سامانه پشتیبانی خدمات اطلاعات

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات162
تعداد شماره‌ها6,578
تعداد مقالات71,072
تعداد مشاهده مقاله125,689,563
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله98,918,783
کولایی, الهه, میرگلوی بیات, جواد. (1402). نخبگان خاورمیانه‌ای، سوژه‌های برساخته نظم بین‌الملل اروپامدار. , 53(3), 540-519. doi: 10.22059/jpq.2024.347796.1007989
الهه کولایی; جواد میرگلوی بیات. "نخبگان خاورمیانه‌ای، سوژه‌های برساخته نظم بین‌الملل اروپامدار". , 53, 3, 1402, 540-519. doi: 10.22059/jpq.2024.347796.1007989
کولایی, الهه, میرگلوی بیات, جواد. (1402). 'نخبگان خاورمیانه‌ای، سوژه‌های برساخته نظم بین‌الملل اروپامدار', , 53(3), pp. 540-519. doi: 10.22059/jpq.2024.347796.1007989
کولایی, الهه, میرگلوی بیات, جواد. نخبگان خاورمیانه‌ای، سوژه‌های برساخته نظم بین‌الملل اروپامدار. , 1402; 53(3): 540-519. doi: 10.22059/jpq.2024.347796.1007989

نخبگان خاورمیانه‌ای، سوژه‌های برساخته نظم بین‌الملل اروپامدار

فصلنامه سیاست
مقاله 5، دوره 53، شماره 3، آذر 1402، صفحه 540-519    اصل مقاله (432.4 K)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jpq.2024.347796.1007989
نویسندگان
الهه کولایی* 1؛ جواد میرگلوی بیات2
1استاد، مطالعات منطقه ای، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
پس از امواج استقلال‌طلبی پساجنگ جهانی دوم، نظم بین‌الملل موجب ایجاد شکاف روزافزون میان کشورهای توسعه‌یافته و توسعه‌نیافته شده است. نخبگان سیاسی و فکری خاورمیانه نیز مانند دیگر مناطق کم‌توسعه جهان، به‌عنوان «سوژه‌هایی» که در پی ایجاد تغییر در موقعیت این کشورها در نظم جهانی و بهبود وضع آنها بودند، وارد کارزار شدند. این «سوژه‌ها» بیش از آنکه عاملیت مستقل داشته باشند، خود محصول گفتمان‌های اروپامدار به‌ویژه گفتمان نوسازی و توسعه و مارکسیسم بودند که نظم جهانی را تشکیل می‌دادند. هدف اصلی این مقاله پاسخ دادن به دو پرسش پژوهشی زیر است: 1. چگونه گفتمان‌های برآمده از نظم بین‌الملل اروپامدار قوام یافته‌اند؟ 2. چرا نخبگان ضداستعمار این منطقه با وجود مخالفت با چنین رویکردی، در نهایت زیر سیطره نگاه اروپامدار قرار گرفتند و به سوژه-موقعیت بدل شدند؟ در فرضیه پژوهش استدلال می‌شود که دیدگاه اروپامداری و شرق‌شناسی در میان نخبگان و روشنفکران خاورمیانه با وجود رویکرد ضداستعماری آنان به بازتولید رویه‌های اروپامدار در کشورهای منطقه منجر شده است. با استفاده از چارچوب نظری پسااستعمارگرایی به‌ویژه اندیشه‌های ادوارد سعید و گایاتری اسپیواک به تحلیل گفتمان نخبگان شرق اسلامی که از 1960 تا 1970 به‌دنبال جبران پس‌افتادگی بودند، می‌پردازیم. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان داد که حتی نخبگان ضداستعماری در این دو دهه، با همه تلاش‌های پیگیر خود حاملان نظمی شدند که در قالب گفتمان مسلط خود را آشکار می‌ساخت.
کلیدواژه‌ها
ادوارد سعید؛ اروپامداری؛ خاورمیانه؛ شرق‌شناسی؛ مطالعات فرودستان
عنوان مقاله [English]
Middle Eastern Elites, the Subjects of the Eurocentric International Order
نویسندگان [English]
Elahe Kolaee1؛ Javad bayat Mirgaloye2
1Professor, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2A PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
During the last two centuries, particularly in the post-World War II period, many former colonies in the Middle East have gained independence. However, there is a growing gap between countries—dichotomized into different groups in the international system such as Developed or Undeveloped, North or South, First World or Third World, Center or Periphery, West or East, and so on. The Middle East or ‘the Islamic East’ is one of the regions which have been suffering from either drastic backwardness or dependent development. In postcolonial discourse, the epistemological agency of the non-European world is revived and the one-sided narration of westerners about the whole world is not the only source of knowledge. Intellectual and political elites of the newly independent societies as ‘nationalist and anticolonialist subjects’ entered into battle in order to change the subordinate position of these countries in the international order and find ways to overcome the problem of underdevelopment and dependence on the western countries, but these so-called ‘Middle Easterners subjects’ as referred to in this paper were unable to be independent subjects and actually became subjected to the influence of the external forces. Most Middle Eastern intellectual and political elites had to change their attitudes and activities due to eurocentrism, especially in the area of foreign policy and international relations. As the subjects of the Eurocentric international order, they unconsciously cooperated with the forces which intended to maintain the existing international order, despite the fact that they were initially trying to change this superior-subordinate arrangement in protest against its unequal nature.  The so-called subjectivity of  these elites has led  to an even expanding backwardness in many parts of the region.
The authors’ main objective is to answer the following research questions:  1. How have the postcolonial discourses, which have originated from the Eurocentric international order been reinforced? 2. Why were the anti-colonial elites of the Middle East ultimately influenced by the Eurocentric view in spite of their initial opposition to eurocentrism? In the research hypothesis, it is argued that the worldview of eurocentrism of the Middle Eastern elites and intellectuals have acted as positive reinforces of the Eurocentrism perspective and orientation in the Middle Eastern countries. To answer these questions, they use the framework of the theories of post-colonialism, and draw conclusions from Spivak's discussions of the subalterns and domination, Edward Said's writings on the subject of Orientalism, and the discourse of the elites of the so-called Islamic East who had struggled to confront the challenge of backwardness of their countries during the 1960-1970 period. The findings of the research showed that even some of the staunchest anti-colonial political elites and intellectuals—in spite of their rebellion against imperial powers and critical views of the Eurocentric attitudes of the westerners—ended up as the subjects of the European-dominated international order. Such results are valuable for understanding the persistent backwardness of countries in the Middle East which are confronted with this challenge in different ways and varying degrees of severity.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Edward Said, Eurocentrism, Middle East, Orientalism, Subalterns Studies
مراجع

References

  1. Abdel-Malek, A. (1981). Civilization and Social Theory. London:
  2. Abrahamian, E. (2009). Īrān beyne du enghelāb, Iran between Two Revolutions, trans. Ahmad Gol Mohamadi and Mohamad Ebrahim Leylayi. Tehran: Nay. [In Persian]
  3. Ansari, H. (1986). The Stalled Society. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  4. Ansari, M; Darroudi, M. (2014). “Motāleāte pasā-estemāri, talāsh matn mehvar dar jahate vārooneh’sāzi-ye cheshmandāz’hā, Post-Colonial Studies: Two Different Approaches,” Jostār’hā-ye siāyasi-ye Mo'āser, Contemporary Political Studies, 5, 12: 1-23. Available at: https://politicalstudy.ihcs.ac.ir/ Html (Accessed 17 July 2022). [In Persian]
  5. Ashcroft, B; and et al. (2005). Post-Colonial Studies: The Key Concept. London and New York: Routledge
  6. Balta, P; Chlorne, R. (1991). Maghreb-e bozorg, az esteghlāl tā sāl-e 2000, Great Maghreb, from Independence to the 2000, trans. Abbas Agahi. Tehran: Nashre MFA. [In Persian]
  7. Blaut, J. (2010). Hasht tārikh’Dane oroopā-mehvar, Eight Eurocentric Historians, Trans. Arastoo Mizani and Behyan Rafie. Tehran: Amir Kabir. [In Persian]
  8. Byrne, J.J. (2009). “Our Own Special Brand of Socialism: Algeria and the Contest of Modernity in the 1960s‌,” Diplomatic History 33, 3: 427-447, .
  9. Carver, M. (2011). A Correct and Progressive Road: U.S.-Turkish Relation, 1945-1964, A PhD Dissertation in History, Bowling Green State University, Ohio, USA. Available at: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=bgsu1300992155&disposition=inline (Accessed 8 October 2022).
  10. Edens, D; Snavely, W. (1970). “Planning for Economic Development in Saudi Arabia‌,” Middle East Journal 24: 1: 17-30. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/i398307 (Accessed 2 August 2022).
  11. Eisenstadt, S.N (1996). Modernization: Protest and Change. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  12. Gandi, L. (2012). Pasā-estemār’gār-I, Post Colonialism, trans. Maryam Alamzadeh and Homayoon Kaka Soltani. Tehran: Pajoheshkadeh-ye motāleālt-e farhangi and ejtemāee. [In Persian]
  13. Gikandi, S. (2012). Pasā-sākhtār’gārā-i and goftemān-e pasā-estemāri, Poststructuralism and Postcolonial Discourse, trans. Jalal Farzaneh Dehkordi and Ramin Farhadi. Tehran: Dāneshgāh-e Imām Sadegh. [In Persian]
  14. Gramsci, A. (2021). Daftar’hā-ye zendān, Prison Note Book, trans. Hasan Mortazavi. Tehran: Cheshmeh. [In Persian]
  15. Guha, R, ed. (1982). Subaltern Studies I. Oxford and New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
  16. Hakimi, H; Maboodi, M. (2017). “Tahlili bar teori-ye nosāzi tosëh (An Analysis of the Modernization Theory of Development,” Fasl’nāmeh-ye rāhbord-e tosëh, Journal of Development Strategy, 13, 51: 29-59. Available at: http://rahbord-mag.ir/Article/13970404 195748112950 (Accessed 17 July 2022). [In Persian]
  17. Harris, L.C. (1986). Libya: Gadhafi’s Revolution and the Modern State. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. 
  18. Harrison, D. (1991). The Sociology of Modernization and Development. London: Routledge.
  19. Hiddleston, J. (2009). Understanding Postcolonialism. Stocksfield: Acumen.
  20. Hinnebusch, R. (1981). “Egypt under Sadat: Elites, Power Structure, and Political Change in a Post-Populist State‌,” Society for Study of Social Problems 28, 4: 442-464, <DOI:2307/800057>.
  21. Hinnebusch, R; Ehteshami, A. (2011). Siyāsat khāreji-ye keshvarhā-ye eslāmi, The Foreign Policies of Middle East States, trans. Morteza Sabbah and Rahman Ghahremanpour. Tehran: Dāneshgāh-e Imām Sadegh. [In Persian]
  22. Hobson, J. (2012). The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics, Western International Theory 1760-2010. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  23. Hodgson, M.G. (1993). The Venture of Islam. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  24. Hooks, B. (1990). “Marginality as a Site of Resistance‌,” in Russell Fergusen, et al., eds. Out There: Marginalization and Contemporary Cultures. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 152-190.
  25. Jirvand, A. (1989). Tosëh eghtesādi (Economic Development). Tehran: Molavi. [In Persian]
  26. Kandil, H. (2016). The Power Triangle: Military, Security, and Politics in Regime Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  27. Kesseiri, R. (2005). Ideologised Foreign Policy and the Pragmatic Rationale: The Case of Algeria under Houari Boumedienne, 1965-1978, A PhD Dissertation in Middle Eastern Studies, the University of Leeds, UK. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/ 40033451.pdf (Accessed 8 May 2022).
  28. Macfie, A. L. (2019). Orientalism, Translated by Masoud Farhamandfar. Tehran: Morvarid. [In Persian]
  29. Marsh, D; Stoker, J. (2013). Ravesh and nazariyeh dar oloom-e siyāsi, Theory and Methods in Political Science, trans. Amir Mohamad Haji-Yoosefi. Tehran: Pajoheshkadeh-ye motāleāte rāhbordi. [In Persian]
  30. Mccully, B. (1940). English Education and the Origins of Indian Nationalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
  31. Miliken, J. (2006). “The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and Methods,” trans. Homerirah Moshirzadeh, Public Law Research 8, 21: 209-260. Available at: https://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_2816.html?lang=en (Accessed 17 July 2022). [In Persian]
  32. Milz, S. (2003) Goftemān, Discourse, trans. Fatah Mohamadi. Zanjan: Hezāreh sevom. [In Persian]
  33. Moeini Alamdari, J. (2006). “Hoviat and tavil: dar jostejoo-ye yek hoviate pāsā-estemāri, Identity and Interpretation: In Search of a Postcolonial Identity,” Faslnāmeh-ye motāleāt-e melli, Journal of National Studies, 7, 1: 23-52. Available at: https://www.sid.ir/fa/ Journal/ViewPaper.aspx? ID=42917 (Accessed 17 July 2022). [In Persian]
  34. Parry, B. (2004). “The Institutionalization of Postcolonial Studies,” The Cambridge Companion to Postcolonial Literary Studies, 66-80, <DOI:10.1017/CCOL0521826942.004>.
  35. Parry, B. (2012). Nahādineh kardan-e motāleāt-e pasā-estemāri, Institutionalizing Postcolonial Studies, trans. Jalal Farzaneh Dehkordi and Ramin Farhadi. Tehran: Dāneshgāh-e Imām Sadegh. [In Persian]
  36. Pelt, A. (1970). Libyan Independence and the United Nations: A Case of Planned Decolonization. New Haven: Yale University Press, 168-170, 1017/S0021853700000402>.
  37. Pipes, D. (1992). Greater Syria: The History of an Ambition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  38. Rami, G. (1997). Egypt's Incomplete Revolution: Lutfi Al-Khuli and Nasser's Socialism in the 1960s. London: Routledge.
  39. Robinovitch, I. (1972). Syria under the Baath, 1963-1966. Jerusalem: Israel University Press.
  40. Rostow, W.W. (1960). The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  41. Saee, A. (2006). “Moghadameh-ei bar nazariyeh and naghd nosāzi, An Introduction to Postcolonial Theory and Criticism,” Majalehʼi dāneshkadehʼi hoghogh and oloom-e siyāsī, The Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science, 73: 133-154. Available at: https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ ViewPaper.aspx?id= 60762 (Accessed 17 July 2022). [In Persian]
  42. Saee, A. (2011). Masāel-e siyāsī and eghtesādī jahān-e sevom, Political and Economic Issues of the Third World, Tehran: SAMT. [In Persian]
  43. Said, E. (2016). Shargh’shenāsi (Orientalism), trans. Abdolrahim Govahi. Tehran: farhāng-e eslāmi. [In Persian]
  44. Sardar, Z. (2008). Shargh’shenāsi (Orientalism), trans. Mohamad Ali Ghasemi. Tehran: Pajooheshkadeh-ye motāleāt-e farhangi and ejtemāī. [In Persian]
  45. Spivak, G (1985). "Can the Subaltern Speak? Speculations on Widow-Sacrifice," Wedge 7/8: 120-130. Available at: https://abahlali.org/files/Can_the_subaltern_speak.pdf (Accessed 3 October 2023).
  46. Spivak, G. (1987). “Three Women’s Text and a Critique of Imperialism,” Critical Inquiry 12, 1: 243-261. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/ stable/1343469 (Accessed 3 August 2022).
  47. Spivak, G. (2018). Āyā foroodast mitavānad sokhan begooyad, Can the Subaltern Speak? Trans. Ayoob Karimi. Tehran: Falāt. [In Persian]
  48. St John, R.B. (2008). “The Changing Libyan Economy, Causes and Consequences,” Middle East Journal 62, 1: 75-91. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233583356_The_Changing_Libyan_Economy_Causes_and_Consequences (Accessed 2 August 2022).
  49. Taghizadeh Tabari, A. (2009). “Eslāhāt dar maktab-e nosāzi, Reforms in the School of Modernization,” Rahā’vārd-e siyāsi, Political Result, 7, 24 and 25: 91-106. Available at: http://ensani.ir/fa/article/220659 (Accessed 17 July 2022). [In Persian]
  50. Tipps, D. (1976). Modernization Theory and the Comparative Study of Societies: A Critical Perspective. New York: Free Press.
  51. Torrey, G.H.; Delvin, J.F. (1965). “Arab Socialism‌,” Journal of International Affairs 19, 1: 47-62. Available at: https://www.jstor. Org/ stable/i24362871 (Accessed 2 August 2022).
  52. Turner, B. (2007). Sharg’shenāsi pasā-modernism and jahāni’shodan, Orientalism, Postmodernism and Globalization, Trans. Saed Vesali. Tehran: Bonyad-e nahj’olbalāgeh. [In Persian]
  53. Vandewalle, D. (2006). A History of Modern Libya. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  54. Yodfat, A. (1971). “The End of Syria’s Isolation‌,” The World Today 27, 8: 329-339. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40394532 (Accessed 2 August 2022).
  55. Young, R. (2003). Postcolonialism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  56. Ziai, A. (2012). “Postcolonial Perspectives on Development,” Center for Development Research, University of Bonn, ZEF Working Paper Series, 103. Available at: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/ 10419 / 88339/1/ 773389075.pdf (Accessed 2 August 2022).
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 252
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 303





سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب