ضرورت‌های حکمرانی فضای سایبر از منظر امام خامنه‌ای

In the present age, cyberspace has become one of the most important arenas for the exercise of governance-an arena that, by virtue of the flow of information, profoundly affects governmental structures, processes, and objectives and even redefines national identity and security. The capacity of this space to create unparalleled opportunities
while simultaneously generating unprecedented threats—from cognitive warfare and psychological operations to interference in culture, economy, and politics—has led pioneering countries to formulate bespoke models of cyber governance on the basis of their intellectual, cultural, security, and economic foundations. For the Islamic Republic of Iran, which claims to present a distinctive model of governance grounded in the Islamic–Iranian system, this arena plays a key role in realizing the objectives of the Second Step of the Islamic Revolution. However, the country’s central challenge is that a comprehensive, indigenous model for cyberspace governance—designed in accordance with national values, ideals, and needs—has not yet fully taken shape, and its implementation requires
a proper understanding of this space’s multidimensional necessities. This study aims to identify and elucidate the necessities of cyberspace governance from the perspective of the Leader of the Muslims, Imam Khamenei. The main axis is that His Eminence’s views over the past two decades—as reflected in speeches, messages, and the state’s macro-level documents—not only provide a value-laden and operational framework for governance but can also serve as a roadmap for designing an Islamic–Iranian model of progress in this field. A further aim is to extract these necessities in managerial, human, infrastructural, and content categories and to link them to national and civilizational strategies so as to enable
a systematic movement from the self-construction of the country’s cyberspace to the realization of new Islamic civilization-building. The research also seeks, while conducting a comparative review of other countries’ experiences, to identify the capacities and limitations of non-indigenous models and to emphasize the need to design a country-specific model. The method is descriptive–analytical, based on library and documentary data collection. Sources include Imam Khamenei’s statements, the Islamic Republic’s upstream documents, domestic and foreign scholarly studies, and other countries’ practical experiences in cyber governance. To complement the analysis, samples of the cyber governance models of the United States, China, Russia, and France are examined and their strategic elements identified for comparison with indigenous requirements. Subsequently, through content analysis of the Leader’s statements, the components and necessities of cyber governance from his perspective are coded, categorized, and explained. The findings show that, from Imam Khamenei’s perspective, cyberspace governance is not a subsidiary sector but a strategic component on par with the Islamic Revolution, whose importance even precedes economy, security, and culture. His Eminence articulates necessities across four principal domains: in the managerial domain, priority is given to steering the space in favor of religious and revolutionary values, informational oversight over the society’s intellectual space, independence and ownership of content and infrastructure, control of content flows, and prudent management—indicating that cyber management must be strategic, proactive, and grounded in the preservation of national agency and sovereignty. In the human domain, emphasis falls on cultivating faithful, expert, and committed human resources, elevating media literacy, cultivating proper-use culture, and strengthening
cyber discernment; an aware human cadre is the guarantor of other necessities and the
key element for minimizing harms and maximizing opportunities. In the technical and infrastructural domain, priorities include establishing the National Information Network, developing independent hardware and software capacities, securing infrastructures, and severing dependency on foreign platforms and protocols; His Eminence stresses that infrastructure must be designed in relation to content and that primacy lies with value-guided content, not mere technology. In the content domain, the focus is on producing and distributing wholesome, rich, and attractive content suited to societal needs, countering harmful content, and shaping flows that elevate awareness and cultural resilience; cyberspace is introduced as a medium for the expansion of awareness and for society-building that, under a civilizational plan, can be extended from the national level to that of the Islamic umma. To this end, four macro steps are proposed: establishing a National Information Network, creating a national cyberspace, forming a civilizational information network, and creating a civilizational cyberspace—an evolutionary trajectory that transforms cyber governance into an instrument of civilization-building. Comparison with foreign models shows that leading countries do not view cyberspace as merely a technical domain but manage it in conjunction with security, culture, and national power: coordination between state and private sector under security–military oversight in the United States; the social credit system and technological self-reliance in China; a blend of state control and outsourcing in Russia; and the protection of cultural values and privacy in France. At the same time, the Islamic–Iranian model of cyber governance is distinguished by its emphasis on independence, justice, value-guidance, and a civilizational horizon. Overall, the results clarify that, from Imam Khamenei’s perspective (may his shadow be extended), cyberspace governance is a multidimensional process that must simultaneously cover managerial, human, technical, and content dimensions and, within a strategic horizon, ensure both security and independence, realize scientific and cultural growth, and provide a platform for new Islamic civilization-building. This outlook compels policymakers, beyond piecemeal and reactive measures, to design and implement a comprehensive, integrated, and value-centered model.