PMOI | professorsheehan

Archive for PMOI

2015 Annual Conference for Democracy in Iran

Posted in 9-11, advisory board, analysis, arak, ashraf, assad, baghdad, ballistic missiles, bipartisan, briefing, brussels, camp liberty, CIA, civil unrest, clinton, congress, counterterrorism, covert, crimes against humanity, delisting, democracy, diplomacy, dissident, Dr. Ivan Sascha Sheehan, education, european union, evidence-based, farsi, fordow, foreign policy, foreign policy analysis, Fox, freedom, fundamentalism, geneva, gingrich, global, haider al-abadi, hostages, House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism and Non-Proliferation, human rights, human security, IAEA, intelligence, international relations, international security studies, interview, iran, iraq, irgc, ISIS, israel, Ivan Sascha Sheehan, James Woolsey, kerry, kurd, Louis Freeh, media, MEK, MI6, middle east, military, mossad, mousavi, natanz, NCRI, negotiation, netanyahu, nuclear, obama, P5+1, paris, PMOI, policy, political science, politics, preemptive, Professor Ivan Sascha Sheehan, protest, qum, rajavi, regime change, regime change from within, research, rouhani, Rudy Giuliani, sanctions, scholarly, sectarian conflict, security studies, senate, senate foreign relations committee, sheehan, shiite, social science, state department, sunni, syria, tehran, terror tagging, terrorism, the hill, threat, Tom Ridge, u.s. foundation for liberty, unrest, war, weapons, white house, zarif with tags @ProfSheehan, Congress, Dr. Ivan Sascha Sheehan, Iran, Iraq, Ivan Sascha Sheehan, MEK, PMOI, Professor Ivan Sascha Sheehan, Regime Change, School of Public and International Affairs, Terrorism, White House on June 19, 2015 by Professor Sheehan

#Media / #News / #Scholarship / #Inquiries / #UB

In June 2015 Dr. Ivan Sascha Sheehan, Associate Professor of Public and International Affairs at the University of Baltimore, traveled to Paris as part of a distinguished research delegation examining the Iranian opposition in the context of the ongoing P5+1 nuclear negotiations with the Iranian regime.

A guest of the organizing committee, Dr. Sheehan met with a series of elected officials while at the meeting to discuss U.S.-Iran policy and his research on regime change.

The annual conference – which featured crowds estimated at 100,000 – is the largest annual gathering of the democratic Iranian opposition in exile. The June event featured remarks by leaders from more than fifty countries, a bipartisan delegation of U.S. policymakers, and prominent academics from around the world. The ongoing nuclear negotiations between the P5+1, democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and the deteriorating situation in neighboring Iraq were discussed.

Dr. Ivan Sascha Sheehan is the Director of the graduate programs in Negotiations & Conflict Management and Global Affairs & Human Security in the College of Public Affairs at the University of Baltimore.

For additional research or media related updates or to learn more about Dr. Sheehan, follow him on Twitter @ProfSheehan or link to his research profiles.

/ #About / #News / #Scholarship /

SHEEHAN: What Is “Regime Change From Within?” Unpacking the Concept in the Context of Iran | Digest of Middle East Studies | Oct 14

Posted in analysis, arak, ashraf, assad, baghdad, ballistic missiles, camp liberty, CIA, civil unrest, clinton, college of public affairs, congress, council on foreign relations, counterterrorism, covert, crimes against humanity, data, debate, delisting, democracy, deterrence, digest of middle east studies, diplomacy, dissident, DOMES, education, european union, evidence-based, farsi, fordow, foreign policy, foreign policy analysis, framing, freedom, fundamentalism, geneva, global, haider al-abadi, hostages, human rights, human security, IAEA, intelligence, international relations, international security studies, international studies association, iran, iran policy committee, iraq, irgc, ISA, ISIS, israel, kerry, kurd, maliki, media, MEK, MI6, middle east, middle east dialogue, military, mossad, natanz, NCRI, negotiation, netanyahu, nuclear, obama, P5+1, paris, PMOI, policy, policy studies organization, politics, preemptive, prof. ali ansari, prof. raymond tanter, protest, qum, quoted, rajavi, regime change, regime change from within, research, rouhani, sanctions, scholarly, sectarian conflict, security studies, senate, senate foreign relations committee, sheehan, shiite, social science, state department, strike, sunni, syria, tanter, tehran, terror tagging, terrorism, the hill, think-tank, threat, turkey, u.s. foundation for liberty, university of baltimore, unrest, war, weapons, white house, wocmes, zarif with tags Dr. Ivan Sascha Sheehan, Iran, Ivan Sascha Sheehan, MEK, NCRI, PMOI, Policy, Professor Ivan Sascha Sheehan, Rajavi, Regime Change, Sheehan, Tanter on October 29, 2014 by Professor Sheehan

#Media / #News / #Scholarship / #Inquiries / #UB

SHEEHAN: What Is “Regime Change From Within?” Unpacking the Concept in the Context of Iran | Digest of Middle East Studies | Fall 2014 | Vol. 23, Issue 2

Dr. Ivan Sascha Sheehan is published in the fall 2014 issue of the Digest of Middle East Studies, a peer-reviewed journal published by Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of the Policy Studies Organization. Dr. Sheehan’s latest study — What Is “Regime Change From Within?” Unpacking the Concept in the Context of Iran — clarifies the contested concept of regime change from within via Tehran’s organized opposition and makes contributions to the concept’s formation to increase its policy relevance and classificatory significance.

Abstract: The use of the phrase “regime change from within” has surged in recent years in media, policy, and opposition discourse, especially in relation to the Islamic Republic of Iran. But what does “regime change from within” actually mean? Is it just a script to encourage the aspirations of a people, or can it be defined with more specificity? This article argues that to be of value as a concept and the basis for articulate policy, “regime change from within” needs to be better defined. To bring greater clarity to the term, the article tries to unpack the concept by disaggregating it into three analytically separable problem components: the “regime,” “change,” and “from within.” Drawing on the case of Iran, I argue that although most of the current debate around the concept is on the “from within” component, the definitional choices that need more discussion are the “regime” and “change” aspects of the phrase.

Excerpt | What Is “Regime Change From Within?” Unpacking the Concept in the Context of Iran | Digest of Middle East Studies | F.14 | Vol. 23, Issue 2 –

[The concept of] ‘regime change from within’ has been employed for an array of very disparate processes — as a holder for democracy promotion efforts from outside a country as well as indigenous efforts that exclude outside intervention, to highlight the need for radical change and more vaguely to call for continuous reform. But to be of value as a concept and the basis for articulate policy, a term needs to have some degree of specificity of meaning, some shared consensus. Otherwise, it just becomes a proverbial “you know it when you see it” concept that is difficult to distinguish from other types of political phenomena.

To address this gap and bring greater clarity to the concept, this article looks at some of the definitional choices that need to be addressed to come to a consensus on the meaning of “regime change from within.” Using the case of the Islamic Republic of Iran, I show how different decisions about what constitutes “regime change from within” could lead to very different conceptualizations in empirical cases…

/ #About / #News / #Scholarship /