Faith or Ideology? Religiosity, Political Islam, and Anti-Americanism in Iran

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 545-559
Author(s):  
Peyman Asadzade
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Systematic Study ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Islam ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
The Government ◽  
Original Survey

Abstract The Middle East, particularly the Islamic Republic of Iran, has a reputation for harboring very strong forms of anti-Americanism. Why are some individuals more hostile to the United States than others? What factors are associated with anti-American sentiments? This article offers the first systematic study of anti-Americanism in Iran, a country in which anti-Americanism has been a guiding policy of the government since the 1979 revolution. Based on original survey data from 2016, I seek to explain how religiosity and political Islam influence public attitudes toward the United States. Distinguishing between political and cultural anti-Americanism, I find that, while support for political Islam is significantly associated with both types of anti-Americanism, religiosity predicts only cultural anti-Americanism. The findings challenge the literature that associates anti-American sentiments with religiosity in the Islamic world.

R. N. Pomeroy v. Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran

1984 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 240-243
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Capital Stock ◽  
The United States ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Administrative Services ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
The Government ◽  
Planning Development

Claimants, sole owners of capital stock in Pomeroy Corporation (Pomeroy), a Liberian corporation, filed a claim against respondent, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, before the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal for amounts allegedly due Pomeroy under a contract for the provision of planning, development and administrative services to the Iranian Navy. Respondent challenged the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, contending that claimants could not assert the contract rights of Pomeroy because it was not a national of the United States. In addition, respondent disputed the validity of the contract and, in the alternative, alleged that Pomeroy had breached the contract. Chamber Three rejected the jurisdictional challenge, holding, that since the claimants owned a controlling interest in the corporation, they indirectly owned the claims of the corporation. As U.S. nationals, they were proper parties to assert those claims before the Tribunal. The Chamber also held that a contract existed between the parties and awarded claimants amounts due for services rendered, an estimated amount for lost profits, and interest and costs.

Phillips Petroleum Co. Iran v. Islamic Republic of Iran

1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. 184-191
Author(s):  
David P. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Flow Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Discounted Cash Flow ◽  
Phillips Petroleum ◽  
Wholly Owned Subsidiary ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Persian Gulf

Phillips Petroleum Co. Iran, a wholly owned subsidiary of Phillips Petroleum Co., brought a claim before the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal against the Islamic Republic of Iran and the National Iranian Oil Co. (NIOC) seeking compensation for the alleged taking of its rights under a joint agreement for the exploration and exploitation of petroleum resources in the Persian Gulf. Chamber Two of the Tribunal concluded that the claimant had been deprived of its property interests during the Iranian Revolution by conduct attributable to the Government of Iran for which respondents were liable to provide compensation. Affirming earlier decisions that the 1955 Treaty of Amity between the United States and Iran requires payment of “just compensation” representing the full equivalent of the property taken, the Tribunal accepted “discounted cash flow” analysis as a central method of determining that value. After making significant adjustments to claimant’s calculations, and considering “all relevant circumstances,” the Tribunal awarded claimant $55 million as the value of the expropriated property, with simple interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of loss to the date of payment from the Security Account.

scholarly journals Comparative Study of International Commercial Arbitration and International Law in Iran

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 242
Author(s):  
Soheila Hashemi ◽  
Nader Mardani
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
International Trading ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran

Arbitration is one of the most important solutions to end enmity and replace judicial inquest. As international trading is extended, referring to judgment to solve the conflicts caused by commercial contracts has been rapidly rising which is a result of judgment benefits over justice authorities. Fastness and efficiency, law inquest cost, compromise nature of selecting the referees, and professional selection are among the most evident specifications of arbitration. Furthermore, Iran’s involvement in the most significant judgment case of the last century i.e. the lawsuits filed between the Islamic Republic of Iran the United States of America after the victory of the revolution would double the essentiality of knowing this organization. Judgment may be either individual or organic (permanent) and also the number of referees needs to be one or three. The most important issue in the judge’s inquest is to follow two factors including independence and impartiality from the beginning until the end of the inquest process. Violating these characteristics or the lack of one of both or other descriptions predicted in the arbitration contract would result in its violation by one side of the conflict or both of them. In the present paper, a comparison is conducted between the commonalty and distinction of Iran’s international commercial arbitration in 1376 and international law.

scholarly journals Review of Discourse Components of Islamic Republic of Iran in the Middle East

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Reza Abedi Gonabad ◽  
Ebrahim Fayaz ◽  
Ahmad Naderi
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Political Islam ◽  
Political Protest ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Data Description ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Social ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
And Function

With the victory of the Islamic Revolution, some shift in paradigm or the shift of discourse is observed in Iran. Islamic Republic System of Iran that was replaced instead of Pahlavi Regime took different discourse, behavior and function practically in addition to domestic policy at the level of foreign policy at the level of the Middle East or West of Asia and North of Africa and this approach was definitely different from the past. The discourse had a central indication of jurisprudential political Islam as the social and political protest against national Iranian radical otherness, western quasi-modernism, secularism and militarism of Pahlavism Discourse, which was created by the friction and dialectic between dominant discourses of similarity to west and discourses different from the west. In this study, 4 components and indices of anti-arrogance Islamism, monist Shiism (establishment of the Islamic Ummah), independence and anti-order orientation based on supporting Axis of Resistance against Axis of Compromise are explained as discourse components of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Middle East. The data analysis method in this study is mainly based on qualitative methods. Moreover, this study has used data description and analysis using documentary references and methods and through referring to the library and internet.

scholarly journals Chronological Study of Iran-U.S Relations (1785-1997)

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
Baharak Partowazar ◽  
Fakhreddin Soltani
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Islamic Republic ◽  
Islamic Revolution ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
Pahlavi Dynasty ◽  
Diplomatic Relationship

Relationship between Iran and the United States started with a Trade Agreement during Qajar dynasty during Amir Kabir chancellorship, though formal diplomatic relationship was not established until 1944.During Pahlavi dynasty, their relationship improved and after the Islamic revolution their relationship transformedinto the hostility.Therefore, Iran-U.S relation has experienced complex changes. This article attempts to study major shifts in Iran-U.S relationssince Qajar dynasty until the end of Rafsanjani presidency in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document