The opposition between tradition and modernity has long served as one of the principal conceptual frameworks for interpreting social, political, intellectual, and cultural change. Within this framework, tradition is frequently represented as the inheritance of the past, while modernity is associated with rationalization, scientific knowledge, individualism, technological development, secularization, and new political institutions. Such a binary, however, risks reducing historically complex processes to a conflict between two supposedly coherent and mutually exclusive systems. The Iranian experience demonstrates particularly clearly the limitations of this approach. Iranian encounters with modernity did not constitute a simple transition from tradition to modernity, nor did resistance to Westernization necessarily amount to rejection of modernity itself.

14. Iran and Israel as Geographically Unequal Targets:
The enormous difference in territorial scale means that the consequences of an identical number of nuclear detonations would not necessarily be geographically equivalent. A country with enormous territorial depth and a country occupying a much smaller geographic area cannot be assumed to experience identical consequences. This is the foundation of the argument that an attacker must consider not only its ability to strike Iran, but Iran's ability to retaliate against a much more geographically concentrated opponent. In this context, the analogy that Israel's territory is comparable to an island relative to Iran's vast landmass illustrates the magnitude of the geographical asymmetry. The comparison is rhetorical, but it expresses a genuine strategic concept: territorial depth affects survivability.

Arshtat (Avestan: arštāt) is a female yazata, or divine being worthy of worship, in Zoroastrianism, embodying the principles of rectitude, justice, truth, and righteousness. The name arštāt derives from the Avestan root meaning "upright" or "straight," signifying both the divinity and the principle of rectitude. She represents an abstract moral force that supports ethical order (asha) and is invoked alongside other deities to promote cosmic and human harmony.

The persistence of political violence in the Middle East raises a fundamental humanitarian and political question: to what extent can the political survival of authoritarian, populist, nationalist, or religiously oriented leaders become structurally connected to the continuation of military confrontation? This article examines the hypothesis that, in political systems where leaders derive legitimacy from permanent insecurity, national mobilisation, religious polarisation, or external confrontation, peace and comprehensive social welfare may constitute a political challenge rather than merely a humanitarian objective. The argument does not claim that every regional leader consciously creates war solely for personal enrichment or political survival. Rather, it proposes that political systems can develop incentives in which prolonged conflict strengthens executive power, suppresses political opposition, redirects public attention away from domestic failures, expands security institutions, and generates economic opportunities for state-linked actors.

The Shahnameh cannot be compared solely with the Iliad and the Odyssey; rather, it should be considered alongside the great epics of the world — from the Mahabharata and the Ramayana in India to Goguryeo on the Korean Peninsula and the works of Virgil. None of these works can be considered identical or equal to the Shahnameh, because the Shahnameh is fundamentally different. It contains, in a remarkably comprehensive form, the various strands of national identity. Here, the concepts of “country” and “homeland” are not confined merely to a particular geographical territory. They encompass an entire framework of ideals, culture, mythology, history, intellectual thought, virtue, ethics, truthfulness, systems of governance, and ways of life. All of these elements and symbols can be found in the Shahnameh, whereas they do not appear in the Iliad and the Odyssey in the same way.