Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Preface -- Acknowledgment -- A Note on Translation, Transliteration, and Dates -- Praise For Political Participation In Iran From Khatami To The Green Movement -- Contents -- About the Author -- Abbreviations -- Chapter 1: Reformism and Political Participation in Iran -- Political Change and Participation -- The Short-Circuit -- Locating Political Participation and Reformism in the Relevant Scholarship -- Five Elements of Iran's Dissonant Institutionalisation -- Approaching Eslahat -- Non-insularity -- Power and Reformism: Contesting Governmentality -- Securitised Research: Navigating Fieldwork in Iran -- The Geopolitics of Political Participation -- Searching for Political Participation -- Book Content -- References -- Chapter 2: Political Participation in Context: Reformism and Elite Factionalism After the Iran-Iraq War -- The Foundations of Factional Politics -- Mobilising the Democratic Discourse: The velayat-e motlaqeh-ye faqih and the Constitutional Reform -- Mapping Iran's Factions -- The Rise of the Islamic Right and the Origin of Reformism During the 1990s -- The Decline of the Islamic Left -- The Islamic Left's Objections Against Marginalisation -- The Convergence of the Democratic Left and Right -- Political Expediency and the Transformation of the Islamic Left -- The Reform Era (1997-2005) -- The Reformists' Discursive Frames and Factional Conflicts -- Trends and Groups Within the Reformist Front -- Two Phases of the Reform Era -- Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 3: Reformism As a Governmental Project: The 'Reform Discourse' and Political Participation -- The Power of Discourse, the Discourse of Power -- Shifting Persuasions -- Recurring Themes -- National History, Anti-Authoritarianism, and Moderation -- Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law -- Civil Society and Participation -- Conclusion -- References.

AbstractThis article examines the reception of the Iranian state's authoritarian discourse by the Italian far right to interrogate the mechanisms of authoritarian diffusion from the point of view of the receiving actors. Coding Iran's state propaganda and searching for overlaps and resonances with the far right's discourse, this article argues that the receiving audience selectively translates the content coming from Iran for the Italian public with the goal of reinforcing its own political discourse. The article contributes to the debate on authoritarian diffusion by providing fresh empirical findings from a rarely studied case study and by shifting the focus to political discourse and narratives. This article also foregrounds the agency of the receiving audience, rather than the authoritarian state's, with the goal of interrogating the resources and infrastructures that enable diffusion, rather than the motivation or the success of the 'sending' authoritarian state. This article expands the understanding of complex dynamics of authoritarian diffusion and contributes to examine the establishment of transnational connections between state and non-state illiberal actors in the era of 'sovranism' and right-wing populism.

The editorial decision to publish a roundtable on the 2022–23 protests in Iran has come with challenges and obvious limitations due to access and immediacy. The ambition of this intervention is to offer some initial reflections and some analytical instruments in the hope that they will be useful for future publications. We also want to write in this moment because we want to register its characteristics—emotions running high, the quick detours of power relations between the state and the protesters, the uncertainty, the changing political weight of the diaspora—along with the difficulty of doing analytical work in the midst of such processes.

Analyzing public debt in low-income developing countries (LIDCs) is like solving a puzzle with many missing pieces. Forty percent of LIDCs have not published any sovereign debt data in the last two years. Public debt data disclosed in different publications show discrepancies of up to 30 percent of GDP across sources, and relative to the records of relevant authorities. Over 15 LIDCs have outstanding collateralized debt but no details of the collateralization are provided in official statistics. Restructuring of bilateral and commercial debt is often handled privately. All these problems have different origins and implications. Yet, they all amount to a lack of transparency. The international community has become acutely aware of the importance of debt transparency after recent cases of "hidden debt" The "Tuna Bond" case in Mozambique highlighted the dangers of inadequate debt transparency. In 2016 two large previously unreported loans totaling 1.15 billion US Dollars —equal to about 9 percent of the country's GDP—were revealed. As a result, donor support was frozen, the economy plunged, and the government was forced to make deep cuts in public spending. The biggest losers were poor Mozambiquans. Nontransparent public debt can quickly alter the lives of millions of ordinary citizens. This report is the first comprehensive assessment of debt transparency in LIDCs. It presents a complete picture of the current challenges and the pending policy agenda for all stakeholders. It draws upon new databases and surveys to take stock of key gaps in debt reporting, borrowing practices and legal frameworks, offering a detailed and timely view on the current state of debt transparency in LIDCs. It also synthesizes recent studies and policy discussions on debt transparency and offers practical policy recommendations required to further improve debt transparency in LIDCs.

This article investigates contentious politics in authoritarian contexts by looking at the case study of student activism in the Islamic Republic of Iran. More specifically, the article asks 'how does the Iranian student movement "do" contentious politics?', and argues that a broader approach is needed when examining social movements and mobilizations in authoritarian countries, than one focused on visible mobilizations. In particular, interpersonal relationships, local histories of activism, and what happens 'in-between' episodes of contention should be valued as material carrying analytical gravity. Adopting this approach, the article looks at the continuities and ruptures that have characterized on campus political contention in Iran in the 2000s and 2010s, bringing to the fore the overlooked history of how the student movements have re-organized after major waves of state repression.

This article investigates contentious politics in authoritarian contexts by looking at the case- study of student activism in the Islamic Republic of Iran. More specifically, the article asks 'how does the Iranian student movement "do" contentious politics?', and argues that a broader approach is needed when examining social movements and mobilizations in authoritarian countries, than one focused on visible mo- bilizations. In particular, interpersonal relationships, local histories of activism, and what happens 'in-be- tween' episodes of contention should be valued as material carrying analytical gravity. Adopting this ap- proach, the article looks at the continuities and ruptures that have characterized on campus political con- tention in Iran in the 2000s and 2010s, bringing to the fore the overlooked history of how the student move- ments have re-organized after major waves of state repression.

Nel nostro ordinamento il diritto allo studio è un diritto soggettivo che trova il suo fondamento nei comma 3 e 4 dell'art. 34 della Costituzione, nei quali si afferma il diritto dei capaci e meritevoli, anche se privi di mezzi economici, di raggiungere i gradi più alti degli studi, e il dovere della Repubblica a rendere effettivo questo diritto. Il diritto allo studio trova un fondamento anche nell'art. 3 della Costituzione dove si afferma che è "compito della Repubblica rimuovere gli ostacoli di ordine economico e sociale che, limitando di fatto la libertà e l'uguaglianza dei cittadini, impediscono il pieno sviluppo della persona umana". Dunque tutti i cittadini capaci hanno il diritto di proseguire gli studi al termine degli otto anni di scuola obbligatoria prescritti dalla Carta Costituzionale (comma 1 e 2 dell'art. 34) e la Repubblica ha il dovere di rimuovere quegli ostacoli economici che impediscono agli studenti capaci di continuare e completare gli studi scolastici non obbligatori nonché quelli universitari. Questo lavoro è indirizzato allo studio delle politiche attuate dal legislatore dall'unità d'Italia fino ai giorni nostri finalizzate alla tutela del diritto allo studio universitario dando grande attenzione alle problematiche effettive che in ogni epoca gli studenti universitari si sono trovati ad affrontare e le azioni attuate dal Parlamento, dai Governi e dai Consigli regionali per rendere concreti i principi espressi nell'art. 34 della Costituzione. Rispetto ad ogni scelta del legislatore sono stati riportati anche i diversi punti di vista della dottrina, con l'obiettivo di offrire al lettore un quadro il più possibile completo degli aspetti critici di ciascun atto normativo, nonché dei risultati conseguenti. Nell'analisi delle leggi e dei decreti riguardanti il diritto allo studio universitario possiamo notare che nel corso degli anni, quattro sono stati i temi che più di altri sono stati oggetto di analisi e di dibattito politico e dottrinario: il tipo di ripartizione di competenze tra Stato, Regioni e Università, il passaggio dell'assistenza universitaria da azione quasi caritatevole a diritto soggettivo degli studenti, la controversia riguardante i criteri di reddito e quelli di merito nell'individuazione dei beneficiari delle prestazioni e, infine, le specifiche tipologie di servizi da garantire agli studenti. Particolare attenzione è stata dedicata all'analisi della programmazione degli accessi (cd numero chiuso) e alle conseguenze sulla disciplina del diritto allo studio.

This article investigates contentious politics in authoritarian contexts by looking at the case-study of student activism in the Islamic Republic of Iran. More specifically, the article asks 'how does the Iranian student movement "do" contentious politics?', and argues that a broader approach is needed when examining social movements and mobilizations in authoritarian countries, than one focused on visible mobilizations. In particular, interpersonal relationships, local histories of activism, and what happens 'in-between' episodes of contention should be valued as material carrying analytical gravity. Adopting this approach, the article looks at the continuities and ruptures that have characterized on campus political contention in Iran in the 2000s and 2010s, bringing to the fore the overlooked history of how the student movements have re-organized after major waves of state repression.