The International Institute of Peace: Difference between revisions

(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 68:

===General Critique and Distrust of International Organizations===

From the perspective of Iranian policymakers and scholars, international organizations-including peace institutes-are often viewed with skepticism due to perceived Western dominance and double standards. This mistrust stems from several historical and political experiences:

* Perceived Bias and Double Standards: Iranian elites frequently argue that international organizations, established and influenced by Western powers, have demonstrated partiality-especially regarding Iran’s nuclear program, human rights, and regional security ~~issues3~~. The belief is that these organizations have failed to treat Iran fairly, applying standards inconsistently and serving the interests of dominant global powers rather than upholding universal principles<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html<ref>.

* Perceived Bias and Double Standards: Iranian elites frequently argue that international organizations, established and influenced by Western powers, have demonstrated partiality-especially regarding Iran’s nuclear program, human rights, and regional security issues<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>. The belief is that these organizations have failed to treat Iran fairly, applying standards inconsistently and serving the interests of dominant global powers rather than upholding universal principles<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>.

* Historical Grievances: Iran’s experience with the United Nations during the Iran-Iraq War, where the Security Council was seen as failing to remain impartial, has deepened this mistrust. Such historical episodes reinforce the perception that international organizations act more as instruments of Western policy than as neutral arbiters <ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>.

===Concerns about Hidden Objectives===

Iranian analysts and officials sometimes suggest that behind the stated goals of peace and conflict resolution, such institutes may pursue hidden agendas:

* Influence Operations and Narrative Shaping: There is concern that think tanks and peace institutes serve as tools for soft power, aiming to shape regional narratives and public opinion in ways that align with Western or adversarial ~~interests5~~. For example, the influence of think tanks and their analyses in regional media is seen as a way to legitimize certain foreign policies and delegitimize Iran’s positions, particularly regarding resistance movements and regional deterrence ~~strategies5~~.

* Influence Operations and Narrative Shaping: There is concern that think tanks and peace institutes serve as tools for soft power, aiming to shape regional narratives and public opinion in ways that align with Western or adversarial interests<ref>IPIS. (2024, May 5). The most prominent analytical opinions regarding the conflict between Iran and the Zionist regime. https://www.ipis.ir/en/subjectview/746389/the-most-prominent-analytical-opinions-regarding-the-conflict-between-iran-and-the-zionist-regime</ref>. For example, the influence of think tanks and their analyses in regional media is seen as a way to legitimize certain foreign policies and delegitimize Iran’s positions, particularly regarding resistance movements and regional deterrence strategies<ref>IPIS. (2024, May 5). The most prominent analytical opinions regarding the conflict between Iran and the Zionist regime. https://www.ipis.ir/en/subjectview/746389/the-most-prominent-analytical-opinions-regarding-the-conflict-between-iran-and-the-zionist-regime</ref>.

* Policy Instrumentalization: Institutes may be perceived as supporting the strategic objectives of Western governments, especially in areas like sanctions, nuclear negotiations, and regional security, rather than genuinely advancing impartial peace<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>4. This is reinforced by the experience of economic sanctions, which, despite humanitarian exemptions, have had severe impacts on the Iranian population, leading to the belief that such measures are part of a broader strategy of coercion rather than ~~peacebuilding4~~.

* Policy Instrumentalization: Institutes may be perceived as supporting the strategic objectives of Western governments, especially in areas like sanctions, nuclear negotiations, and regional security, rather than genuinely advancing impartial peace<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref> <ref>Shams, L., & Rahimi, H. (2018). Assessment of the Effects of Economic Sanctions on Iranians' Right to Health. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 47(1), 1–12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5953521/</ref>. This is reinforced by the experience of economic sanctions, which, despite humanitarian exemptions, have had severe impacts on the Iranian population, leading to the belief that such measures are part of a broader strategy of coercion rather than peacebuilding<ref>Shams, L., & Rahimi, H. (2018). Assessment of the Effects of Economic Sanctions on Iranians' Right to Health. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 47(1), 1–12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5953521/</ref>.

===Concerns about Infiltration and Counter-Narratives===

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 ===General Critique and Distrust of International Organizations===
 From the perspective of Iranian policymakers and scholars, international organizations-including peace institutes-are often viewed with skepticism due to perceived Western dominance and double standards. This mistrust stems from several historical and political experiences:
-* Perceived Bias and Double Standards: Iranian elites frequently argue that international organizations, established and influenced by Western powers, have demonstrated partiality-especially regarding Iran’s nuclear program, human rights, and regional security issues3. The belief is that these organizations have failed to treat Iran fairly, applying standards inconsistently and serving the interests of dominant global powers rather than upholding universal principles<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html<ref>.
+* Perceived Bias and Double Standards: Iranian elites frequently argue that international organizations, established and influenced by Western powers, have demonstrated partiality-especially regarding Iran’s nuclear program, human rights, and regional security issues<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>. The belief is that these organizations have failed to treat Iran fairly, applying standards inconsistently and serving the interests of dominant global powers rather than upholding universal principles<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>.
 * Historical Grievances: Iran’s experience with the United Nations during the Iran-Iraq War, where the Security Council was seen as failing to remain impartial, has deepened this mistrust. Such historical episodes reinforce the perception that international organizations act more as instruments of Western policy than as neutral arbiters <ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>.
 ===Concerns about Hidden Objectives===
 Iranian analysts and officials sometimes suggest that behind the stated goals of peace and conflict resolution, such institutes may pursue hidden agendas:
-* Influence Operations and Narrative Shaping: There is concern that think tanks and peace institutes serve as tools for soft power, aiming to shape regional narratives and public opinion in ways that align with Western or adversarial interests5. For example, the influence of think tanks and their analyses in regional media is seen as a way to legitimize certain foreign policies and delegitimize Iran’s positions, particularly regarding resistance movements and regional deterrence strategies5.
+* Influence Operations and Narrative Shaping: There is concern that think tanks and peace institutes serve as tools for soft power, aiming to shape regional narratives and public opinion in ways that align with Western or adversarial interests<ref>IPIS. (2024, May 5). The most prominent analytical opinions regarding the conflict between Iran and the Zionist regime. https://www.ipis.ir/en/subjectview/746389/the-most-prominent-analytical-opinions-regarding-the-conflict-between-iran-and-the-zionist-regime</ref>. For example, the influence of think tanks and their analyses in regional media is seen as a way to legitimize certain foreign policies and delegitimize Iran’s positions, particularly regarding resistance movements and regional deterrence strategies<ref>IPIS. (2024, May 5). The most prominent analytical opinions regarding the conflict between Iran and the Zionist regime. https://www.ipis.ir/en/subjectview/746389/the-most-prominent-analytical-opinions-regarding-the-conflict-between-iran-and-the-zionist-regime</ref>.
-* Policy Instrumentalization: Institutes may be perceived as supporting the strategic objectives of Western governments, especially in areas like sanctions, nuclear negotiations, and regional security, rather than genuinely advancing impartial peace<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref>4. This is reinforced by the experience of economic sanctions, which, despite humanitarian exemptions, have had severe impacts on the Iranian population, leading to the belief that such measures are part of a broader strategy of coercion rather than peacebuilding4.
+* Policy Instrumentalization: Institutes may be perceived as supporting the strategic objectives of Western governments, especially in areas like sanctions, nuclear negotiations, and regional security, rather than genuinely advancing impartial peace<ref>Eslami, M. (2007). Iran's Foreign Policy Approaches toward International Organizations. World Studies Quarterly, 65218. https://wsps.ut.ac.ir/article_65218.html</ref> <ref>Shams, L., & Rahimi, H. (2018). Assessment of the Effects of Economic Sanctions on Iranians' Right to Health. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 47(1), 1–12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5953521/</ref>. This is reinforced by the experience of economic sanctions, which, despite humanitarian exemptions, have had severe impacts on the Iranian population, leading to the belief that such measures are part of a broader strategy of coercion rather than peacebuilding<ref>Shams, L., & Rahimi, H. (2018). Assessment of the Effects of Economic Sanctions on Iranians' Right to Health. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 47(1), 1–12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5953521/</ref>.
 ===Concerns about Infiltration and Counter-Narratives===