The American model in the people's war against the Islamic Republic of Iran

Document Type : research Artichel

Authors

1 PhD in Strategic Defense Sciences; Supreme National Defense University

2 PhD in Future Studies; Supreme National Defense University

3 Senior researcher of Holly Defense Science Researcher Center

Abstract

The Islamic Revolution led the United States to take hostile action against the Islamic Republic of Iran. This behavior includes the vast range of hard, semi-hard, and soft military methodes. In this regard, it seems that the focus of the enemies is on the Iranian people, as the Supreme Leader of Iran points out that "the aim of the enemies is to deprive the holy system of the Islamic Republic of the support of the people, which is a great support for the country; "... Incidentally, the main target is the people". This study seeks to answer this question which asks “how does the United States influence the Iranian people in its possible actions against the Islamic Republic of Iran to attain its goals.” based on ground theory methods and western related reports of Iran. Therefore, its strategy is exploratory and qualitative and has no hypothesis and it’s applied-developmental in terms of purpose. In order to validate the results, a members control or accountability approach has been used. The results show that the United States is well aware of the role and vital impact of the support of the Iranian people on the stability and consistency of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Therefore, there has been every attempt to influence the people in various ways, such as: economic, political, cultural, defense, etc, so that they feel disappointment about the efficiency of the current system of the Islamic Republic of Iran and weaken their support of the government and the system. In the meantime, economic pressure, prevention of resistance economics, as well as creating pessimism and consideration of research activities and the development of defense technologies in the people’s mind, self-imposed by state organizations and private sectors, and universities are important factors and consequences of this behavior. The result of this behavior is that on the one hand the resilience of the society and the mobilizing power of the government and system of the Islamic Republic of Iran is decrease, and on the other hand, the mobilizing power of the United States and the enemies of the Islamic Republic of Iran is increased.

Keywords

References

  1. الف. منابع فارسی

    1. کرسول، جان دبلیو (2007). طرح پژوهش (رویکردهای کمی، کیفی و شیوه‌های ترکیبی)، ترجمه: حسن دانایی‌فرد و علی صالحی، تهران، مؤسسه کتاب مهربان نشر

    2. کلانتری، فتح‌الله (1394). واکاوی راهبردهای نظامی آمریکا در جنگ های حال و آینده، فصلنامه راهبرد دفاعی، سال سیزدهم، شماره 51.

    3.  گوهری مقدم، ابوذر (1392)، الگوی رفتاری آمریکا در قبال بیداری اسلامی: عمل‌گرایی محتاطانه، پژوهش‌های راهبردی سیاست، دوره 2، شماره 6، شماره پیاپی 6.

    4. فولادی، قاسم، صابرفرد، علیرضا (1390)، واکاوی مدل رفتاری آمریکا علیه جمهوری اسلامی ایران، تهران، مؤسسه آموزشی و تحقیقاتی صنایع دفاع، مرکز آینده‌پژوهی علوم و فناوری دفاعی

    5. فولادی، قاسم، رحیمی، غلامحسین (1394)، مدل راهبردی رفتار آمریکا در جنگ نرم علیه جمهوری اسلامی ایران، فصلنامه مطالعات بین‌رشته‌ای دانش راهبردی، دوره 5، شماره 18.

     

    ب. منابع انگلیسی

    1. Boyd, John (2007). Patterns of War, briefing slides, Pentagon, VA. https://geekboss.com/boyd-patterns-of-conflict.
    2. Cordesman, Anthony (2008). The Lessons of the Israeli-Lebanon War, Center for Strategic and International Studies.
    3. DoD (2007). Irregular warfare, U.S Joint Force Command. https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/concepts/joc_iw_v1.pdf
    4. Emery, Norman; Werchan, Jason; Mowles, Donald G. (2005). Fighting Terrorism and Insurgency: Shaping the Information Environment, MILITARY REVIEW.
    5. Gavrilis, James A. (2009). A Model for Population-Centered Warfare: A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing and Understanding the Theory and Practice of Insurgency and Counterinsurgency, Small Wars Foundation.
    6. Jones, Seth G. (2019). United States’ Soft War with Iran. CSIS.
    7. McCuen, John (2007). The Art of Counter-Revolutionary War, —The Strategy of Counter-Insurgency (Harrisburg, Pa: Stackpole Books, 1967).
    8. Nye, Joseph S. Jr(2004). Soft Power: The Means To Success In World Politics, amazon book.
    9. Rupert Smith (2005). The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern War, Barnes&Noble.com (London: Allen Lane).
    10. Seyyed Ali Mortazavi Emami, Seyed Javad Emamjomehzadeh, Hosein Harsij and Hosein Masoudnia (2014). Soft Warfare Theory. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 22 (10).
    11. THOMAS A. MARKS, SEBASTIAN L.v. GORKA, AND ROBERT SHARP (2012). Getting the Next War Right Beyond Population-centric Warfare. PRISM 1 No.3.
    12. Vest, Jason (2008). Fourth Generation Warfare, The Atlantic.com, December.
Defence Studies
Volume 19, Issue 4 - Serial Number 76
All of the articles in this number are research.
December 2021
Pages 33-61

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics