The Iran-Iraq War, one of the longest wars in the 20th century, deeply affected both countries. In Iran, one aspect of this has been the formation of a specific war culture; a culture that began to take shape from the earliest days of the conflict and continues until today. At the heart of it is a particular concept of martyrdom rooted in ideas based on the Karbala paradigm, thoroughly adapted to the contemporary socio-political context framed by the Iraqi invasion and the 1979 Revolution. It is a concept which has permeated all aspects of state-sponsored discourse on the war. Literature has become one of the most salient sites of reflection of Iranian war culture. Literary output about the war--in the forms of prose fiction, poetry and memoir--has been immense, yet, until very recently remained largely unexplored by scholars of Iranian studies in the west as well as in Iran. A cursory look at the existing studies on Iranian war literature immediately makes apparent the need for this field to be investigated more thoroughly. This is especially true when one realizes that literature has also proven to be one of the most vibrant sites of struggle between proponents of the Iranian state's ideology and its critics. By examining works in the genres of memoir and fiction by major contemporary Iranian authors such as Shahriar Mandanipour, Ahmad Dehqan, Hossein Mortezian Abkenar and Zahra Hosseini this paper will focus on the literary figure of the martyr and the concept of martyrdom, demonstrating the ways in which literature has become a critical semiotic site for discursive battles on the Iran-Iraq War. In examining works by these authors and others, this paper will show how the martyr has been re-imagined and depicted in various ways that transform notions of heroism, masculinity and bravery. Additionally, it will highlight continuity and change within Iranian war writing and explore the ways in which authors have sought to problematize the concept of martyrdom, and by extension, issue a challenge to one of the ideological underpinnings of the official discourse on the Iran-Iraq War.

This paper contextualizes contemporary discussion of the evolving notion(s) of transnational feminist networks by examining the case of Iran since the 1997 election of (former president) Mohammed Khatami. I center the paper around the One Million Signatures Campaign for Equality, a nationally-focused grassroots effort that combines demands for legal gender equality with a public education campaign involving women and men across socio-economic boundaries and the urban/rural divide. Combining grassroots organizing with transnational networking, the campaign attempts to maintain autonomy and authenticity in the face of growing international visibility and support. I explore the ways in which campaign activists employ tools such as the internet, as well as more conventional or hegemonic international spaces such as UN conferences, to forge strategic alliances with other women transnationally, reflecting on the benefits and dangers of these acts of solidarity. I also examine some of the limitations imposed on the campaign, both by national and global political realities and by the strategies it uses to address the particularities of Iranian women's varied needs while deploying a universalist language of human rights. Finally, I reflect on what activists and scholars of transnational feminism can learn about our theories of transnational feminist solidarity in light of contemporary Iranian women's activism. By examining the benefits and risks of transnational practices by a nationally-focused Iranian women's campaign, my paper contributes to theorizing on transnationality, global feminisms, and Iranian/Diaspora Studies at a moment of increased international focus on the evolving political situation in Iran.

The occurrence of the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979 followed by a broad "institutionalization" of political power, led to some unique consequences with regard to the domestic and, more importantly, the international politics of the country. Iran was, as a result, suddenly transformed to an independent, proactively religious power in the region. The impacts on Iran's security decision-making process have been one of the most challenging controversies in foreign policy analysis and security studies. This paper attempts to explore in evolution of Iran's security structure and the extent to which the bureaucratic structures impact the actual process of security-related policy-making. It investigates the role of the revolution on the Iranian security complex and associated institutions. Moreover, it will aim to explore the dynamics related to the formation of institutions --what structures were established, To what extend the formation and evolution of institutions and councils affect the security policy-making? Although "formal" security policy-making process is still largely in the exclusive domain of the Supreme leader, this paper argues that the Iran-Iraq war has considerably affected the engagement of institutions and organizations in security related policy-making structures in Iran. The approach to this analysis will be based on interviews, analysis of the content of available archives and discourse analysis. I will be choosing different security decision-making cases as examples. In order to assure that the argument in this respect provides a credible analysis, capturing factors leading to crisis decision-making, I will pick my cases from a combination of crisis decision-making in regional and international security terms together with cases assessed as being of low-risk but nonetheless invoking the same decision-making mechanisms. The paper thus argues that bureaucracies and institution have gained an important role in security policy-making structures in Iran, through "formal" and "informal" action channels. It concludes that the security related policies is tilting towards reflecting different organizational and strategic standpoints on each issue. Thus, the institutional and bureaucratic mechanisms have had an increasing role in shaping the security-related decisions.

The aftermath of the disputed presidential elections in June 2009 stunned not only the world but also the leaders of the Islamic Republic. Whereas on the surface, the elections seem to have ushered in a second term for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the street demonstrations as well as the acts of resistance and defiance by those who continue to argue that their 'vote was stolen', show that the elections have, in fact, helped to broaden the base and appeal of a reformist opposition movement which having been considered largely ineffective if not 'dead' by 2006, has now been given new life in its most recent reincarnation as the 'Green Movement.' This paper considers the genealogy of the Green Movement. More specifically, it examines the reformist movement from its earliest days on two levels, as discourse and as political project. That is, by using the reformist press as the main source of enquiry, this paper will, in the first place, discuss what was understood by reform and reformism in the early years, at the height of the movement between 1998 and 2000, and thus outline its key components and principles. It will, in particular, delineate the debate that took place among reformists such as Said Hajjarian, Alireza Alavitabar, Abbas Abdi and Seyyed Morteza Mardiha (among others) regarding the definition of 'reform' as opposed to 'revolution', and argue that the reformist discourse, from the outset, was neither pre-packaged nor its parameters well-defined. In fact, its main characteristic was its multi-vocality as well as the fact that it lacked ideology. Secondly, by examining the instances when reformism emerged as a political project, that is as a means to achieve power, as in the cases of Muhammad Khatami's two presidencies, or the recent presidential campaign of Mir-Hossein Moussavi in summer 2009, this paper will assess the paradoxes and inconsistencies of the reformist movement on the one hand, and on the other, speculate on its ability to adapt and adjust to changing times.