University of Tehran Public Law Studies Quarterly 2423-8120 Articles in Press 2025 05 11 The Neutral State: Myth or Reality? The Neutral State: Myth or Reality? 101975 10.22059/jplsq.2025.390638.3702 FA Ali Velaei PhD Student in Public Law at Shahid Beheshti University Seyed Mohammad Ghari Seyed Fatemi Professor in International Law and Human Rights, Shahid Beheshti University. Seyed Alireza Hosseini Beheshti Assistant Professor in Political Philosophy, Tarbiat Modares University. Journal Article 2025 02 17 Liberal neutrality, considered the dominant theory in contemporary political philosophy, has been accompanied by many issues in practice. In this paper, based on conceptual analysis and a critical approach, the reasons for the theoretical and practical impossibility of a neutral state will be examined. The discussion will address the self-contradictory nature of neutrality and inability to justify itself impartially, the reliance on a form of atomistic individualism, the neglect of the contextual nature of values, the pursuit of cultural uniformity in non-liberal societies, the lack of free and independent will necessary for autonomy, the failures of the cultural market to providing sufficient range of options for citizens, as well as the crises arising from the neutral state that envisions no ultimate purpose for human beings. This absence can strip citizens of any form of concern for virtues in the public sphere, playing a passive role in the flourishing of human capabilities, while also disregarding citizens' social responsibilities and necessary interventions of the state. According to the findings of this research, determining the scope of neutrality and partiality is significant, and by the distinction between the concepts of neutrality and impartiality, what is desirable and achievable is limited neutrality or impartiality. Liberal neutrality, considered the dominant theory in contemporary political philosophy, has been accompanied by many issues in practice. In this paper, based on conceptual analysis and a critical approach, the reasons for the theoretical and practical impossibility of a neutral state will be examined. The discussion will address the self-contradictory nature of neutrality and inability to justify itself impartially, the reliance on a form of atomistic individualism, the neglect of the contextual nature of values, the pursuit of cultural uniformity in non-liberal societies, the lack of free and independent will necessary for autonomy, the failures of the cultural market to providing sufficient range of options for citizens, as well as the crises arising from the neutral state that envisions no ultimate purpose for human beings. This absence can strip citizens of any form of concern for virtues in the public sphere, playing a passive role in the flourishing of human capabilities, while also disregarding citizens' social responsibilities and necessary interventions of the state. According to the findings of this research, determining the scope of neutrality and partiality is significant, and by the distinction between the concepts of neutrality and impartiality, what is desirable and achievable is limited neutrality or impartiality.