واکاوی کارآمدی فقه سیاسی در عرصۀ سیاست خارجی دولت اسلامی براساس قانون اساسی جمهوری اسلامی ایران

Evaluating different theories from the perspective of efficacy in the realm of foreign policy leads to the advancement and benefit of states in political conduct. Shiite political jurisprudence, possessing diverse religious capacities, has a demonstrable framework for the foreign policy of the Islamic State. This is evident in the second, fourth, and fifth principles of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which mandate governance and legislation based on Islamic laws, continuous ijtihad by fully qualified jurists, and the theory of Wilāyat al-Faqīh (Guardianship of the Jurist). However, the jurisprudential model of the foreign policy of the Islamic State, from the perspective of theoretical explanation of the model and evaluation of its efficacy in the international system—especially by focusing on the jurisprudential approach and its application to constitutional principles—still requires completion and filling of gaps. The present research is written with the aim of examining the elements of efficacy in theories of international relations and political jurisprudence in the realm of foreign policy and their application in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The research question is: "What is the efficacy of the theory of political jurisprudence in the realm of foreign policy of the Islamic State based on the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran?" The research hypothesis is based on the premise that "The theory of Imami political jurisprudence has maximum efficacy in the realm of international relations and foreign policy of the Islamic State based on the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran." The research method is descriptive-analytical, with qualitative data processing and data collected through library-based study. The research structure is organized into three main sections: a) Analysis of the theory of efficacy in theories of international relations (examining the components of comprehensive security, acquisition of superior and discourse-building power, and stable cooperation and convergence); b) Analysis of jurisprudential rules in the realm of foreign policy of the Islamic State (emphasizing the two overarching general rules of 'Superiority and Denial
of Authority' and 'Denial of Oppression'); c) Application of the components of the jurisprudential model to the Constitution (assessing the indicators of political, military, economic independence, freedom of expression, relations based on justice and balance, adherence to treaties, and respect and good association). In theories of international relations, the efficacy of a state's foreign policy is measured in three areas: comprehensive security with an emphasis on expanding security to non-military levels; power acquisition centered on discourse-building; and maximum relations based on stable cooperation and convergence. Efficacy-based strategies also include six indicators: political independence, economic independence, freedom of expression in international stances, relations based on justice and balance, adherence to treaties, and respect and good association.
Consequently, the two rules of 'Superiority and Denial of Authority' (uluww wa-nafy
al-sabīl) and 'Denial of Oppression' (nafy al-ẓulm) in the heritage of Imami political jurisprudence, due to their absolute authority, non-specificity, and priority in cases of conflict and interference, constitute the main pillars of the foreign policy of the Islamic State. Other rules (such as invitation, amān (safe conduct), taqiyya (dissimulation), taʾlīf
al-qulūb (reconciliation of hearts)) are all defined within the framework of these two overarching principles. In applying these two jurisprudential rules to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, six strategic principles in foreign policy are enumerated:
First, political independence (Principle 146), which mandates the prohibition of any form of guardianship or domination by non-Muslims.
Second, military independence (Principles 145 and 146), which prohibits the presence of foreigners in the armed forces and the establishment of foreign military bases.
Third, economic independence (Principle 81 and Chapter Ten), which, in addition to forbidding exploitative contracts, considers the lack of a coherent plan as a clear instance of oppression.
Fourth, freedom of expression in support and condemnation (Principle 154), which obliges the state to strive for the removal of oppressive domination and to defend the oppressed.
Fifth, relations based on justice and balance (Principle 154), which bases foreign relations on equity, justice, and non-interference in the internal affairs of other nations.
Sixth, respect and good association (Principle 12), which, while extending justice, respects other religions and emphasizes moral balance in foreign policy.
The research results show that the jurisprudential model, based on the two pillars of 'independence' and 'denial of oppression', while realizing the three components of efficacy in international relations (comprehensive security, increasing discourse-building power, and developing cooperation and alliances), obliges the Islamic State to: political independence (negating subservience and foreign bases), military independence (self-sufficiency and deterrence), economic independence (resistance against sanctions and self-reliance), dignified diplomacy, freedom in defending the oppressed, adherence to treaties, and good association. The manifestation of these principles can be observed in the fundamental discourse of "Neither East, nor West" and the strategic triad of "Dignity, Wisdom, Expediency". A discourse that, relying on the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the foundations of Imami political jurisprudence, has led to the formation of a theoretical framework for the foreign policy of the Islamic State, enhancing its capacity to be presented at the level of theoretical discussions in international relations.