Compiled and written by: Fateme Nekoolal Azad
(A senior research scholar in International Relations)
What follows is a comprehensive approach and in-depth analysis and scholarly writing of the historic letter from various perspectives.
Imam Khomeini's historic Letter to Gorbachev: A critique approach to foundations of the Dominant International Order and a proposal for an Alternative Theory
Imam Khomeini's historic letter to the last leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, was issued and dispatched in January 1989 at a sensitive juncture, on the eve of the collapse of the bipolar order. It cannot be deemed merely a moral sermon or political warning.
The letter delves into multiple layers, providing deep insight into the theoretical implications that aim to review or challenge the analytical foundations of existing international relations and critique the dominant paradigms in this regard.
The methodology of the letter appears to focus on delving into less conventional frameworks for understanding state behavior more deeply.
Imam's historic letter presents an alternative interpretation of the reasons behind the crisis and decline of modern political systems. This aspect looks beyond the traditional analysis of power dynamics, focusing instead on the crisis of meaning and worldview as the root cause of collapse.
Critique of realism and material reductionism
At the time of writing and dispatching the letter, structural realism was recognized as the dominant paradigm in theorizing international relations. This approach views the existing materialistic international system as an anarchic arena in which states, as rational actors, seek to maximize material power and ensure survival. In such a context and framework, the collapse of the Soviet Union was often associated with indicators such as economic pressure, erosion resulting from the arms race, or the disruption of the balance of power.
Imam Khomeini's letter fundamentally challenges the traditional explanation by delving deeper into the main cause of the crisis facing the Soviet Union. It points not to the components of hard power, but explains that the real issue lies in the lack of a proper epistemological and metaphysical foundation, as well as the dominance of a materialistic view of humanity and the world.
From this perspective, having material power without spiritual support not only fails to ensure survival and stability, but also contributes to the internal erosion and eventual collapse of the political system.
While this analysis shares some constructivist assumptions on a methodological level - particularly in its focus on the importance of ideas, beliefs, and identities - it also diverges from them.
Imam Khomeini does not view ideas solely as social constructs; instead, he believes they are rooted in an ontological truth that is independent of human collective will. According to Imam Khomeini, this truth is faith and the sacred.
Criticism of liberalism and the concept of linear progress
Conversely, international liberalism and liberal institutionalism sought a solution to the crisis of closed systems in economic development, market expansion, and integration into international institutions.
Within this framework, the Soviet transition from communism to capitalism was seen as a "natural" and inevitable path to stability and progress.
Imam Khomeini explicitly critiques this assumption in his letter as well. His famous warning that the main problem is not the economy serves as a profound critique of the liberal notion of linear progress.
From the Imam's perspective, replacing communism with capitalism is not seen as a solution to the crisis. Instead, it represents a shift from one materialistic system to an even more materialistic one, where the dominance of the market and profit supplants the dominance of state ideology.
This section of the letter can be seen as a prediction and a precursor to the recent criticisms of neo-liberalism. These criticisms address the moral crises of identity and meaning in the contemporary world, highlighting the inadequacy of liberal theory and its anthropological assumptions in providing sufficient analytical tools to understand and explain these issues.
Monotheistic society as an alternative paradigm
The theoretical significance of Imam Khomeini's letter extends beyond merely criticizing dominant paradigms; it presents an alternative theoretical horizon known as a monotheistic society. Within this framework, the unit of analysis in international relations shifts from the nation-state, which is primarily driven by material interests, to human society, which is guided by divine truth.
In this paradigm, concepts such as development, power, and security are fundamentally redefined. They are transformed from independent analytical variables into elements that are subordinate to the monotheistic worldview. In this interpretation, Islam is not merely a competing ideology among others; rather, it serves as a normative-civilizational theory for world order, advocating for a profound transformation in humanity's understanding of man, the state, and the purpose of politics.
Conclusion
Imam Khomeini's letter to Gorbachev can be considered a trans-paradigmatic text that demonstrates how spiritual and divine factors are not on the margins, but are actually within the context of global macro-analyses. This letter suggests the possibility of alternative theorizing in international relations, a concept that has been overlooked in the mainstream literature of the field.
The contemporary developments in the supernatural world have revealed more than ever the inefficiency of purely materialistic explanations and the necessity of rethinking the theoretical foundations of international order.
Imam Khomeini's letter to Gorbachev can be seen as a trans-paradigmatic text that shows how spiritual and divine factors are central, rather than peripheral, in global macro-analyses. The letter suggests the potential for alternative theorizing in international relations, which has been largely ignored in mainstream literature.
Moreover, recent developments in the supernatural realm have emphasized the inadequacy of purely materialistic explanations and emphasized the need to reconsider the theoretical foundations of international order.