functions, thereby enabling improved governmental performance and enhanced public welfare. In pursuit of this aim, the study seeks to combine systems theory with Qur’anic concepts to offer a model that encompasses both divine principles and the requirements of advanced public administration; beyond reforming decision-making and executive structures, the model can institutionalize coordination among the branches of power, civil institutions, and the private sector on the basis of Qur’anic values, providing a practical pattern adaptable to local and global conditions. The research method is an analytical–descriptive approach employing a systems-theory framework. First, the theoretical bases governing the transformation from “government” to “governance” and the indicators of good governance were examined,and the place of this transformation within political thought and public managementwas analyzed. Then, focusing on two core functions of governance—policy-making and regulation—the relevant Qur’anic teachings were identified. The sources include the text of the Noble Qur’an, authoritative exegeses, and scholarly works in political science and public administration; data were collected documentarily and processed via qualitative content analysis to map, in a networked and systemic manner, the relationships between Qur’anic concepts and governance components. In this process, Qur’anic principles such as justice, shūrā, trustworthiness, and qiṣṭ were treated as system inputs, while participatory policy-making, just regulation, fair redistribution, and transparent accountability were defined as the system’s processes and outputs; feedback was considered on both worldly and otherworldly levels. The findings indicate that, alongside affirming the divine legitimacy of rule, the Qur’an places special emphasis on the governance process andthe quality of societal administration, viewing government as a vessel whose contentand essence must be shaped by justice, consultation, trustworthiness, anti-corruption, preservation of human dignity, and the negation of despotism. Examination of the governance of prophets in the Qur’an—such as David, Solomon, and Joseph (peace be upon them)—demonstrates the close linkage between political power and value-oriented governance. A systemic analysis of verses shows that these principles operate reciprocally and dynamically, generating a network of functions in which policy-making and regulation, as the two main axes, interact with other functions such as oversight, accountability, provision of just services, facilitation, and balance of powers. For example, justice—which is emphasized in numerous verses, including al-Naḥl 16:90—operates as a regulatory and redistributive function; consultation (Āl ʿImrān 3:159) provides the ground for participatory policy-making; the principle of responsibility (al-Isrāʾ 17:36) connects to oversight and accountability; the preservation of human dignity (al-Nisāʾ 4:135) aligns with the delivery of human-centered services; and combating corruption (al-Baqarah 2:188) links to deterrent policies and financial transparency. In the proposed model, these interactions are represented as a continuous cycle in which each function simultaneously serves as aninput and a feedback element for the others. Accordingly, the Qur’an-based systems model of governance can furnish an indigenous and divine response to the complex needsof contemporary governance, provided that, in the design of policies and executive mechanisms, these functions are employed synergistically and coherently.

In the contemporary world, where societies encounter extensive cultural, religious, and ethnic diversity, the issue of righteous governance and the attainment of an efficient model for managing such diversity constitutes one of the fundamental challenges in political thought and social administration. Multicultural and multi-religious societies, often dueto fundamental differences in values and interests, face risks such as division, distrust, discrimination, and serious challenges in realizing justice and peaceful coexistence. The central question addressed in this article is how, by drawing upon Qur’anic teachings—and particularly their interpretation by a thinker such as Imam Musa al-Sadr—one can present a model for desirable and ethical governance in such societies,a model that, while remaining faithful to religious principles, also attends carefully and strategically to the exigencies of the contemporary era and urgent social needs. The primary objective of this study is to extract and explain the principles and central components of righteous governance based on Imam Musa al-Sadr’s interpretation of the Noble Qur’an. The author endeavors to show how al-Sadr’s particular approach to divine verses can provide political and social leaders of today with practical and applicable strategies for establishing justice, solidarity, and lasting peace in culturally diverse societies. Emphasis on concepts such as trust inGod, peaceful coexistence, solidarity among believers, and the integration of rationalityand emotion—which are prominent in the thought of Imam Musa al-Sadr—offers a new perspective on governance that can contribute both to the development of related theories in political science and Islamic political studies, and to practical applications for policymakers, elites, and governance actors. The research method employed in this article is the analytical–interpretive method, making use of library data and textual analysis. The author, with direct reference to Qur’anic verses and al-Sadr’s exegetical works, particularly the collection Step by Step with the Imam, has sought to extract and examine the key themes of the model of righteous governance within the framework of ethical, social, and educational discussions. The research is organized both from the perspective of the social interpretation of the Qur’an and from a problem-oriented approach to the challenges of contemporary governance. Accordingly, the article adopts an interdisciplinary perspective, utilizing the achievements of modern political philosophy while correlating them with the thought of Imam Musa al-Sadr. The findings demonstrate that, from al-Sadr’s viewpoint, righteous governance requires adherence to several key principles: first, reliance upon God and avoidance of arrogance and self-centeredness, which prevents rulers from succumbing to despotism and deviation and safeguards them from moral perils such as pride and oppression,as the experience of the Battle of Ḥunayn illustrates, neglect of divine reliance leads governance to failure. Second, the primacy of peaceful coexistence with religious and cultural minorities, which in al-Sadr’s political thought rests on three elements: mutual respect, mutual trust, and mutual assurance. Practical examples from al-Sadr’s conduct—such as attending Christian monastic ceremonies, defending the rights of non-Muslim citizens, and striving for religious unity—manifest the dynamism of these principles in reality. Third, special emphasis on the solidarity of believers and responsibility beyond individual and geographical boundaries, so that all people of truth feel accountable for each other’s destiny and extend mutual support. Fourth, the integration of reason and love in administering society,righteous governance must be a synthesis of rationality, fairness, and compassion so that it can address both the material needs and the emotional, ethical, and spiritual dimensions of human life. The findings also show that although these principles overlap with modern concepts such as cultural pluralism, public legitimacy, and social solidarity, their fundamental distinction lies in their divine foundation and their emphasis on ethics and spirituality. This form of governance is considered an alternative to the instrumental rationality and excessive individualism dominant in the liberal tradition, while simultaneously offering an ethical and social response to the challenges of the age. In conclusion, the present article highlights the idea that the integration of religious (Qur’anic) teachings, social interpretation, and practical experiences of Muslim leaders can providea new and indigenous model for effective, just, and humane governance in today’s multicultural and multi-religious societies. This model, while contributing to the theoretical development and scientific literature on religious governance, will also serve as a source of inspiration for practical action in the fields of politics and social administration.

In the administration of societies, security governance is a foundational componentand, simultaneously, an interdisciplinary domain with political, social, cultural, and legal dimensions whose foundations rest upon the worldview and ruling thought of the political structure. In today’s world, the emergence of schools and models of security is influenced by diverse philosophical, religious, and scientific perspectives: secular and liberal worldviews in the West, socialist and authoritarian approaches in the East, and a monotheistic worldview in Islamic systems have delineated different pathways for defining, goal-setting, and methodizing security governance. Nevertheless, the scholarly literature contains few comprehensive, dedicated studies on the “principles governing the thought of security governance,” especially those grounded in Islamic foundations. This theoretical gap persists even as twenty-first-century states face phenomena such as novel threats, hybrid warfare, transformations in human security, and tensions between security values and individual freedoms. Within this context, the need to define precisely the “thought of security governance” and its governing principles on the basis of Islamic values and worldview foundations is increasingly palpable. The principal question of this study is: what are the fundamental principles of the thought of security governance, and how can these principles—emphasizing Islamic value-based foundations—be identified and applied across the layers of security governance so as to meet contemporary security needs while avoiding the trap of purely materialist models? This research aims to identify, classify, and explicate the principles governing the worldview and thought of security governance, particularly within the framework of Islamic governance. Along the way, it pursues several subsidiary objectives: to provide a clear definition of the concept “thought of security governance” and distinguish it from adjacent concepts; to examine similarities and differences among Eastern, Western, and Islamic worldviews in the realm of security governance; to identify foundational principles and contemporary challenges facing security governance; to analyze the place of the three layers—“security governance over society,” “in society,” and “with society”—in the Islamic model and the role of the people in securing sustainable security; and, finally, to present a theoretical framework for employing religious values in formulating security policies and practices. The ultimate end is to develop an intellectual foundation for security governance that combines practical effectiveness with value-based and cultural legitimacy. Methodologically, the study is exploratory with a descriptive–analytical approach. Data were collected through library research, examination of classical sources in political and security thought, religious texts, and works of contemporary scholars. First, by means of content analysis, key conceptsand components were extracted from the texts. Next, through comparative analysis,the differences and commonalities of Western, Eastern, and Islamic models of security governance were examined. Thereafter, using a worldview-centered theoretical framework, the study explained how doctrinal and value-based foundations shape the principles of security governance. Finally, it defined a three-layer structure for security governance and analyzed each layer—considering its specific functions, relations, and requirements—in the light of the Islamic worldview, a method that enabled the linkage of theoretical levels (foundations and principles) with practical levels (policies and actions). The findings indicate that the thought of security governance is a macro-level, strategic concept that, absent recognition of fundamental principles and the prevailing worldview, becomes fragmented, incoherent, and vulnerable to emergent threats. Comparative examination shows that the Western worldview, grounded in secularism, humanism, and the primacy of profit and power, largely treats security as an instrument for preserving national interests and the dominance of the ruling structure; the Eastern worldview, while emphasizing social stability and collective cohesion, often tends toward centralized authoritarianism and stringent control of social institutions; by contrast, the Islamic worldview—relying on monotheism (tawḥīd), Sharia (Islamic law), social justice, and human dignity—defines security simultaneously in material and spiritual dimensions and regards the people as both partners in and pivots of the security-provision process. From the Islamic perspective, security governance rests upon three complementary layers: (1) security governance over society: focusing on security organizations and institutions to engage justly and rationally with the target society; (2) security governance in society: organizing inter-organizational relations and coordination to achieve synergistic use of security capacities; and (3) security governance with society: eliciting public participation and transforming the people into active agents in securing safety and upholding justice. In Islamic thought, these three layers must be accompanied by principles such as justice-centeredness, responsible transparency, balance between national security and human security, and the integration of material power with spiritual strength. Key challenges identified include intrinsic tensions between centralization and populism, the preservation of confidentiality versus the necessity of transparency, and confronting complex threats that blur the line between internal and external security. The study emphasizes that the success of Islamic security governance is contingent upon balancing these dualities. It concludes that designing the thought of security governance on an Islamic worldview not only yields an indigenous model consonant with the nation’s culture and social structure but—by combining spirituality with rational policy-making—can also provide an effective model for other Islamic societies. Such a model, while safeguarding religious values, enhances the capacity to confront emergent threats and contributes to sustainable security, political legitimacy, and social cohesion.

Security, as one of the most fundamental functions of governance, has continually stood at the center of attention in political schools and theories. Although diverse theories—such as Realism, the Copenhagen School, and contemporary security approaches—have sought to provide a framework for ensuring security, their practical failures in resolving complex crises, especially in Islamic societies, have highlighted the necessity of returning to authentic epistemic and revelatory sources. The Noble Qur’an, as the most complete source of human guidance, regards security not only as an individual and collective need but also as part of the divine mission of the prophets, linking its realization to precise principles and specific mechanisms. The core question of this study is how desirable security governance is designed in the Qur’anic logic and what status groups, as one of the key actors, hold in this process. Insufficient attention to the role of populations and social groups in security-making has caused a significant portion of the capacities of Islamic governance to remain neglected. An examination of frequently used Qur’anic terms such as “Āl” (house/lineage), “Banī” (children/descendants), and “al-Malaʾ” (the notables) shows that this divine text places special emphasis on the role of groups in constructing and sustaining security, such that the narrative of the Children of Israel, whether as a negative exemplar or for conveying positive teachings, stands among the most salient cases of Qur’anic security studies. The aim of this research is to systematically explain the foundations and mechanisms of security governance on the basis of Qur’anic verses—with emphasis on the role of groups—and to present a model adaptable to the contemporary conditions of Islamic societies. Along this path, the study endeavors, on the one hand, to offer a coherent depiction of the desirable structure of security governance in the logic of revelation and, on the other hand, to derive practical strategies for the participation of groups in the process of security-making by extracting the relevant teachings. The research also seeks, by reviewing historical examples such as the confrontation of Moses (peace be upon him) with Pharaoh and the role played by groups such as the House of Pharaoh, the notables, and the followers of truth, to show how behavioral and managerial patterns in interaction with groups can strengthen or weaken security. The research method is based on “extractive thematic exegesis,” which focuseson collecting and analyzing verses on a common theme—here, security and the role of groups—without treating the codex order as a binding framework; in this approach, the exegete compiles the dispersed verses on a topic and, through structural and content analysis, offers a comprehensive picture of the Qur’an’s view. Data were completed through library study and recourse to authoritative exegeses, historical sources, and texts relatedto Islamic political thought. To increase precision, analytical cases were examined with Qur’anic examples such as the role of the Children of Israel during the mission of Moses (peace be upon him), the Pharaonic polity, agents like Qārūn and Balaam the son of Beor, and concepts such as “oppression and subjugation of the weak (istidʿāf),” “sedition/trial (fitna),” and “disputation in the fairest manner (jidāl bi-al-aḥsan).” The findings show that, from the Qur’anic perspective, security governance goes beyond the provision of a threat-free condition and depends on establishing a stable balance among the rights, duties, and dignity of diverse social actors. In this system, groups occupy a dual position: they can be agents of consolidation of security or be instrumentalized for despotism and insecurity.In the desirable Qur’anic model, the formation of groups is accepted—even deemed necessary—and their security must be guaranteed against internal and external threats. The rejection of the subjugation of the weak, opposition to discriminatory categorizations, and restoration of violated rights are key characteristics of this approach. The account of Moses’s (peace be upon him) confrontation with Pharaoh exemplifies the principle that the liberation of an oppressed group was a prelude to the emergence of their doctrinal and practical capacities. According to the Qur’an, threats against groups may arise from tyrannical governments, other powerful groups, or even influential individuals. To consolidate domination, the arrogant employ instruments such as creating social cleavage, diminishing human capital, and eliminating elites. In contrast, the Qur’anic model emphasizes internal solidarity, fair competition, and the peaceful management of differences; terms like “ḥizb” (party/group) and “shuʿūb” (peoples) indicate acceptance of diversity while safeguarding social unity. The findings also indicate that security is not confined to the physical dimension; it encompasses levels such as intellectual and doctrinal security and fundamental freedoms. By recognizing freedom of belief, expression, and debate, the Qur’an sketches a space in which opponents may voice their views freely, provided ethical limits and justice are observed. This approach not only prevents insecurity born of repression but also paves the way for intellectual growth and the strengthening of the foundations of legitimacy. Teachings such as “disputation in the fairest manner,” the demand for proof, non-inquisition of beliefs, and security for those who enjoin right and forbid wrong constitute the pillars of this intellectual edifice. Overall, the present study shows that the Qur’anic model of security governance regards security as the product of the active and responsible interaction of the state, groups, and individuals, underscoring the key role of groups in this chain. Avoiding an exclusive focus on either state or individual security, it offers a comprehensive and balanced view in which all actors are both rights-holders and duty-bearers. Such a perspective, when adapted to today’s social and cultural conditions, can ground the design of sustainable, justice-oriented security policies in Islamic societies.

The contemporary world increasingly encounters the phenomenon of cultural and linguistic pluralism—a phenomenon that can serve as a source of civilizational richness and flourishing or, if mismanaged, as a ground for conflict and social fragmentation. In this context, the question of how an Islamic government should engage human diversities gains particular importance, especially since Islam, in its sacred texts—above all, the Noble Qur’an—offers clear principles and foundations for articulating the relation between diversity and unity. Key verses such as “O humankind, indeed We created you from a male and a female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another (li-taʿārafū) …” (al-Ḥujurāt, 13) and “And among His signs is the diversity of your tongues and your colors” (al-Rūm, 22) both affirm the divine wisdom in diversities and the necessity of mutual recognition, and also identify taqwā rather than race or ethnicity as the criterionof merit. Alongside these, concepts such as the “single umma (ummatan wāḥidah)” and “holding fast to the Rope of God (ḥabl Allāh)” delineate a unifying framework that can harmonize diversities under a shared, value-oriented telos. The central problem of this study is how to translate these two complementary principles—upholding the intrinsic worth of diversity and prioritizing faith-based unity—into an effective model for Islamic governance that both forestalls the threats of division and harnesses the synergistic opportunities arising from diversity. This research aims to undertake a deep rereadingof Qur’anic foundations related to pluralism and unity and to extract their practical implications for governance in an Islamic society. Its primary focus is how Qur’anic teachings can simultaneously combine acceptance of and respect for linguistic, ethnic, and cultural diversities with the strengthening of cohesion and faith identity. Accordingly, the study endeavors to present a theological–strategic framework by which an Islamic state’s cultural and social policy-making in plural settings can be organized so that the values of diversity are preserved and allowed to flourish while the solidarity of the Islamic umma is reinforced. A subsidiary aim is to clarify the distinction between the Qur’anic concept of “milla” (a revealed way and sacred law) and the modern concept of “nation” in nationalist terms, in order to prevent theoretical conflations and identity misunderstandings. The method is descriptive–analytical with an approach of “critique of foundations” and strategic inference. First, data were collected from authentic sources, including the Noble Qur’an and authoritative Sunni and Shiʿi exegeses, as well as documents and statements of leading thinkers of the Islamic world. Second, content analysis of the relevant verses was conducted to examine key concepts—taʿāruf (mutual recognition), “divine signs (āyāt Allāh),” “single umma (ummatan wāḥidah),” “the Rope of God (ḥabl Allāh),” and “milla”—from the perspectives of classical and modern exegetes. Then, by comparing juridical, exegetical, and political-theory readings, points of convergence and divergence were identified and employed to derive applicable principles for cultural policy-making. Finally, through an inferential method, the proposed framework was translated from the level of Qur’anic concepts to the level of executive strategies in governance. Examination of the Qur’anic verses and commentaries showed that the Qur’anic view of cultural and linguistic pluralism is not threat-centered but opportunity-centered. The principle of taʿāruf indicates that ethnic and linguistic diversities—as divine signs—form a groundworkfor recognition and constructive interaction among human beings, and that denying or disparaging them constitutes opposition to God’s creational sunnah. At the same time, the Qur’an regards taqwā as the criterion of excellence and of social ordering, thereby engendering an identity that transcends ethnic and geographic affiliations. Concepts such as the “single umma” and “the Rope of God” emphasize that the community of faith must be defined under monotheistic belief and that its unity is preserved by adherence to the divine religion and shared values. The data also showed the necessity—both theoretical and practical—of distinguishing the Qur’anic “milla,” which is related to religion and sharīʿa, from the modern “nation” of the nation-state, since the former is defined by faith and mission while the latter is grounded largely in political borders and historical attachments. It can thus be concluded that, for an Islamic government, combining the two aforementioned principles as a dual yet complementary structure—diversity as a legitimate reality and faith-based unity as the orienting guide of that diversity—can provide the basis for cultural and social policy. In practice, this combination yields strategies such as recognizing different languages and cultures within the framework of law and sharīʿa; eliminating any discrimination based on ethnicity or language; creating institutional mechanisms for inter-cultural dialogue; and actively countering divisive ideologies. In this way, an Islamic government can, while benefiting from the rich reservoir of diversities, strengthen faith identity and social cohesion, and offer a model of peaceful coexistence and civilizational advancement that is rooted in revelatory principles and responsive to the complex needs of contemporary society.

Justice-centeredness is one of the fundamental and inseparable principles of Islamic governance, rooted in the teachings of the Noble Qur’an, the Sunnah of the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him), and the conduct of Imam ʿAlī (peace be upon him). In Islam’s political system, justice is not merely a moral virtue or spiritual ideal, but the principal indicator of legitimacy, effectiveness, and durability of the political order. The historical experience of Islamic governments—especially the ʿAlawī governance—has shown that neglect of justice in structural, political, and social arenas lays the groundwork for the erosion of public trust, the rise of corruption, and the weakening of social cohesion. Despite this central place, many contemporary studies have examined justice only in conceptual and ethical terms or within the domain of public policy, and comprehensive research that analyzes the causal chain of the governmental consequences of justice-centeredness is rarely observed. The absence of such a model has prevented policymakers and evaluators of Islamic governance from systematically measuring the impact of justice on indicators of sustainability, legitimacy, and social capital. The principal question of this study is what structural, legitimacy-related, and social consequences justice-centeredness entails in Islamic governance and how these consequences, within a coherent causal model, reinforce one another and ultimately lead to the consolidation of the political system. The main objective is to identify and explain the governmental consequences of justice-centeredness on the basis of authoritative religious sources and then to depict a causal model that shows how the realization of justice at various levels of governance results in the strengthening of political structures and public satisfaction. The subsidiary objectives are: extracting the principal components of justice-centeredness in Islamic governance from religious texts; explaining the mechanisms linking justice-centeredness to indicators of effectiveness and sustainability of the political order; briefly comparing the findings with certain Western theories of justice in governance, especially the views of John Rawls, Francis Fukuyama, and Bo Rothstein, and demonstrating the distinctiveness of the Islamic approach; and presenting a theoretical framework for assessing just governance in Islamic systems and for reinforcing indigenous policymaking. This study is a theoretical and analytical inquiry with a qualitative approach. The principal method is inferential content analysis based on data gathered from authentic Islamic sources, including the Noble Qur’an, Nahj al-Balāgha, Ghurar al-Ḥikam, Tuḥaf al-ʿUqūl, Mustadrak al-Wasāʾil, and the works of leading thinkers such as Murtaza Mutahhari and Muḥammad Bāqir al-Ṣadr. In addition, the principles of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Statement on the Second Step of the Revolution are considered complementary documents. In the research process, after coding concepts related to justice and governance, the components and mechanisms for realizing justice were extracted and depicted in a causal chain showing that each consequence provides the ground for the next. The findings reveal that justice-centeredness possesses a multi-layered driving force whose reflections appear in structural, legitimacy-related, and social arenas. At the structural and institutional level, justice, by preventing discrimination, corruption, and inequality in resource distribution, stabilizes institutions, consolidates power, and increases effectiveness; the ground for accountability and the susceptibilityof rulers to oversight is laid by justice, and meritocracy becomes a behavioral rule that enables the appointment of righteous and honest managers. In the political and legitimacy dimension, justice-centeredness, by attracting trust and reducing social resistance, increases the soft influence of the government and simultaneously strengthens divine legitimacy and popular acceptance; Qur’anic verses and the ʿAlawī conduct show that the linkage between God’s satisfaction and people’s satisfaction is embedded in the implementation of justice. In the social and communicative arena, justice-centeredness prepares the ground for social solidarity, reduction of cleavages, reinforcement of a sense of belonging to the political order, and the enhancement of social capital. The causal chain depicted in this research shows that these consequences, as a progressive cycle, reinforce each other: structural reform yields political sustainability, sustainability increases social capital, and social capital leads to greater effectiveness of structures. A comparative analysis with theories such as those of John Rawls and Francis Fukuyama shows that, although in Western thought justice is likewise a condition for governmental effectiveness and stability, inthe Islamic intellectual system justice—beyond rational functions—is grounded in divine legitimacy, moral reform, and victory over falsehood. This study, while presenting a coherent model of the governmental consequences of justice, proposes a theoretical framework for evaluating and strengthening models of Islamic governance that can serve as a basis for comparative studies and indigenous policymaking. According to the presented model, justice-centeredness generates a positive cycle: starting from structural reform, leading to political sustainability and legitimacy, and ultimately elevating social capital and national cohesion; this social capital feeds back positively into structural effectiveness and sustains the cycle. The comparative analysis showed that although in Western theories justice is presented as a condition for governmental effectiveness and stability (as in Rawls and Fukuyama), in Islamic thought justice, in addition to rational functions, rests upon divine legitimacy, social reform, and victory over falsehood.

With the Islamic Revolution of Iran entering its second phase of life—as articulated in the Statement on the Second Step of the Islamic Revolution by the Supreme Leader, defined as the era of “self-cultivation, society-building, and civilization-building”—the necessity of recognizing and employing intellectual and theoretical foundations in Islamic governance has become increasingly significant. From the perspective of His Eminence, the three components of “contemplation,” “intellectual reflection,” and “free thinking” constitute the pillars of national soft power and the prerequisite for the realization of Islamic governance on the level of the new Islamic civilization. These elements, in addition to serving as the foundations of knowledge production and innovation, provide the ground for educating a generation in harmony with the Revolution and for shaping a thoughtful society committed to religious values. Despite repeated emphases by the Leader, challenges such as the lack of structural institutions to promote free thinking, the absence of effective linkage between the production of thought and discourse formation, and the nonexistence of a comprehensive model for utilizing these capacities in the governance process have hindered the full use of this soft capital. Consequently, the necessity of presenting a scientific and indigenous model capable of explaining and operationalizing these three components in relation to Islamic governance has become a strategic imperative. The principal objective of this research is to identify, explain, and design a conceptual–applicative model for the effective utilization of the capacities of contemplation, intellectual reflection, and free thinking in the path toward achieving civilization-building Islamic governance. This objective is based on an analysis of the Supreme Leader’s views regarding the structural role of these components in managing society and in the process of civilization-building, and it seeks to extract the necessary principles and theoretical frameworks for linking intellectual capacities with the functions of governance in various dimensions such as thought production, human resource training, and cultural institution-building. Furthermore, the research aims to extend the flow of contemplation and free thinking from the level of academic and educational centers to the arena of macro-level decision-making and executive management of the country, thereby clarifying the role of these components as prerequisites for the transition from the Islamic state to the Islamic society and ultimately the realization of the new Islamic civilization. The study has been conducted through a descriptive–analytical method with a qualitative approach. Data have been collected through library and documentary study, with the primary focus on analyzing the speeches, writings, and official documents published by the Office for the Preservation and Publication of the Works of the Supreme Leader, as well as upstream documents such as the Statement on the Second Step of the Revolution, the Islamic-Iranian Model of Progress, and the Charter of the Advanced Seminary. In the first stage, the definitions and concepts of the three components “contemplation,” “intellectual reflection,” and “free thinking” were revisited within the framework of Islamic principles, and subsequently, through an ijtihād-based approach, their relation to the fundamental elements of the Islamic system and civilization was examined. Moreover, strategic statements by the Supreme Leader regarding institution-building, discourse formation, and human resource training were analyzed using content analysis in order to identify the governing principles of the proposed model. The findings demonstrate that, from the perspective of the Supreme Leader, the triad of contemplation, intellectual reflection, and free thinking constitutes the foundation of the civilizational movement of Islamic culture in the present era, and without them the path to civilization-building governance will be interrupted. Contemplation, as a purposeful rational activity aimed at understanding and solving issues based on Islamic knowledge, is the initiator of strategic thought production. Intellectual reflection is the process of critical and methodical analysis of phenomena to provide effective responsesto contemporary needs, and free thinking ensures the freedom of thought within the framework of rationality and Sharīʿa, preventing intellectual subjugation and imitation of foreign models. The findings further reveal that these components must be employed simultaneously in four arenas: first, in the human sphere, through the training of faithful, self-disciplined, and rational human resources familiar with Islamic lifestyle and Iranian traditions who are capable of realizing the ideals of the Revolution; second, in the sphere of thought production and discourse formation, by strengthening free thinking to generate indigenous concepts and vocabularies consistent with the intellectual structure of the Revolution, which are then transformed into public and executive discourse; third, in the institutional sphere, by creating and reinforcing supportive institutions such as seminaries, universities, media, and intellectual assemblies to strengthen the flow of religious rationality and responses to doubts; and fourth, in the sphere of governance, by ensuring the practical connection of intellectual processes with macro-level policy-making and societal management in such a way that major decisions are made based on theoretical foundations and Islamic values. Overall, the findings emphasize that civilization-building Islamic governance is achieved when these three components are employed not merely as theoretical values but as practical and strategic instruments in the design and implementation of models of progress and societal management, with the synergistic role of seminaries, universities, and cultural institutions being continuously reinforced in this process.

In people-based political systems, a strategic and persistent challenge is engaging a segment of society known in political discourse as the “gray stratum.” This stratum comprises citizens who neither possess full ideological loyalty to the ruling structure nor belong to the ranks of radical opponents; rather, they adjust their political and social positioning at various junctures on the basis of rational assessment and cost–benefit calculation. In the Islamic Republic of Iran—whose legitimacy rests on a dynamic bond between state and people—the gray stratum plays a decisive role in political developments, electoral participation, and the balance of forces at critical moments. Despite this group’s importance, there exists a notable gap in precise knowledge of strategies for engaging it, especially within the framework of Islamic governance. Four decades of Ayatollah Khamenei’s leadership show that, to preserve the bond with this stratum, he has employed patterns beyond traditional mobilization and one-way propaganda, proceeding on the basis of dialogue-oriented rationality. The central problem of this research is to identify the components of these strategies, trace how they have evolved within the country’s social and political transformations, and assess their impact on the continuity of legitimacy and the effectiveness of Islamic governance. The main objective is to identify, classify, and explain Ayatollah Khamenei’s strategies for political engagement with the gray stratum and to analyze their role in realizing Islamic governance. This objective is pursued along four subsidiary axes: redefining the concept of the gray stratum within the context of the Islamic Republic’s social and discursive transformations; examining the trajectory of the Leader’s strategies from the 1990s to the 2020s in response to changes within this stratum; extracting overarching principles and patterns of engagement—including features such as gradual persuasion, soft boundary-drawing, and dialogue with diverse groups; and, finally, evaluating the capacity of this pattern to serve as an indigenous model in comparative studies of religious governance in plural societies. The method is descriptive–analytical, employing Jürgen Habermas’s framework of “communicative action,” which rests onthe logic of understanding, communicative rationality, and the legitimacy of political discourse. Data were collected through library research by studying Ayatollah Khamenei’s statements, speeches, stances, and communicative practices from 1989 to 2023. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) was used to probe semantic layers and to reveal communicative mechanisms, clarifying how these strategies have been formed and evolved at discursive, institutional, symbolic, and behavioral levels. During analysis, time periods were delineated according to major political and social shifts (such as the end of the war, the reform era, the rise of cyberspace, and post-2021 developments), and each period was examined with indicators such as mode of societal communication, message-delivery tools, and the level of public participation. The results show the following trajectory of strategic evolution: in the 1990s—a transition from rhetorical mobilization to rational persuasion, as the growing middle class and changing social expectations prompted a shift from affective/ideological mobilization to rational dialogue that interpreted political and religious concepts in terms accessible to the hesitant; in the 2000s—managing cleavages and preserving a space for mutual understanding amid polarization, with emphasis on national unity, rearticulation of foundational revolutionary concepts, and creating venues for dialogue among diverse currents so that boundary-drawing would not bar critics from participation; in the 2010s—responding to the transformations of cyberspace by re-creating the message in digital environments, promoting media literacy, and practicing multilayer persuasion; and in the 2020s—rebuilding social capital at the micro scale by prioritizing face-to-face dialogues with elites, youth, and small social groups over macro-oriented approaches amid declining political participation and public trust. Ultimately, the study identifies six overarching strategies as the foundation of the Leader’s thought in Islamic governance: (1) gradual persuasion and staged interpretation of political concepts—adjusting the meaning and narrative of key notions (such as independence, progress, and resistance) to social conditions and mental horizons to preserve value-based linkage; (2) soft boundary-drawing and minimal exclusion—distinguishing critique from subversion to preserve the broadest possible circle of belonging and to prevent the exclusion of the hesitant; (3) attention to audience agency—recognizing the gray stratum as analytical and meaning-making,to be addressed with a language of respect and reasoning; (4) conceptual flexibility—reproducing concepts commensurate with socio-political transformations without departing from foundational principles; (5) message management in a plural media environment—using diverse tools and formats to convey meaning effectively; and (6) maximal inclusion and minimal rejection in line with the moral-political logic of the ʿAlawī tradition—emphasizing engagement, listening, and mutual understanding as the basis of legitimacy-building. Comparative examination indicates that these are not temporary tactics but elements of a systematic communicative logic for reconstructing a shared language with Iran’s multilayered, evolving society—a logic that locates the continuity of legitimacy and social stability in meaningful, dialogue-centered engagement with the gray stratum and offers a model with potential for indigenization in other plural Islamic societies.

In the present age, cyberspace has become one of the most important arenas for the exercise of governance-an arena that, by virtue of the flow of information, profoundly affects governmental structures, processes, and objectives and even redefines national identity and security. The capacity of this space to create unparalleled opportunitieswhile simultaneously generating unprecedented threats—from cognitive warfare and psychological operations to interference in culture, economy, and politics—has led pioneering countries to formulate bespoke models of cyber governance on the basis of their intellectual, cultural, security, and economic foundations. For the Islamic Republic of Iran, which claims to present a distinctive model of governance grounded in the Islamic–Iranian system, this arena plays a key role in realizing the objectives of the Second Step of the Islamic Revolution. However, the country’s central challenge is that a comprehensive, indigenous model for cyberspace governance—designed in accordance with national values, ideals, and needs—has not yet fully taken shape, and its implementation requiresa proper understanding of this space’s multidimensional necessities. This study aims to identify and elucidate the necessities of cyberspace governance from the perspective of the Leader of the Muslims, Imam Khamenei. The main axis is that His Eminence’s views over the past two decades—as reflected in speeches, messages, and the state’s macro-level documents—not only provide a value-laden and operational framework for governance but can also serve as a roadmap for designing an Islamic–Iranian model of progress in this field. A further aim is to extract these necessities in managerial, human, infrastructural, and content categories and to link them to national and civilizational strategies so as to enablea systematic movement from the self-construction of the country’s cyberspace to the realization of new Islamic civilization-building. The research also seeks, while conducting a comparative review of other countries’ experiences, to identify the capacities and limitations of non-indigenous models and to emphasize the need to design a country-specific model. The method is descriptive–analytical, based on library and documentary data collection. Sources include Imam Khamenei’s statements, the Islamic Republic’s upstream documents, domestic and foreign scholarly studies, and other countries’ practical experiences in cyber governance. To complement the analysis, samples of the cyber governance models of the United States, China, Russia, and France are examined and their strategic elements identified for comparison with indigenous requirements. Subsequently, through content analysis of the Leader’s statements, the components and necessities of cyber governance from his perspective are coded, categorized, and explained. The findings show that, from Imam Khamenei’s perspective, cyberspace governance is not a subsidiary sector but a strategic component on par with the Islamic Revolution, whose importance even precedes economy, security, and culture. His Eminence articulates necessities across four principal domains: in the managerial domain, priority is given to steering the space in favor of religious and revolutionary values, informational oversight over the society’s intellectual space, independence and ownership of content and infrastructure, control of content flows, and prudent management—indicating that cyber management must be strategic, proactive, and grounded in the preservation of national agency and sovereignty. In the human domain, emphasis falls on cultivating faithful, expert, and committed human resources, elevating media literacy, cultivating proper-use culture, and strengtheningcyber discernment; an aware human cadre is the guarantor of other necessities and thekey element for minimizing harms and maximizing opportunities. In the technical and infrastructural domain, priorities include establishing the National Information Network, developing independent hardware and software capacities, securing infrastructures, and severing dependency on foreign platforms and protocols; His Eminence stresses that infrastructure must be designed in relation to content and that primacy lies with value-guided content, not mere technology. In the content domain, the focus is on producing and distributing wholesome, rich, and attractive content suited to societal needs, countering harmful content, and shaping flows that elevate awareness and cultural resilience; cyberspace is introduced as a medium for the expansion of awareness and for society-building that, under a civilizational plan, can be extended from the national level to that of the Islamic umma. To this end, four macro steps are proposed: establishing a National Information Network, creating a national cyberspace, forming a civilizational information network, and creating a civilizational cyberspace—an evolutionary trajectory that transforms cyber governance into an instrument of civilization-building. Comparison with foreign models shows that leading countries do not view cyberspace as merely a technical domain but manage it in conjunction with security, culture, and national power: coordination between state and private sector under security–military oversight in the United States; the social credit system and technological self-reliance in China; a blend of state control and outsourcing in Russia; and the protection of cultural values and privacy in France. At the same time, the Islamic–Iranian model of cyber governance is distinguished by its emphasis on independence, justice, value-guidance, and a civilizational horizon. Overall, the results clarify that, from Imam Khamenei’s perspective (may his shadow be extended), cyberspace governance is a multidimensional process that must simultaneously cover managerial, human, technical, and content dimensions and, within a strategic horizon, ensure both security and independence, realize scientific and cultural growth, and provide a platform for new Islamic civilization-building. This outlook compels policymakers, beyond piecemeal and reactive measures, to design and implement a comprehensive, integrated, and value-centered model.

The rapid technological transformations of recent decades have swiftly altered the world’s political, economic, social, and cultural structures and have made technology one of the most important drivers of change in governance. Fields such as information technology, biotechnology, energy, and artificial intelligence have not only created unprecedented opportunities for development but have also imposed complex threats to security, cultural identity, and social cohesion. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, technology is not merely a technical or economic matter; rather, as a value-oriented phenomenon it is intertwined with the society’s religious and cultural foundations, and its policy-making must be redefined within the framework of the requirements of Islamic governance. Despite the “General Policies of Science and Technology” promulgated by the Supreme Leader as an upstream document—emphasizing indices such as scientific authority, technological self-sufficiency, technological justice, and public access—the institutional structure of technology governance in the country still faces challenges such as duplication, overlapping mandates, weak inter-institutional coordination, and the absence of a single steering authority. The core problem of this study is how to design an indigenous and efficient model for technology policy and governance in Iran that both aligns with rapid global transformations and rests upon Islamic principles and values. The main objective is to conduct an institutional analysis of technology policy in Iran with a focus on the Islamic approach and to identify legislative requirements and value-oriented strategies for reforming and enhancing the governance structure in this domain. In addition to reviewing the status quo and institutional challenges, the study seeks to extract and integrate Islamic criteria and principles into technology policy and to present an appropriate theoretical and operational framework for addressing technological phenomena. At the theoretical level, the research 268                                                                    Islamic Governance Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2025 focuses on explaining the place of technology in Islamic thought, distinguishing among permissible (ḥalāl), prohibited (ḥarām), and necessary (wājib) technologies, and determining how the governance system should interact with each of these categories on the basis of public interest (maṣlaḥa) and the Sacred Law (al-sharīʿa). At the practical level, its aim is to create a pattern for synergy among policy-making, legislative, and oversight bodies and to remove points of conflict and overlap among their functions. The method is qualitative, combining documentary analysis, directed content analysis, and in-depth interviews with experts in Islamic sciences and technology policy. First, the study’s conceptual framework was developed using Grounded Theory based on data obtained from interviews with scholars of the Qom seminary. Upstream documents and laws—including the General Policies of Science and Technology, the Laws on Supporting and “Leaping” Knowledge-Based Production, the Law on the Permanent Provisions of Development Programs, resolutions of the Supreme Council of Science, Research, and Technology, and documents of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution—were purposively selected and deductively analyzed. To validate findings and extract solutions, two focus group sessions were held with eight experts in fiqh, governance, law, and science-and-technology policy, in which the status quo, research hypotheses, and reform proposals were discussed and assessed; participant selection prioritized disciplinary diversity and institutional neutrality to minimize organizational bias. The findings show that technology governance in Iran must simultaneously account for three principal axes: institutional structure, value orientation, and implementation challenges. Structurally, the multiplicity of responsible bodies and overlapping mandates, lack of coordination in policy-making, and weak oversight are serious obstacles to strategic coherence. From a value perspective, within Islamic thought technology is not neutral; it must be guided under ethical, legal (sharʿī), and social considerations and placed in the service of the community’s dignity, independence, and justice. The results indicate that technologies can be divided into three broad categories: permissible (ḥalāl) technologies that do not entail prohibited effects and whose use is licit; prohibited (ḥarām) technologies that engender corruption, undermine morality, or threaten the community’s security and must be restricted or eliminated;and necessary (wājib) technologies whose acquisition and development are obligatory to preserve the existence and power of the Islamic society, such as defense and security technologies. The study further shows that technology-governance strategies should be designed along two principal spectra: developmental strategies for expanding ḥalāl and necessary technologies, and restrictive strategies for containing harmful and undesirable technologies. In the developmental spectrum, based on Qur’anic and hadith teachings, scientific advancement and innovation are not only permissible but a religious and social duty; Qur’anic verses such as “And prepare against them whatever force you can” (al-Anfāl 8:60) emphasize comprehensive preparedness in domains of power, including scientific and technological power. In the restrictive spectrum, confronting technologies that provide grounds for moral decay, economic dependency, or foreign political domination is deemed an intrinsic duty of Islamic governance. Accordingly, the study’s proposed model for technology governance in Iran includes re-engineering institutional roles and missions, strengthening the legislature’s lawmaking and oversight functions, establishing a national coordinating authority, and instituting indigenous technology-assessment mechanisms grounded in sharʿī criteria and Islamic values. By integrating policy-making, enhancing institutional accountability, and ensuring the realization of technological justice, this model can chart a developmental path that maximizes scientific and technological capacities while preventing cultural, ethical, and social harms.

In the complex and dynamic environment of contemporary governance, the legitimacy, influence, and effectiveness of managers are more than ever dependent on their symbolic and image capital in society. Within the framework of Islamic governance—whose foundations, aims, and methods are defined on the basis of justice, value-orientation, meritocracy, and accountability—“public trust” is regarded as a vital asset. Nevertheless, experiences over recent decades indicate that public trust, even in societies grounded in religious values, can be impaired by weak communications, inefficiency, or a negative image of managers. One of the novel approaches to strengthening public trust is managers’ “personal branding,” a process through which a manager, by accurately understanding his or her personality, values, skills, and performance and aligning them with governance missions, creates a credible, appealing, and enduring image in the minds of stakeholders. In today’s competitive, media-driven space, where public opinion is daily confronted—via social networks, mass media, and face-to-face communications—with a flood of data and messages, the absence of deliberate personal branding causes the image of strategic managers to form passively and at times in a distorted manner, thereby harming public trust. The present research aims to explain the role and function of strategic managers’ personal branding in strengthening Islamic governance and rebuilding public trust. This study seeks to answer the fundamental question of how the capacities of personal branding can be used—not merely as an individual marketing technique, but as a strategic, value-oriented instrument—to enhance the social capital of an Islamic government. Embedded within this principal aim are multiple subsidiary objectives: identifying the constituent components of a personal brand consistent with Islamic values; explaining the mechanisms through which these components affect public trust; and presenting a model that forges a linkage between the manager’s personal identity, the pattern of Islamic governance, and the indicators of public trust. The perspective of this research is that personal branding, if formed on the basis of honesty, keeping promises, justice-seeking, and effectiveness, not 302                                                                    Islamic Governance Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2025 only does not conflict with Islamic teachings but can become a legitimate and effective instrument for promoting the model of a manager aligned with the ideals of the Islamic Revolution. Methodologically, the present study is applied in type with a qualitative approach. Data were collected through documentary and field methods. In the documentary part, sources including books, domestic and international scholarly articles, upstream documents related to Islamic governance, religious teachings, and studies in the fieldof personal branding were examined and analyzed. In the field part, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of experts, including university professors, researchers in the field of governance, experienced high-level managers, and media practitioners, in order to extract the dimensions and localized requirements of managers’ personal branding in the context of Islamic Iran. The collected data were coded, categorized, and interpreted using Theme Analysis. Moreover, to ensure the validity of the findings, strategies of participant review and comparison with authoritative texts were employed. The findings indicate that personal branding in Islamic governance has four fundamental dimensions: the personality and ethical dimension, grounded in honesty, commitment, humility, courage, justice-seeking, and service to the people; the skill and professional dimension, which addresses the manager’s scholarly, managerial, and strategic competencies and constitutes a necessary condition for establishing professional credibility; the communicative and interactive dimension, which includes the ability to communicate effectively with the public, active listening, transparency in information dissemination, accountability, and persuading the audience; and the symbolic and cultural dimension, which refers to the manager’s role as a model and cultural reference in Islamic society and is conveyed through his or her conduct, speech, and lifestyle. The synergy of these dimensions forms a personal brand that is not an artificial, promotional image, but rather an objective reflection of the manager’s real character and performance in the public mind. The research also showed that the linkage between personal branding and public trustis established through multiple pathways. First, alignment of words and deeds: when managers match their promises and statements with real actions, the credibility of their personal brand is enhanced in public opinion. Second, transparency and accountability: honest and prompt information about decisions and actions, even under crisis conditions, signals respect for the people and creates a sense of participation in governance. Third, reliability and predictability: consistency in positions and behaviors increases trust in the continuity of policies. Fourth, inspiration and moral authority: managers whose lifestyle and conduct reflect Islamic exemplars increase the capital of public trust not only in the technical sphere but also in cultural and identity-related dimensions. From a policy perspective, the findings indicate that achieving effective personal branding in Islamic governance requires systematic measures, including training and empowering managers in communication and media skills; creating consultative bodies to align messages with values; designing mechanisms for continuous evaluation of managers’ public image and for gathering feedback from society; and preventing the emergence of a gap between image and reality through institutional transparency. These measures must be considered within a framework that preserves and strengthens the managers’ religious-revolutionary identity and prevents personal branding from turning into a tool for self-promotion or destructive competition. In sum, the present research emphasizes that personal branding in the context of Islamic governance—if built upon honesty, justice, expertise, and effective interaction—can become a strategic instrument for enhancing public trust and consolidating the bond between the people and the state. This approach transforms managers from being passive before public judgment into active agents in managing their image, and, by aligning personal identity with organizational mission, it facilitates the realization of the model of a manager befitting the Islamic Revolution.

As one of the leading powers of the international system, the United States has played a prominent role in shaping and steering numerous international treaties and organizations. The historical experience of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries shows that the United States usually assumes an active—even founding—role in the early stages of draftingand advancing key treaties, yet subsequently either declines to join them, accepts only conditional and limited membership, or even withdraws. This pattern raises fundamental questions concerning the United States’ real objectives on the international stage, its degree of commitment to rules of international law, and the impact of such policies on the principle of equality and the collective interests of the international community. The central problem addressed here is whether, behind a veneer of cooperation and lawfulness, the United States has in fact sought unilateral exploitation of others’ commitments while purposefully evading its own; and, if so, what mechanisms it has employed to achieve this goal and with what consequences for the international legal order. The primary aim of this study is to identify U.S. practices in drafting, acceding to, and withholding membershipin international treaties and to analyze the underlying objectives of such behavior. By examining salient cases—including the Covenant of the League of Nations, the Charter of the United Nations, and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court—the research seeks to present a clear picture of U.S. behavioral patterns, to reveal linkages between this pattern and the United States’ overarching national strategies, and to assess the effects of such particularistic conduct on international law and global interests. Specifically, it asks, first, whether treaty-drafting in U.S. foreign policy functions as a means of constraining others without accepting reciprocal constraints, and, second, what countermeasures or policies other states might adopt in response. Methodologically, the study is descriptive–analytical with a historical–documentary approach. Data were collected from library sources, historical records, international legal scholarship, and official political statements. The analysis focuses both on comparative examination of documents and historical events (such as the formation of the League of Nations or negotiations over the U.N. Charter)and on content analysis of U.S. official positions and statements to identify behavioral continuity and strategic objectives; inductive reasoning—from case studies to general conclusions—and logical analysis are used to explicate the relationship between declaratory acts and actual conduct. The League of Nations case shows that, despite its pivotal role in proposing the idea and drafting the Covenant, the United States ultimately refused formal membership on legal pretexts such as alleged incompatibility of the collective defense clause with the Constitution; historical evidence suggests that part of this opposition stemmed not from genuine legal concerns but from domestic partisan rivalries and the strategic aim of limiting others without accepting reciprocal limits. The result was the imposition of binding obligations on other states in disarmament and security cooperation while leaving the United States free of those constraints, even as it maintained indirect influence over League decisions. In the United Nations case, the United States, by accepting the veto alongside four other powers, effectively ensured its capacity to nullify any decision contrary to its interests, while also proposing the “Uniting for Peace” resolution so that, where others’ vetoes proved adverse, it could find an alternativeavenue to secure its aims—illustrating that mechanisms ostensibly intended to enhance organizational effectiveness may, in practice, serve a particular power’s interests. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court provides another instance: the United States played an active role in drafting and initially signed the Statute to shape the Court’s provisions and mechanisms, but then declined to transmit it to the Senate, formally “unsigned,” and refused to join—evincing instrumental use of the drafting process to mold an international institution without accepting its obligations. Comparative analysis of these three cases indicates a consistent policy line in U.S. foreign and legal conduct: encouraging other states to accept binding constraints, leveraging their committed status to advance national interests, and deliberately avoiding any obligation that would restrict U.S. maneuverability and strategic superiority. This approach manifests a form of “legal particularism,” wherein great powers—especially the United States—interpret and implement rules not as general and equal principles but as flexible tools for realizing their interests. The findings suggest that such a practice, beyond eroding trust in international institutions and treaties, fosters skepticism and diminishes weaker states’ incentives to honor international commitments, thereby seriously undermining international law’s effectiveness as a regulator of interstate behavior. The study argues that only through awareness-raising, building unified fronts among adversely affected states, and insisting on impartial oversight mechanisms can the negative consequences of this pattern be mitigated and the further entrenchment of particularistic legal regimes in international law be prevented.