This study investigates the conceptual and strategic evolution of Iranian foreign policy as articulated in official discourse. It examines how Iranian foreign policy concepts are articulated in official discourse by applying frame analysis to speeches by Iranian leaders, constitutional provisions and state strategic documents and traces how terms such as martyrdom, Global Arrogance and self-sufficiency are made salient to define threats, interpret causes and recommend policy responses. Revolutionary discourse functions as an attempt to articulate an alternative model of governance that aspires to elevate Iran's standing in both the Islamic world and the broader international arena. Persistent tensions exist within this discourse, including between ideological export and political continuity and between pan-Islamic solidarity and Iranian nationalism. The study does not claim that discourse determines policy outcomes but rather traces how official narratives provide a framework for understanding Iranian strategic thinking.
Alibabalu et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: