Aug 2026· Journal of International Analytics· 0 citations· 18 references
Abstract
This article analyzes the US representations of Iran across five administrations (1993–2024). Combining historical institutionalism with discursive institutionalism, the study traces how presidents and senior foreign-policy officials produced and reproduced two foundational myths – the “international community” and the “rogue states” – that represent Washington’s approach to Tehran. Based on detailed analysis of presidential statements and key policy discourse, the work argues that these myths produce a durable path-dependent framing: they simplify complex political interaction into a moralized binary (inside / outside; civilized / outcast) and thereby limit the range of politically plausible options. Although US administrations have oscillated between engagement and pressure, such stylistic and tactical differences remain confined by the underlying myths. Even administrations that pursued negotiations or rapprochement did so while implicitly sustaining the “rogue state” frame. The article therefore explains the puzzle of persistent hostility amid episodic détente: US rhetoric as well as policy towards Iran moves in circular patterns within mythic boundaries. In other words, although “dovishness” and “hawkishness” play an important role in US discourse towards Iran, both are still strictly limited by the “rogue state” framework. Such a state of affairs renders complete and lasting normalization between the two states impossible.
This article examines how expressions of solidarity with Palestine in Oman reveal transformations in state–society relations during the Gaza war of 2023–2025, a period of leadership transition and regional rupture. Drawing on elite statements, opinion columns and semi‐structured interviews, it combines framing analys...
This article investigates the discursive construction of ideological antagonism in the speeches of Nigel Farage (UK), Marine Le Pen (France), and Santiago Abascal (Spain), focusing on how each leader produces and legitimizes polarized “us-versus-them” frameworks. Drawing from Critical Discourse Analysis (van Dijk, 1998...
P. A. Artero Abellán· CIRCULO de linguistica aplic...· 0 citations
This study seeks to answer the problematic question of why, during the years 1997 to 2013, under two different administrations known as the Reformists and the Principlists, the political conflict between the state and the government remained similar. Relying on the documentary method and system theory, this research ar...
Hossein Souri Ghorlivand, A. Mokhtari· Journal of Social-Political...· 0 citations
Buddhist nationalism in Myanmar is often portrayed as monolithic, yet fractures persist within its core constituencies. This article examines why Rakhine nationalists, once aligned with the state's exclusionary Buddhist nationalism during the 2012 anti-Muslim violence, have become leading actors in armed resistance aga...
Tian Zhang, Fang-Liang Zhang· Journal of Current Southeast...· 0 citations
The present study explores the construction of political myths and the representation of threat in Donald Trump’s discourse during his first presidency on Iran (2017-2020). The study used a qualitative diachronic Critical Discourse Analysis approach to examine a selection of presidential official speeches and statement...
Asst Lec. Iltifat Aliwi Mohammed Alhusseini, Asst Lec.Rawih Youssef Abdel Ali, H. Alhusseini· International journal of res...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.