Consistent with the broader institutional makeup of the system, Iran’s deep state is complex and has several components. The velayat-e faqih stands as the central critical core of the Iranian deep state. As such, the leader provides the institutional and doctrinal organizing principles around which the other components of the deep state rally. These include the state’s praetorian guards, namely the IRGC and the Basij, those institutions specifically designed for system maintenance – that is, the Guarding Council, the Expediency Council and the judiciary – and a series of other formal and informal institutions that also ensure the protection of the system’s interests as defined by them, and the continuity of those interests regardless of the changes that may occur through popular elections. These latter set of institutions include the country’s various intelligence agencies, the Qom-centered clerical establishment, the Friday Prayer Imams, the Special Court for the Clergy, and the state radio and television broadcaster – the IRIB. Impervious to outside demands and influences, each of these institutions report only to the velayat-e faqih, operating mostly outside of and independent from the formal institutions and procedures of the state.

To test the hypothesis of policing as a function of regime type, this chapter focuses on the evolutions of political policing in light of recent Thai political developments – as only political policing is expected to be affected by democratization. Indeed, whether in times of full-fledged military dictatorship or in times of electoral democracy, routine service-oriented, law-enforcement type of policing remains relatively constant. This chapter argues that post-1970s democratization in Thailand had minimal effects on the entrenched practices of authoritarian policing. Democratization did not put an end to these practices but instead correlated with their legalization through the enactment of a set of empowering legislations. This empirical finding invites reconsideration of the hypothesis of a covariation of regime type and policing practices.

This chapter questions the urban/rural distinction, given that in times of conflict and demographic volatility, borders between urban and rural are diminished and events in the countryside shape those of the city and vice versa. Accordingly, it considers the impact of Turkish security forces’ counterinsurgency strategy of mass forced displacement not only on rural areas but also how it reconfigured Kurdish urban centres. It outlines the implementation of the forced evacuation of potentially millions of rural Kurds in order to deprive the PKK of its local support networks. The chapter shows the emotional trauma and the violence of the experiences, which led to the relocation of PKK support from the countryside to the cities. It also addresses the disaggregated strategies of state repression, particularly the so-called deep state that operated outside of any form of democratic accountability. The chapter also covers the state’s relationship with an Islamist movement, Hezbollah, used to target Kurdish intellectuals and politicians and to analyses how the PKK mobilised in Kurdish cities, focusing in particular on Serhildans (Uprisings), Newroz celebrations and guerrilla funerals.

This chapter addresses the ways in which the Trump administration has exemplified and accelerated a long-term trend toward democratic backsliding in the United States by undermining public sector institutions. The Trump administration has sidelined administrative expertise and scientists in many areas, selecting senior leaders whose lack of qualification is frequently matched only by their disdain for their organizational mission, and shown a willingness to push the boundaries of the law beyond its breaking point. While avoiding a direct attack on civil service legislation, the Trump administration has sought to weaken the ability of public sector unions to negotiate for benefits, punished individuals and units deemed not to be politically loyal, and weakened oversight bodies such as the Merit Systems Protection Board. All of this has been accompanied by a rhetoric of delegitimization, wherein the President and his supporters frequently invoke conspiratorial theories of deep state plots. These tendencies, and the costs that they raise, are illustrated both in President Trump’s impeachment process and a botched response to the coronavirus pandemic.

The book is an analysis of recently released CIA and State Department documents on Iran during the period of Mossadeq’s premiership beginning in April 1951 until his overthrow by the CIA in August 1953. These documents had been kept classified some thirty years beyond their scheduled date of release. They reveal that the United Kingdom and USA resorted to “fake news” and “electoral collusion” to undermine Mossadeq. They also reveal the existence of a “deep state” within the Truman administration advocating Mossadeq’s removal as early as May 1951.

John Gray widens the perspective to look at the fear of insecurity as it has spread in recent times across the European continent from Italy to Hungary. He details the various reactions to migrants from the Middle East and the reforms and policy decisions they have created at the state level. His argument is that the security state has transcended politics. With piercing insights, he examines the populism of France’s Macron and asks whether Russia’s Putin is a Hobbesian strategist, and if so, what that suggests for geopolitical strategies from the US, China, and elsewhere.