Research Center for Principles and Models of Endemic Economy Diplomatic Interactions 3041-9395 3 11 2025 09 23 Iran’s Diplomatic Discourse in the June 2025 Crisis: A Discursive Resistance Analysis Against Structural Inequality Iran’s Diplomatic Discourse in the June 2025 Crisis: A Discursive Resistance Analysis Against Structural Inequality 240622 10.22034/dpiq.2026.565473.1066 FA Amin SadeqiBakyani PhD, Department of Political Science, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. 0009-0000-9291-005X Journal Article 2026 02 16 Introduction In contemporary international relations, diplomacy has shifted from a purely institutional practice to a dynamic discursive arena in which power, meaning, and ideology interact dialectically. This transformation is particularly evident in states such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, which operates under sustained geopolitical pressure and seeks to construct an alternative, resistance-oriented foreign policy discourse. Following the military aggression by the Zionist regime against Iran in June 2025, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi delivered a series of official statements, letters, speeches, and social media posts that collectively constitute a strategic and multi-layered diplomatic response. This study analyzes this discourse through Norman Fairclough’s (2009) Dialectical–Relational Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which conceptualizes discourse not merely as text, but as a form of social practice embedded within—and actively shaping—structures of power, ideology, and global inequality. Research Objectives Existing scholarship on Iran’s foreign policy has explored the concept of “resistance discourse” from historical, strategic, and ideological perspectives (Wu & Moshirzadeh, 2025; Karemefard, 2025; Koohkan et al., 2020). However, most studies either adopt macro-level theoretical approaches or focus on speeches by senior leadership, overlooking the nuanced and crisis-driven diplomatic discourse articulated by operational actors such as foreign ministers. Although a limited number of studies have applied Fairclough’s CDA to Iranian diplomatic texts (e.g., Rahimi Tehrani & Chalak, 2021; Asadi, 2014), none have examined a complete corpus of texts produced in direct response to a military attack. Moreover, previous research has often neglected the triadic relationship between textual strategies, discursive practices (such as multi-channel dissemination), and the broader sociopolitical context of global hegemony. This study directly addresses this gap. Methodology This research adopts a qualitative design based on Fairclough’s (2009) three-dimensional CDA framework: (1) textual analysis, (2) discourse practice, and (3) sociocultural practice. The data consist of 14 publicly available texts issued by Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi between 13 and 21 June 2025, including formal letters to the UN Security Council and the IAEA, official statements, diplomatic speeches, and posts on the X (formerly Twitter) platform. Data were collected through document analysis and coded using NVivo 14 software. The analytical process followed three stages: open coding (identification of surface themes), axial coding (categorization into conceptual clusters), and selective coding (derivation of core discursive strategies). Trustworthiness was ensured through peer debriefing, dual coding by independent researchers, and thick contextual description. Results The analysis reveals four dominant thematic clusters structuring Araqchi’s discourse: (1) legitimate self-defense, grounded in Article 51 of the UN Charter and the NPT; (2) illegal aggression, framed as a “heinous violation” of international law and a “crime against humanity”; (3) destroyed diplomacy, emphasizing that Iran was engaged in negotiations (including the Muscat talks) at the time of the attack; and (4) Western hypocrisy and injustice, highlighting structural double standards within Western powers and international institutions. At the linguistic level, the discourse combines formal legal terminology with moral and emotive metaphors (“diplomacy was destroyed,” “shameful silence”) alongside binary oppositions such as “us/them,” “victim/aggressor,” and “justice/hypocrisy.” Strategically, the texts were disseminated through both formal diplomatic channels (UN, IAEA) and digital platforms (X), targeting international institutions, global public opinion—particularly in the Islamic world—and domestic audiences simultaneously. Reception patterns indicate strong solidarity from several Muslim-majority states, muted or cautious responses from Western governments, and procedural inaction by international organizations. Discussion Araqchi’s discourse functions not merely as a reactive justification, but as a deliberate form of resistance discourse aimed at challenging hegemonic Western narratives that delegitimize non-Western sovereignty. By invoking universally recognized legal norms while simultaneously exposing their selective enforcement, Iran repositions itself from a “security threat” to a “victim of illegal aggression,” thereby subverting dominant security discourses. The integration of digital diplomacy (particularly through X) with traditional diplomatic channels reflects a hybrid communicative strategy designed to bypass Western-controlled media structures and engage transnational audiences directly. In Fairclough’s terms, this illustrates how discourse is both shaped by and shapes social structures: despite operating within an unequal international order, Iran uses language strategically to create discursive space for justice, resistance, and alternative legitimacy. However, the effectiveness of this discourse remains constrained by structural power asymmetries, as Western media and international institutions largely marginalize or reframe Iran’s narrative. Conclusion This study demonstrates that Iran’s diplomatic discourse in the aftermath of military aggression constitutes a sophisticated and multi-dimensional strategy of discursive resistance. It simultaneously legitimizes defensive action, delegitimizes the aggressor, exposes systemic double standards, and constructs an alternative geopolitical imaginary grounded in justice and South–South solidarity. While this discourse may not immediately alter material power relations, it performs a crucial symbolic function by asserting moral and political agency in a global system where both the “right to speak” and the “right to defend” are contested. Future research should further examine audience reception dynamics and conduct comparative analyses with other Global South states facing similar structural asymmetries. Introduction In contemporary international relations, diplomacy has shifted from a purely institutional practice to a dynamic discursive arena in which power, meaning, and ideology interact dialectically. This transformation is particularly evident in states such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, which operates under sustained geopolitical pressure and seeks to construct an alternative, resistance-oriented foreign policy discourse. Following the military aggression by the Zionist regime against Iran in June 2025, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi delivered a series of official statements, letters, speeches, and social media posts that collectively constitute a strategic and multi-layered diplomatic response. This study analyzes this discourse through Norman Fairclough’s (2009) Dialectical–Relational Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which conceptualizes discourse not merely as text, but as a form of social practice embedded within—and actively shaping—structures of power, ideology, and global inequality. Research Objectives Existing scholarship on Iran’s foreign policy has explored the concept of “resistance discourse” from historical, strategic, and ideological perspectives (Wu & Moshirzadeh, 2025; Karemefard, 2025; Koohkan et al., 2020). However, most studies either adopt macro-level theoretical approaches or focus on speeches by senior leadership, overlooking the nuanced and crisis-driven diplomatic discourse articulated by operational actors such as foreign ministers. Although a limited number of studies have applied Fairclough’s CDA to Iranian diplomatic texts (e.g., Rahimi Tehrani & Chalak, 2021; Asadi, 2014), none have examined a complete corpus of texts produced in direct response to a military attack. Moreover, previous research has often neglected the triadic relationship between textual strategies, discursive practices (such as multi-channel dissemination), and the broader sociopolitical context of global hegemony. This study directly addresses this gap. Methodology This research adopts a qualitative design based on Fairclough’s (2009) three-dimensional CDA framework: (1) textual analysis, (2) discourse practice, and (3) sociocultural practice. The data consist of 14 publicly available texts issued by Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi between 13 and 21 June 2025, including formal letters to the UN Security Council and the IAEA, official statements, diplomatic speeches, and posts on the X (formerly Twitter) platform. Data were collected through document analysis and coded using NVivo 14 software. The analytical process followed three stages: open coding (identification of surface themes), axial coding (categorization into conceptual clusters), and selective coding (derivation of core discursive strategies). Trustworthiness was ensured through peer debriefing, dual coding by independent researchers, and thick contextual description. Results The analysis reveals four dominant thematic clusters structuring Araqchi’s discourse: (1) legitimate self-defense, grounded in Article 51 of the UN Charter and the NPT; (2) illegal aggression, framed as a “heinous violation” of international law and a “crime against humanity”; (3) destroyed diplomacy, emphasizing that Iran was engaged in negotiations (including the Muscat talks) at the time of the attack; and (4) Western hypocrisy and injustice, highlighting structural double standards within Western powers and international institutions. At the linguistic level, the discourse combines formal legal terminology with moral and emotive metaphors (“diplomacy was destroyed,” “shameful silence”) alongside binary oppositions such as “us/them,” “victim/aggressor,” and “justice/hypocrisy.” Strategically, the texts were disseminated through both formal diplomatic channels (UN, IAEA) and digital platforms (X), targeting international institutions, global public opinion—particularly in the Islamic world—and domestic audiences simultaneously. Reception patterns indicate strong solidarity from several Muslim-majority states, muted or cautious responses from Western governments, and procedural inaction by international organizations. Discussion Araqchi’s discourse functions not merely as a reactive justification, but as a deliberate form of resistance discourse aimed at challenging hegemonic Western narratives that delegitimize non-Western sovereignty. By invoking universally recognized legal norms while simultaneously exposing their selective enforcement, Iran repositions itself from a “security threat” to a “victim of illegal aggression,” thereby subverting dominant security discourses. The integration of digital diplomacy (particularly through X) with traditional diplomatic channels reflects a hybrid communicative strategy designed to bypass Western-controlled media structures and engage transnational audiences directly. In Fairclough’s terms, this illustrates how discourse is both shaped by and shapes social structures: despite operating within an unequal international order, Iran uses language strategically to create discursive space for justice, resistance, and alternative legitimacy. However, the effectiveness of this discourse remains constrained by structural power asymmetries, as Western media and international institutions largely marginalize or reframe Iran’s narrative. Conclusion This study demonstrates that Iran’s diplomatic discourse in the aftermath of military aggression constitutes a sophisticated and multi-dimensional strategy of discursive resistance. It simultaneously legitimizes defensive action, delegitimizes the aggressor, exposes systemic double standards, and constructs an alternative geopolitical imaginary grounded in justice and South–South solidarity. While this discourse may not immediately alter material power relations, it performs a crucial symbolic function by asserting moral and political agency in a global system where both the “right to speak” and the “right to defend” are contested. Future research should further examine audience reception dynamics and conduct comparative analyses with other Global South states facing similar structural asymmetries.

Research Center for Principles and Models of Endemic Economy Diplomatic Interactions 3041-9395 3 11 2025 09 23 The Political Economy of State-Building during the Reza Shah Period and Its Impact on Iran’s Diplomatic Balancing Approach The Political Economy of State-Building during the Reza Shah Period and Its Impact on Iran’s Diplomatic Balancing Approach 244993 10.22034/dpiq.2026.566182.1068 FA Shirin Cheraghyan PhD student, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Kermanshah Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran. 0009-0000-2444-0500 Siamak Bahrami Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Kermanshah Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran. 0009-0002-7367-7330 Hamidreza Saeedynezad Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Kermanshah Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran. 0000-0001-9276-9199 Journal Article 2025 05 13 Introduction The period of Reza Shah Pahlavi’s rule (1925–1941) represents a decisive turning point in the political and economic trajectory of modern Iran and marks the emergence of a new state-centered order within the country’s political economy. This era developed in the aftermath of political fragmentation, foreign intervention, and institutional weakness inherited from the late Qajar period. Under these circumstances, the consolidation of political authority and the pursuit of rapid modernization were regarded as necessary conditions for national independence and state survival. During this period, the Iranian government attempted to transform the country’s administrative, economic, and social structures through a state-led modernization program influenced by Western models and modernist ideas. These reforms were implemented through the expansion of state institutions, infrastructural development, and increasing government intervention in economic affairs. As a result, the foundations of a centralized and authoritarian state gradually emerged. Understanding the interaction between modernization policies, modernist intellectual currents, and the formation of an authoritarian state is therefore essential for analyzing the political economy of Iran during this period. Accordingly, this research seeks to examine the political economy of the Reza Shah era and to explain how state-led modernization policies influenced economic development, domestic governance, and Iran’s foreign policy orientation. Literature Review Studies concerning Iran’s political economy during the early twentieth century have primarily focused on modernization policies, state-building processes, and the transformation of traditional social structures. Many scholars emphasize the role of the authoritarian state in implementing modernization programs and restructuring economic institutions. A number of historical studies have examined the administrative and institutional reforms introduced during the Reza Shah period, particularly the expansion of bureaucracy, the establishment of modern legal institutions, and the centralization of political authority. These studies highlight how modernization policies contributed to the formation of a centralized political structure and a state-dominated economic system. Other research has focused on the intellectual foundations of modernization in Iran, particularly the influence of modernism and nationalist thought on the political elite. These studies argue that the modernist worldview of political leaders played an important role in shaping economic development strategies and the expansion of state intervention in the economy. Despite these contributions, relatively limited attention has been paid to the relationship between the political economy of the Reza Shah era and Iran’s foreign policy orientation. In particular, the interaction between authoritarian state structures, modernization strategies, and diplomatic behavior remains insufficiently explored. Therefore, this study seeks to address this gap by examining how domestic political economy influenced Iran’s diplomatic strategies and international positioning. Methodology The present research adopts a historical-analytical approach. Data collection is primarily based on library research and the examination of historical documents, scholarly articles, and academic books related to Iran’s political economy and modernization during the Reza Shah period. The theoretical framework of the study is based on the concepts of the authoritarian state and top-down modernization. These concepts provide analytical tools for understanding how modernization and economic development policies were implemented through centralized state authority rather than through participatory or socially driven processes. Through qualitative analysis of institutional reforms, economic policies, and diplomatic practices, the study examines the relationship between political centralization, modernization strategies, and economic governance in Iran during the early twentieth century. Results The findings of this research indicate that the political economy of the Reza Shah era was shaped by a close relationship between political centralization and modernization-oriented development policies. Inspired by Western models of modernization and modernism, the Iranian government expanded state institutions and strengthened administrative structures in order to promote economic development. The expansion of bureaucracy, the creation of modern legal and administrative institutions, and increased state control over key economic sectors led to the formation of a semi-modern economic system characterized by strong state intervention and limited market autonomy. Within this framework, the authoritarian state played a central role in directing economic activities and implementing modernization programs. At the same time, traditional social forces such as tribal authorities and religious institutions were gradually weakened or subordinated to the central government. In the sphere of foreign policy, this political-economic structure encouraged a pragmatic and strategic diplomatic approach aimed at balancing relations among major powers while seeking external resources to support national economic development. Discussion The experience of modernization in Iran during the Reza Shah period demonstrates the complex interaction between state authority, modernist ideology, and economic transformation. The state sought to accelerate economic development by adopting centralized policies and strengthening bureaucratic institutions. However, this process occurred in a context where civil society remained weak and social participation in political and economic decision-making was limited. As a result, modernization policies were implemented primarily through top-down mechanisms controlled by the authoritarian state. Although these policies contributed to infrastructural expansion and institutional development, they also reinforced patterns of centralized governance and state dominance over economic activities. Furthermore, the political economy of this period significantly influenced Iran’s diplomatic behavior. The government adopted a pragmatic foreign policy aimed at balancing relations with major powers while using international engagement as a means to advance modernization and economic development goals. However, reliance on external actors also exposed the country to international pressures and geopolitical constraints. Conclusion The political economy of the Reza Shah period played a crucial role in shaping the foundations of the modern Iranian state. Through centralized governance and modernization policies inspired by modernist ideas, the government established new administrative institutions and promoted economic development. However, the dominance of the authoritarian state and the limited participation of social institutions created structural imbalances within the development process. The absence of strong intermediary institutions and civil society organizations restricted the prospects for inclusive and sustainable economic development. Consequently, the legacy of this period can be observed in the enduring patterns of centralized governance, state intervention in economic affairs, and security-oriented political structures in Iran. The experience of top-down modernization during the Reza Shah era therefore highlights the long-term implications of authoritarian development strategies for both domestic governance and the broader political economy of modern Iran. Introduction The period of Reza Shah Pahlavi’s rule (1925–1941) represents a decisive turning point in the political and economic trajectory of modern Iran and marks the emergence of a new state-centered order within the country’s political economy. This era developed in the aftermath of political fragmentation, foreign intervention, and institutional weakness inherited from the late Qajar period. Under these circumstances, the consolidation of political authority and the pursuit of rapid modernization were regarded as necessary conditions for national independence and state survival. During this period, the Iranian government attempted to transform the country’s administrative, economic, and social structures through a state-led modernization program influenced by Western models and modernist ideas. These reforms were implemented through the expansion of state institutions, infrastructural development, and increasing government intervention in economic affairs. As a result, the foundations of a centralized and authoritarian state gradually emerged. Understanding the interaction between modernization policies, modernist intellectual currents, and the formation of an authoritarian state is therefore essential for analyzing the political economy of Iran during this period. Accordingly, this research seeks to examine the political economy of the Reza Shah era and to explain how state-led modernization policies influenced economic development, domestic governance, and Iran’s foreign policy orientation. Literature Review Studies concerning Iran’s political economy during the early twentieth century have primarily focused on modernization policies, state-building processes, and the transformation of traditional social structures. Many scholars emphasize the role of the authoritarian state in implementing modernization programs and restructuring economic institutions. A number of historical studies have examined the administrative and institutional reforms introduced during the Reza Shah period, particularly the expansion of bureaucracy, the establishment of modern legal institutions, and the centralization of political authority. These studies highlight how modernization policies contributed to the formation of a centralized political structure and a state-dominated economic system. Other research has focused on the intellectual foundations of modernization in Iran, particularly the influence of modernism and nationalist thought on the political elite. These studies argue that the modernist worldview of political leaders played an important role in shaping economic development strategies and the expansion of state intervention in the economy. Despite these contributions, relatively limited attention has been paid to the relationship between the political economy of the Reza Shah era and Iran’s foreign policy orientation. In particular, the interaction between authoritarian state structures, modernization strategies, and diplomatic behavior remains insufficiently explored. Therefore, this study seeks to address this gap by examining how domestic political economy influenced Iran’s diplomatic strategies and international positioning. Methodology The present research adopts a historical-analytical approach. Data collection is primarily based on library research and the examination of historical documents, scholarly articles, and academic books related to Iran’s political economy and modernization during the Reza Shah period. The theoretical framework of the study is based on the concepts of the authoritarian state and top-down modernization. These concepts provide analytical tools for understanding how modernization and economic development policies were implemented through centralized state authority rather than through participatory or socially driven processes. Through qualitative analysis of institutional reforms, economic policies, and diplomatic practices, the study examines the relationship between political centralization, modernization strategies, and economic governance in Iran during the early twentieth century. Results The findings of this research indicate that the political economy of the Reza Shah era was shaped by a close relationship between political centralization and modernization-oriented development policies. Inspired by Western models of modernization and modernism, the Iranian government expanded state institutions and strengthened administrative structures in order to promote economic development. The expansion of bureaucracy, the creation of modern legal and administrative institutions, and increased state control over key economic sectors led to the formation of a semi-modern economic system characterized by strong state intervention and limited market autonomy. Within this framework, the authoritarian state played a central role in directing economic activities and implementing modernization programs. At the same time, traditional social forces such as tribal authorities and religious institutions were gradually weakened or subordinated to the central government. In the sphere of foreign policy, this political-economic structure encouraged a pragmatic and strategic diplomatic approach aimed at balancing relations among major powers while seeking external resources to support national economic development. Discussion The experience of modernization in Iran during the Reza Shah period demonstrates the complex interaction between state authority, modernist ideology, and economic transformation. The state sought to accelerate economic development by adopting centralized policies and strengthening bureaucratic institutions. However, this process occurred in a context where civil society remained weak and social participation in political and economic decision-making was limited. As a result, modernization policies were implemented primarily through top-down mechanisms controlled by the authoritarian state. Although these policies contributed to infrastructural expansion and institutional development, they also reinforced patterns of centralized governance and state dominance over economic activities. Furthermore, the political economy of this period significantly influenced Iran’s diplomatic behavior. The government adopted a pragmatic foreign policy aimed at balancing relations with major powers while using international engagement as a means to advance modernization and economic development goals. However, reliance on external actors also exposed the country to international pressures and geopolitical constraints. Conclusion The political economy of the Reza Shah period played a crucial role in shaping the foundations of the modern Iranian state. Through centralized governance and modernization policies inspired by modernist ideas, the government established new administrative institutions and promoted economic development. However, the dominance of the authoritarian state and the limited participation of social institutions created structural imbalances within the development process. The absence of strong intermediary institutions and civil society organizations restricted the prospects for inclusive and sustainable economic development. Consequently, the legacy of this period can be observed in the enduring patterns of centralized governance, state intervention in economic affairs, and security-oriented political structures in Iran. The experience of top-down modernization during the Reza Shah era therefore highlights the long-term implications of authoritarian development strategies for both domestic governance and the broader political economy of modern Iran.