Navigating “Sensitive” States - How Surveillance Practices Affect Research Development between the United States and Iran

Aug 27, 2026

Upload by Ophelia

Centered on a personal review essay account, the text examines how surveillance practices shape the conditions under which feminist anthropological research can be planned and conducted. Through a detained, interrogation-like encounter during fieldwork in Tehran, it shows how questions about film, contacts, and sexuality translate into scrutiny of researchers’ networks and agendas. The narrative links bureaucratic procedures, censorship pathways, and festival permits to researchers’ strategic self-presentation, illustrating how state monitoring and gender ideology constrain research development across the US-Iran context.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages9

Reading Time23 min

AccessFree to download

Review Essay

Fieldwork Interrogation in Tehran

Research Framing and Network Scrutiny

Feminist, Sexuality, and Transgender Film Focus

Festivals, Permits, and Censorship Pathways

International Journal of Middle East Studies (2023), 55, 786–794 doi:10.1017/S0020743823001472 REVIEW ESSAY Navigating “Sensitive” States: How Surveillance Practices Affect Research Development between the United States and Iran Nat Nesvaderani Department of Anthropology, University of Laval, Quebec, Canada E-mail: [natalie.nesvaderani@ant.ulaval.ca](natalie.nesvaderani@ant.ulaval.ca) I had completed two months of exploratory dissertation research in Tehran in the winter of 2015 when I was called in for questioning by two men who declined to provide me with their names or that of the office they called from. We met in an unmarked building adjacent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in downtown Tehran. They were middle-aged and sat on opposite sides of a table with a framed picture of Ayatollah Khomeini. When they offered me tea, I declined, remembering my cousins’ hurried advice an hour earlier. “God forbid someone puts something in your drink and they take you away to a different location,” he had said. The official who carried out most of the questioning had a full head of hair, a big smile, and a legal pad that he used to take notes, while the other sat back in his chair, quietly looking at me over his glasses. My flight out of Tehran was scheduled for the following day but, for now, the quiet interrogator was twirling my passport in slow circles between his thumb and pointer finger while his colleague asked: “So, tell us about your research interests in film.” I told them about my interest in the post-revolutionary experimental films of Mohsen Makhmalbef, aware of the fact that this director’s work is now part of the Iranian film canon and no longer considered threatening to the regime. This was the apolitical research description I had prepared with Iranian scholar mentors ahead of my trip. Over my fifteen years studying and researching in Iran, I had become practiced at providing vague research descriptions to curious, suspicious bureaucrats. Still, it was difficult to understand how serious this particular interrogation was, or whether it would become serious based on my responses. They wanted to know whose homes I had visited. I replied that I only visited family, not wanting to provide the names or addresses of friends. Still smiling, the interrogator asked,“Who are you in contact with,[Abbas] Kiarostami?” I replied emphatically,“No, how could I possibly interview Kiarostami?” Implying that the renowned director (whom, at that time in 2015, was still living) was far too famous for me to seek an audience with. He pressed forward,“But aren’t you interested in the people of Iran, and not just films, isn’t this what anthropology is about?” He continued, still smiling,“and what about independent film, aren’t you particularly interested in women’s films?” At that moment, I began to recognize the words I had used in an email sent months ago to Ahmad Kiarostami, the film director’s son based in San Francisco, California. We stared at each other, and the tone of the interrogation began to shift. I continued recognizing bits and pieces of my own words peppered throughout his refrain: “Who are you in contact with?” His questions became more like a test, and my responses felt like a dance. One by one the names of directors were drawn forth. Slowly but more readily, I offered the names of friends whose films had screened at the Cinema Verite Festival (Haghighat) in Tehran, © The Author(s), 2024 . Published by Cambridge University Press. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence ([http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743823001472](https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743823001472) Published online by Cambridge University Press International Journal of Middle

FAQs

What triggers increased scrutiny during the author’s fieldwork in Tehran?

The author is called in for questioning after beginning exploratory dissertation research. Interrogators probe research interests and personal contacts under a surveillance-oriented approach.

How do the interrogators test or redirect the author’s answers?

Their questioning shifts toward identifying who the author is connected with, including well-known directors and peers. The questions become structured like a test, with the author recognizing wording from prior emails.

What role does feminist and sexuality-focused research play in the interrogation?

Interrogators focus on whether the author is a feminist researcher interested in sexuality, asking specifically about film plans involving transgender people. The scrutiny targets the researcher’s thematic orientation rather than only documentary subject matter.

Aug 27, 2026

Upload by Ophelia