SpringerLink
Log in

Critical analysis of the representation of government in cyberspace; case study of the Islamic Republic of Iran

  • Published:
GeoJournal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the growth of communication and the development of cyberspace, governments have offered various interpretations of basic policy concepts such as sovereignty, borders, identity and nation. Due to the impact and influence of cyberspace on government policies, it is necessary to conduct new research on these issues. Meanwhile, the representation of political concepts and its role in strengthening and weakening the ruling discourse is one of the most important issues in critical discourse analysis. The present study tries to analyze the propositions of the four constructions of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran (theocratic, bureaucratic, democratic and military) about cyberspace at three levels of description, interpretation and explanation by using the method of Fairclough critical discourse analysis, in this way, specify how the government is represented and its role in strengthening or weakening the discourse. The hypothesis of the present study shows that the representation of sovereignty in the discourse of power structures in Iran is realistic and pessimistic and tries to create a new critical atmosphere by relying on national sovereignty and maintaining national security.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Leader and President of the country.

  2. Member of the Supreme Leader, Secretary of the Guardian Council, Chairman of the Assembly of Leadership Experts, Member of the Expediency Council and Member of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution.

  3. Minister of Communications of the Thirteenth Government.

  4. Member of the Presidium of the Assembly of Leadership Experts, Member of the Guardian Council Jurists, Qom Seminary Teachers Association, Supreme Council of the World Assembly of Ahl al-Bayt, Temporary Friday prayer leader of Tehran and Supreme Council of Seminaries.

  5. He is an Iranian Shiite Islamic cleric who has been described as a "fundamentalist" and an "extremist." He is the Friday prayer leader of Mashhad and the representative of the Supreme Leader in Khorasan Razavi.

  6. Shiite cleric, author and interpreter of the Qur'an and authority on matters of religion.

  7. Clergy, judge and head of the judiciary.

  8. Commander of the IRGC.

  9. Member of Parliament.

  10. Clergy, a reformist politician and the fifth president of Iran.

  11. Clergy and the president of the former government of Iran.

  12. He is an Iranian politician who was the sixth president of Iran from 2005 to 2013.

  13. He is an Iranian politician and chief executive officer who served as Minister of Communications and Information Technology in Hassan Rouhani's government from 2017 to 2014.

  14. Faqih Muslim, an independent Iranian politician, has been working as the eighth president of Iran since 12 August 2021.

References

  • Abazari, M. H., Fard, Izadi, & Akbar, Ali. (2017). Passive defense in cyberspace and explaining the role of governments and religious institutions. Hayat Tayyeba Quarterly, 15, 149–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbasi, M. (2017). Sustainable national security in the age of globalization. University Jihad Organization.

  • ACCORD-Austrian Centre for Country of Origin & Asylum Research and Documentation. Iran: Capacity and methods of authorities to monitor online activities and religious activities of Iranians living abroad Query Response [a-10098]. (12 June 2017).

  • Akasheh, M. (2005). Language of political speech: A comparative linguistic study in the field of connection theory. Egypt: Publication Office.

  • Alvandi, R. (2017). Nixon, Kissinger and the Shah: The United States and Iran in the Cold War. Pareseh.

  • Azandahi, B. M., & AhmadiAnsarizadeh, F. M. S. (2013). Explaining the concept of border in Iran’s political-cyberspace. Geography Quarterly, 36, 291–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azghandi, Seyed Alireza. (2018). History of political and social developments in Iran (1357–1320). samt.

  • Baezner, M., & Patrice, R. (2018). Trend Analysis: Cyber Sovereignty Zürich. Center for Security Studies (CSS) ETH.

  • Bodin, J. (1576). Six Books of the Commonwealth. Oxford, England.

  • Castells, M. (2019). The power of communication. Translated by Hossein Basirian Jahromi, Scientific and Cultural Publishing Company.

  • Desforges, A. (2014). Representations of cyberspace: A geopolitical tool. In Hérodote (vol 152–153, Issue 1–2, 2014, pages 67 to 81). Translated from the French by JPD Systems. ISSN 0338–487X. Available online at: https://www.cairn-int.info/journal-herodote-2014-1-page-67.htm

  • Dorpar M. (2012). Critical stylistics as a new approach to stylistics based on critical discourse analysis. LCQ, 5(17). http://lcq.modares.ac.ir/article-29-4261-fa.html

  • Emery, C. (2018). Us Foreign Policy and the Iranian Revolution: The Cold War Dynamics of Engagement and Strategic Alliance. Ghoqnos.

  • Eslami, R. (2014). Liberation or Subjugation. Political Philosophy of Information Technology, Tisa.

  • Everard, J. (2000). Cyber States the Internet and the Boundaries of the Nation-state. Rutledge Publication.

  • Fairclough, N. (2000). Analysis of critical discourse. Translated by Piran et al. Tehran: Center for Media Studies and Research.

  • Fairclough, N. (2008). Critical analysis of discourse, (FS. Piran et al. Trans). Office of Media Studies and Development, Tehran.

  • Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis. London: Longman.

  • Fairclough, N. (2019). Critical discourse of Analysis, translated by (R. ghasemi, A. Ehsan, Trans). Tehran.

  • Firoozabadi, Dehghani, & Jalal, Seyed. (2013). Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran,. Samt.

  • Foltz, A. C. (2012). Stuxnet, schmitt analysis, and the cyber use-of-force debate. in 4th quarter Members of International Telecommunications Union and UN Institute for Training and Research confer on cyber security, ndupress.ndu.edu.

  • Foran, J. (1998). Fragile Resistance: Social Transformation in Iran from 1500 to the Revolution. Expressive Cultural Services.

  • Ghaffari, M., & Lal Alizadeh, M. (2008). The impact of information and communication technologies on the political components of national sovereignty by examining the situation in Iran. Politics Quarterly, 1, 189–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, L. R. (2016). Toward Representational Sovereignty: Rewards and Challenges of Indigenous Media in the A’uwẽ-Xavante Communities of Eténhiritipa Pimentel Barbosa. Media and Communication, 4(2), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v4i2.438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajat, M. G., & Nosrati, H. (2013). Cyberspace, challenges of sovereignty and sustainable security. Journal of Disciplinary Geography, 2, 94–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heydari, M. A., & Hussein, A. (2017). The responsibility of religious government in protecting the ideological boundaries of citizens in cyberspace (from the perspective of jurisprudence and law). Pure Life, 19, 80–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heywood, A. (2018). Global POLITICS. Ghoqnos: Tehran.

  • Jahangir, K. (2006). Globalization and its impact on national governments and global authority. Politics Quarterly, 4, 75–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamshidi, A., & Sadeghi, S. (2017). Analyzing the role of United States of America in the iran-iraq war. Studies of Holy Defense and Contemporary Battles, 2, 281–302.

  • Lenczowski, G. (1973). Russia and the West in Iran, 1918-1948. (H. Yavari, Trans.). Ibn Sina Publications: Tehran.

  • Lotrionte, C. (2013). State sovereignty and self-defense in cyberspace: A normative framework for balancing legal rights. Emory Int Law Rev, 26, 825–919.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, D., & Stoker, J. (2020). Methods and Theory in Political Science. Research Institute for Strategic Studies.

  • Milani, M. (2002). The Formation of the Islamic Revolution from the Pahlavi Dynasty to the Islamic Republic (M. Attarzadeh,Trans.). Game now: Tehran.

  • Mills, S. (2003). Discourse, translated by Fattah Mohammadi. Zanjan: Hezareh sevom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, M. (2018). Sovereignty and Cyberspace: Institutions and Internet governance. Georgia Institute of Technology School of Public Policy.

  • Mueller, M. L. (2019). Against sovereignty in cyberspace. International Studies Review, 2019, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iran Cybersecurity Policy (2021, June). National Centre or Responsible Agency. UNIDIR. Cyber Policy Portal: www.cyberpolice.ir.

  • Ohmae, K. (1995). The end of the nation-state: The rise of regional economies. Free Press.

  • Razaghi, A. (2013). Rule and velayat-e-faqih in shiite political thought. Research in History, 4, 25–41.

  • Rezaei, A., & Afshari, M. (2018). The role of government in cyberspace management from the perspective of the Iranian constitution. Quarterly Journal of Political and International Research, 37, 320–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, R. (2012). Richard Clarke on Who Was Behind the Stuxnet Attack. www.Smithsonianmag.com: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/rich.

  • Rugge, Fabio, & Massolo, A. (2018). Confronting an “Axis of Cyber”? China, Iran, North Korea Russia in Cyberspace. Ledizioni LediPublishing.

  • Salamatian, L., Douzet, F., Limonier, K., & Salamatian, K. (2019). The geopolitics behind the routes data travels: A case study of Iran. Networking and Internet Architecture, 1, 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. N., & Vihul, L. (2017). Respect for sovereignty in cyberspace. Texas Law Review, 95, 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soltani, A. A. (2005). Discourse analysis as theory and method. Journal of Political Science, 28, 153–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDOS-US Department of State: Country Report on Human Rights Practices. 2017. Iran, (Available at ecoi.net): http://www.ecoi.net/local_link/337185/466945_en.htmhttps://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2017/05/12/ghassem-soleimani-le-gardien-de-l-iran_5126707_3218.html (3 March 2017)

  • West, S. (2014). Globalizing internet governance: Negotiating cyberspace agreements in the post-snowden era. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2418762

  • Wolff, H. (2012). Legal Implications of Territorial Sovereignty in Cyberspace. In 4th International Conference on Cyber Conflict C. Czosseck, R. Ottis, K. Ziolkowski. (Eds.) 2012 © NATO CCD COE Publications, Tallinn. Frankfurt (Oder), Germany.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

    Rohollah Eslami & Afsane Danesh

Authors
  1. Rohollah Eslami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Afsane Danesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rohollah Eslami.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eslami, R., Danesh, A. Critical analysis of the representation of government in cyberspace; case study of the Islamic Republic of Iran. GeoJournal 88, 1215–1230 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-022-10675-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-022-10675-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation