Pour voir les autres types de publications sur ce sujet consultez le lien suivant : Iran – Foreign relations – Russia.
Articles de revues sur le sujet « Iran – Foreign relations – Russia »
Créez une référence correcte selon les styles APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard et plusieurs autres
Consultez les 50 meilleurs articles de revues pour votre recherche sur le sujet « Iran – Foreign relations – Russia ».
À côté de chaque source dans la liste de références il y a un bouton « Ajouter à la bibliographie ». Cliquez sur ce bouton, et nous générerons automatiquement la référence bibliographique pour la source choisie selon votre style de citation préféré : APA, MLA, Harvard, Vancouver, Chicago, etc.
Vous pouvez aussi télécharger le texte intégral de la publication scolaire au format pdf et consulter son résumé en ligne lorsque ces informations sont inclues dans les métadonnées.
Parcourez les articles de revues sur diverses disciplines et organisez correctement votre bibliographie.
1
Kalbasi, Reyhan Ashtary. « Prospects for Russian-Iranian relations in the nuclear Field ». Post-Soviet Issues 6, no 2 (8 août 2019) : 195–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.24975/2313-8920-2019-6-2-195-202.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Russia is one of the influential participants in the technical and political process of Iranian nuclear programme. Russian-Iranian relations in the nuclear field have been developing fora long time. The article discusses the factors that determine Russia’s approaches to cooperationwith Iran on the nuclear issue. Moscow’s policy takes into account the nature of bilateral Russian-Iranian relations, as well as the development of global processes. The position of Russia onthe further implementation of the Iranian nuclear programme is being considered in accordancewith the agreements reached within the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and takinginto account the change in the position of the United States.Russia and Iran have to take into account foreign factors. This is the sanctions policy of Westerncountries for Russia and moreover it has been constantly intensifying since 2014. The events inCrimea, which led to its entry into Russia, were the main reason for the revision of the relationsbetween the West and Russia. In turn, Iran has uneasy relationships with adjacent states. It wasnot so easy to build relationships with Western countries. The American’s revision of its policyon Iran’s atomic programme violated the current balance of Tehran’s relations with the West,which could lead to a further development of relations between Iran and Russia. Russian-Iraniancooperation is based on the mutual interests of the two countries including their internal politicaldevelopment and political processes in the modern world.
2
Katz, Mark N. « Losing Balance : Russian Foreign Policy toward Iraq and Iran ». Current History 102, no 666 (1 octobre 2003) : 341–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/curh.2003.102.666.341.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Moscow's balancing act between Washington and Baghdad [has] failed, and its balancing act between Washington and Tehran is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain. … [A] reluctance to establish clear priorities among competing interests threatens to undermine both its relations with the United States and its influence in a region of continuing strategic importance to Russia.
3
Omidi, Ali. « Russian-Iranian Ties : Strategic Alliance, Strategic Coalition, or Strategic Alignment (Partnership) ». Russian Politics 7, no 3 (7 septembre 2022) : 341–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00604023.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Abstract One of the most critical foreign policy issues of middle – power states is how to mold attitudes towards major powers. Since 1979, Iran has changed the nature of its relations with major powers. Although the Iranian Revolution adopted the ‘Neither East, Nor West’ motto as a macro guide to its foreign policy, since the late 1980s Iran and the Soviet Union – now Russia, have advanced their bilateral relations. Despite Iran and Russia sharing convergent views on many international issues, they have not promoted their ties to a strategic alliance. The present paper addresses the question of what conceptual model represents Iran-Russia relations and what challenges the two countries face in expanding their strategic partnership in the 2020s. This research addresses these problems at three levels: inter-state, regional, and global, and was conducted through a descriptive-analytical method. It is hypothesized that current Iran-Russia relations could be referred to as a ‘strategic alignment’.
4
Brutian, Anush. « Russian Foreign Policy Dynamics in the South Caucasus. Continuity and Existing Problems ». Analytical Bulletin 14 (1 novembre 2022) : 129–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.56673/18294502-22.14-129.
Texte intégralRésumé :
History helps us to create a wider picture of the reality in which the South Caucasus exists now. That is why we are going to discover the influence of the Russian Imperial and Soviet eras on the states in the region and identify the causality of foreign policy relations between Russia and the South Caucasian states. The main question is why neither Russia nor any of the individual South Caucasian states succeeded in developing an effective strategy towards each other despite their shared borders in the Russia-Azerbaijan and Russia-Georgia cases and being a proclaimed strategic partner in the case of Armenia? How did the Soviet period influence the current state of relations between Russia and the South Caucasian states? Those are the issues analyzed in this paper. International relations in the South Caucasus are convoluted because of their rich and complicated past, among other things. Over the centuries, interstate relations inside the region developed in unpredictable directions. Georgia was a real partner for Russia in the conquest of the Caucasus in the 19th century. Yet, since 1991, relations between Russia and Georgia have been tense at best. The proclaimed secular states of Azerbaijan, though mainly Shia, and Turkey, which is mostly Sunni, are now solid allies, whereas Armenia enjoys a relationship of trust with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Turkey, Iran, and Russia are still the main external players in the region though they have, to some extent, even become “domesticated”. Except for a brief period of turmoil during the Bolshevik Revolution and the ensuing Russian Civil War, the entire Caucasus remained within the Russian sphere of influence until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even now Russia continues to play a significant role in economy, energy and security policy in the South Caucasus.
5
Sadegi, E. Mir Mohammad. « Iran-Russia Defense and Security Cooperation ». RUDN Journal of Political Science 22, no 2 (15 décembre 2020) : 276–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2020-22-2-276-289.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This article analyzes Russian-Iranian cooperation in the fields of defense and security. Methodology used refers to the theory of the school of foreign policy analysis, particularly latest generation, in framework of method of discursive analysis. The method of discursive analysis, exploring the main elements and concepts in ideology, analyzing and determining their place within a consolidated framework as one dominant discourse in a certain period of time, helps explain the formation of such concepts as ally, friend, colleague, competitor, and opponent. This article attempts to identify driving forces and obstacles to Iranian-Russian cooperation in the fields of defense and security in different periods of time. It is shown that the relations between Iran and Russia in the fields of defense and security have been undergoing important changes since 2014. Aggravation of the Syrian crisis has led to strengthening ties and also military and defense cooperation between Iran and Russia at the regional level. It is concluded that Iran and Russia consider spread of extremism in neighboring countries as main threat to their own national security and will develop cooperation in this area. According to the author, there are certain conditions for development of Iranian-Russian relations to the level of strategic allies, but to achieve this it is necessary to prevent the impact of destructive role of third players on the process of defense cooperation between Tehran and Moscow. Author suggests that existing obstacles to Russia’s military cooperation with Iran can be partially eliminated by lifting United Nations sanctions in 2020.
6
Tovsultanov, Rustam Alhazurovich, Lilia Nadipovna Galimova et Eliza Musatovna Ozdamirova. « The Russian-Chechen relations in XVI-XVII centuries ». Samara Journal of Science 6, no 1 (1 mars 2017) : 100–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.17816/snv201761203.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The following paper investigates the Russian-Chechen relations in XVI-XVII centuries. The authors note that the Caucasus was in the sphere of Russian foreign policy at the time of the Russian centralized state formation. With the annexation of the Astrakhan khanate, Russia came to the Caucasus border and the Caucasian direction started to occupy a leading place in the Eastern policy of the tsarist government. The Caucasus in the XVI century was an object of a tense struggle between the two most powerful States of the then Middle East - Ottoman Empire and Safavid Iran - and at the same time a bridgehead, where there was a constant threat to the southern outskirts of Russia from these States and the Crimean khanate. The strengthening of Russia on the Caucasian lands could become the most reliable means to ensure the safety of the South of Russia. So in the XVII and XVII centuries, the North Caucasus was Russias military-strategic interest or, in modern language, a geopolitical one. Chechnya came under the influence of Russia in 1567, when the first Russian militarized city Terek in the North Caucasus was founded. For the peoples of the North Caucasus and of Chechnya the appearance of a Russian fortress on their land was of great political importance. Thus, it was vital for Russia to gain a foothold in the North Caucasus, as the enemy (Iran and Turkey) could do it, which was unsafe for Russias southern borders. It was during this period (late sixteenth century) when close military and political ties of the Moscow government and the Chechens were established. The Moscow government was interested in Chechnya because of its geographical location - the immediate proximity to the towns of Terek and the fact that its territory was the most convenient means of communication with Georgia. The relationship between Chechnya and Russia at the end of XVI - first half of XVII century was almost an ideal model of a peaceful rapprochement of the Chechen with the Moscow government for those conditions and at that time. The Russian authorities did not interfere in the internal affairs of the Chechen societies, they did not impose their own rules or laws, being satisfied with the results of the hostages, the payment of tribute and, if necessary, temporary military service. This led to the fact that in the XVII century allied relations of Chechnya societies with Russia were established. However, at the end of the XVII century Russian-Caucasian connection was significantly weakened.
7
Lunev, S., et V. Yurtaev. « Prospects for Establishing Partnership Relations between India and Iran (Significance for Russia) ». International Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy 19, no 2 (2021) : 121–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.17994/it.2021.19.2.65.3.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is dedicated to the features and potential of the emerging strategic partnership relations between India and Iran. The relevance of the study is determined primarily by the necessity of understanding the new challenges and trends that have emerged in Asia as a result of the formation of India as a great power and a sharp increase in the role of Iran in the megaregion. Analysis of the main approaches of India and Iran to the creation of a new paradigm of international relations in Asia is given with respect to the inclusion of the issue in the strategies of the leading powers of the continent. The role of project diplomacy in the energy and transport spheres in the formation of a trusted connection in the Middle East and Central Asia, including the settlement of the situation in Afghanistan, is shown. It was noted that the exceptional continuity which is one of the basic features of India's development, found its expression in the balancing behavior, including in South-West Asia, where Iran is one of the key players which is under US sanctions, and which foreign policy has retained its commitment to the goals of the Islamic revolution and dominance in the region. At the same time, over the past 2 years, negative trends have emerged in India's foreign policy, indicating that the positions of pro-American forces have significantly strengthened, which can undermine the general consensus on foreign policy that has existed for more than half a century. The focus is on the problems of the participation of India and Iran in the implementation of the international initiatives Belt and Road and the International North-South Transport Corridor (Southeast Asia – India – Iran – Russia – Europe). The study of cooperation in the field of energy (identification of the Iranian potential; supply of hydrocarbons to India; the possibility of buying liquefied gas by India; construction of a strategic gas pipeline from Iran to India, including the sea route, and possible participation of Russia in this project) and prospects for the growth of the Indian-Iranian trade turnover and changes in its structure are also crucial tasks in the analysis of Indian-Iranian economic relations.
8
Biswas, Samprity, et Suryasekhar Chakraborty. « Russo-Iranian Relations in the Light of Putin’s Foreign Policy and the Iranian Nuclear Crisis ». Jadavpur Journal of International Relations 23, no 2 (22 septembre 2019) : 179–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0973598419864905.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Historically, Russia and Iran have shared a complex relationship that continues to color the contours of their present bilateral dealings. The complicated patterns of cooperation and conflict between them have been determined by a host of domestic and external factors on both sides, most pronouncedly manifested by their respective relationship with the USA. This article attempts to analyze Russia’s relationship with Iran in the geopolitical setting of the post-Cold War period. The aim of the article is to see how this bilateral relationship has evolved over time, exploring the underlying changes and continuities, from the Yeltsin period to the Putin era, in which Russia’s foreign policy has come to be characterized by an assertive fervor. Russia, under President Putin, has been pushed further toward the globalist end as the USA has attempted to consolidate Western values and institutions, at times to the extent of ignoring and undermining the principles of international law. It is within this broader context that this article will analyze the extent to which Russia’s disillusionment with the USA has played a role in pushing Russia toward adopting a pragmatic and flexible approach from time to time vis-à-vis Iran, in general, and the Iranian nuclear crisis, in particular. The article argues that Russia’s active involvement in minimizing the impact of sanctions on Iran and its method of dealing with Iran, through dialogue rather than force, is not only driven by Russia’s economic interests in the region, but is also a dependent variable of the larger Russia–USA rivalry at the systemic level characterized by both geopolitical competitions and ideational contestations over norms, beliefs, and practices of global governance.
9
Hedayati Shahidani, M. « Foreign Policy of The United States Against the Global Powers and Regional Actors : Case Study “Russian Federation” and “The Islamic Republic of Iran” ». RUDN Journal of Political Science, no 3 (15 décembre 2015) : 106–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2015-3-106-117.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article examines US foreign policy strategy toward the global powers and regional actors in the post-bipolar period. The aim of the article is to demonstrate the theoretical and scientific significance of the concept of balance in the structure of international relations in the post-bipolar period, by defining behaviors of US against Russia and Iran. The results of the research show that US foreign policy toward Russia and Iran in the short term based on a soft balance, and in the long term - on the depletion of power.
10
Bibi, Fozia, et Lubna Abid Ali. « Historical, Empirical and Domestic Pieces of evidence of Iran's Foreign Policy ». Global Foreign Policies Review V, no I (30 mars 2022) : 57–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gfpr.2022(v-i).06.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This article discusses the empirical and domestic factors in the formulation of the foreign policy of Iran. It is essential to understand the history, state-craft and power complex of Iran. In Iran, Faqih is the supreme leader and he has full command of the armed forces and general policies of the state. The foreign policy complex of Iran consists of individuals, agencies and different departments that directly influence the foreign policy of Iran. The foreign policy complex and Statecraft of Iran's political system play a significant role and influence the foreign policy behaviour of Iran. Since the Islamic revolution, Iran is facing threats from regional and global powers. Post Saddam, Iran is mainly focusing on Saudi Arabia, Israeli and America to contain their influence. Since last many decades, Iran is facing serious criticism and sanctions because of its nuclear program. Despite USA sanctions, Iran is moving from the regional to the global arena and also improving its relations with Russia, and China.
11
Värk, Juhan. « Russia between China and the European Union : Friends or Foes ? » Baltic Journal of European Studies 3, no 1 (1 juin 2013) : 29–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2013-0003.
Texte intégralRésumé :
AbstractFor a long time Russia has regarded the European Union and China as its main economic and trade partners, giving preference to the EU. A sudden change occurred in October 2008, when as a response to the EU’s sharp criticism of the Kremlin over the Georgian-Russian military conflict, Russia decided to re-orient its foreign economic and trade policy from the EU to China and partially also to India. At the same time Russian-Chinese military and energy cooperation started to grow. Russia sold China oil and gas at low price and supplied it with advanced weaponry, which has increased China’s aggression toward its neighbours. Russia also started to politically and militarily support China’s activities in Syria and Iran, which, in turn, worsened Russia’s relations with several EU Member States, including Germany, France and Italy, with whom Russia was planning to cooperate in the developing of the Nord Stream gas pipeline project. However, Russian President Vladimir Putin still declares a great continuing friendship and solidarity with China and is hoping to see the worsening of China’s conflict with the US, which, Putin claims, could avert China’s direct conflict with Russia. Several leading Russian military and political experts describe this hope as unrealistic. At the same time, the volume of EU-Russian mutual trade was almost 395 billion US dollars in 2011, which exceeds in volume the Chinese-Russian trade volume by more than four times. It shows that Russia’s trade reset from the EU to China has been negligible. Also, it is bad news for Russia and China that Iran today stifles cooperation with Georgia and Chinese separatist Uyghurs, and Syrian Bashar al-Assad’s regime is developing cooperation with al Qaeda, and does not explain Russia’s and China’s current similar foreign policy toward Iran and Syria.
12
Arabadzhyan, Zaven A. « The Soviet-Iranian Treaty of 1921 : History and Modernity (to the Centenary of Conclusion) ». Vostok. Afro-aziatskie obshchestva : istoriia i sovremennost, no 6 (2021) : 191. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s086919080017726-5.
Texte intégralRésumé :
After a century since the Soviet-Iranian Treaty was signed in 1921 authors of the article consider its significance from a new viewpoint – as the backing of the sovereignty of Iran and Russia that supported development of their relations. Authors examine the way it complied with the interests of Russia and Iran, and its impact on the bilateral relations in the 20th century. The signing of the Treaty secured the sovereignty of Iran, served as the base for the development of equal relations between the two neighboring states and opened up Iran for relations with foreign states. For the Russia, this document was a step towards breaking its diplomatic isolation. The authors emphasize that Russia had granted almost all its property to Iran which contributed to the improvement of the financial situation in Iran and served as a base for the development of mutually beneficial economic relations between the two countries. The authors mention that the property transfer clause was connected with the security of the Soviet Russia. This fact was reflected in the Article 6 of the Treaty. The Treaty set up the basement for the legal status of the Caspian Sea as a closed sea in the states' joint usage. The Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea, signed in 2018, to some extent retained the special regime of the sea and reflected the spirit of the Treaty of 1921. Although in IRI there are different views about the Treaty some experts consider that it generally complied with Iran's national interests.
13
Fishkin, Jennifer. « The Re-Emergence of Russian Super-Power ? » Cornell Internation Affairs Review 2, no 1 (1 novembre 2008) : 41–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.37513/ciar.v2i1.341.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Russian-American relations have become increasingly adversarial with Russian efforts to regain its power and standing in the world. While Russian-American relations are not at Cold War levels of antipathy, the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, has described them as “alarming,”5 and with senior Bush officials commenting that “Russia has provided overwhelming evidence that it seeks to weaken America. Thus wherever possible internationally, Moscow will work to stop America from achieving success”.5 Russian foreign policy has currently been steering away from the relative accord and partnership of the two countries under the Yeltsin era. It has become what some call the Red-Brown coalition of rule, which has led to changes in foreign policy with the goal of building coalitions to hedge against the United States. To understand this Russian foreign policy, it is necessary to address the Russian domestic political factions, as well as their policy vis-à-vis Iran.
14
Sapronova, M. A. « RUSSIAN-ARAB COOPERATION BEFORE AND AFTER THE "ARAB SPRING" ». MGIMO Review of International Relations, no 3(36) (28 juin 2014) : 27–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2014-3-36-27-36.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article considers the main stages of the Russian- Arab economic cooperation since the beginning of the 1990s up to the present time and changing the «Middle Eastern vector» of Russian foreign policy. Analyzes the problems faced by Russia in the development of foreign policy doctrine in the region of the Arab East, becoming the successor of the Soviet Union; difficulty in building bilateral relations with Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Russia's role as a co-sponsor of the Middle East settlement. Next is considered the foreign policy in 2000 and the return of Russia to the «Greater Middle East», analyzes the problems impeding effective Russian- Arab cooperation. Special attention is paid to the strengthening of bilateral relations with the countries of the Arabian Peninsula, the implementation of joint projects in various fields and to establish a constructive dialogue with the new government of Iraq and the establishment of a sound legal framework of mutual relations. Another important direction of Russian foreign policy in the 2000s, becoming the establishment of relations with the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Simultaneously being established permanent contacts with groups «Hamas» and «Hezbollah». In the last part of the article explores the specificity of modern political, trade and economic cooperation after the events of the «Arab Spring» of 2011. Particular attention is paid to the position of Russia in relation to processes taking place in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria. The crisis in Syria has demonstrated a fundamentally different approaches to its solution by Russia and the West. Ultimately, the firm position of Russia on the Syrian issue secured her role as an important political player in the Middle East. In general, regional transformation in 2011, despite their negative consequences for the Russian-Arab economic cooperation and opened new opportunities to promote the Russian Federation for Arab markets.
15
Khalida Siyami, Eidlak. « Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language in Iranian Universities at the Present Stage ». Scholarly Notes of Transbaikal State University 16, no 1 (mars 2021) : 128–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.21209/2658-7114-2021-16-1-128-133.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to a brief overview of the problems of teaching Russian as a foreign language at the present stage to students of higher educational institutions of the Islamic Republic of Iran from the point of view of the use of modern teaching aids in the absence of a language environment. This problem is relevant for modern linguistics, especially in Iran. In connection with the developing relations in the field of politics, economics and culture, between the two friendly states Iran and Russia in teaching the Russian language in higher educational institutions of Iran, there has been a partial departure from the language in favor of a communicative approach to teaching. Teaching Russian as a foreign language in Iran, in the absence of a linguistic environment and an acute shortage of textbooks, sharply raises the question of the need to constantly improve the learning process through the use of informational electronic learning tools in accordance with modern educational standards. Changes are taking place in the teaching approach, which requires constant professional development of teachers. Learning any foreign language in the absence of a natural language environment requires the creation of an artificial language environment. The modern educational process requires the use of traditional forms of education in conjunction with the introduction of innovative information and communication technologies, as a means of improving communication skills. The use of these technologies has a positive effect and allows us to achieve significant results in the process of teaching Russian in higher educational institutions in Iran. Keywords: Russian as a foreign language, learning tool, visual training, textbook, technical training, communicative learning approach
16
MARTIN, VANESSA, et MORTEZA NOURAEI. « Foreign Land Holdings in Iran 1828 to 1911 ». Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & ; Ireland 21, no 2 (avril 2011) : 131–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1356186311000010.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The issue of the purchase of land in one country, in this case Iran, by other countries, in this case Britain and Russia, is one of great significance because of light it may throw on the strength or weakness of national sovereignty, and the ways and degree to which it may be undermined. It can also show the strategies deployed by the country challenged to protect its territorial integrity, as here in the case of Iran. The intricacies of foreign landownership patterns thus have implications for international relations, on which they can provide telling detail in terms of contemporary power politics. The details of land purchase also demonstrate considerable differences as between the two outside powers involved in terms of their objectives in Iran, and thus challenge a tendency in the literature to see them as similar.
17
Martin, Vanessa, et Morteza Nouraei. « The Role of the Karguzar in the Foreign Relations of State and Society of Iran from the mid-nineteenth century to 1921. Part 1 : Diplomatic Relations ». Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 15, no 3 (novembre 2005) : 261–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1356186305005286.
Texte intégralRésumé :
AbstractThe foreign relations of Iran from 1800 to 1921 have on the whole been discussed in terms of diplomatic relations between states, of ‘Great Power’ policy, and of the impact of the world economy upon a comparatively weak and traditional society. A brief survey of the existing literature reveals that Iran's lack of progress has been attributed among other factors to her form of government, foreign interference and to her predicament as a buffer state between the British and Russian empires. The traditional power structures of Iran, as dominated by an absolute monarchy intent on personal interest with a concomitant lack of realism when engaging in war, was, in Ramazani's view, the origin of the country's weakness. Kazemzadeh saw the subject from the point of view of Anglo-Russian rivalry at the highest levels, and argued that both powers sought to impose hegemony on Iran by a variety of means, including, putting pressure on the Shah and chief ministers, using commercial concessions and exercising intimidation. The competition of Britain and Russia was so intense that each was determined to undermine any plan of development proposed by the other, opportunities were numerous, as, for example, in the introduction of railways. Yapp, to some extent, questioned this argument by pointing out that British interests were more complex than those of the Russians; on the one hand a stronger Iran was a more efficient buffer-state, but on the other hand it could undermine British influence in Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf. Yapp also noted that the British and Russian presence gave advantages to Iran in terms of the development of international trade, the control of internal disorder and in the imposition of regional security. Greaves saw Britain's diplomatic connections with Iran as dominated by her preoccupation with the defence of India, and believed that its attitudes to Iran were neither consistent nor strong. Issawi, in his study of economic development, also presented a more complex picture which emphasises the variety of the factors involved, and also the fluctuations in the economy over the period. He pointed out that trade did grow steadily, that the country benefited from new technology, for example the telegraph and the construction of the Suez Canal, and that it lived within its means. On the other hand, involvement in the international economy from 1890–1914 led to rapidly increasing foreign financial and political factors, which undermined the county's independence. Wright provided a different approach in that, while acknowledging the baleful effects of aspects of Anglo-Russian rivalry on Iran, he was more concerned with the experiences of a variety of ‘English’ amongst the Iranians, and thus offered a study of interaction between foreigners and Iranians at a level below that of international politics.
18
Alekseev, Nikolai Nikolaevich, et Imrin Mekhmanovich Babirov. « Azerbaijan-Iran relations : transformation of Azerbaijan's foreign policy during presidency of I. G. Aliyev ». Конфликтология / nota bene, no 3 (mars 2020) : 16–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0617.2020.3.33056.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This article explores the questions related to the current relations between Azerbaijan and Iran, namely vectors of development and milestones over the period from 2000 to 2020. Analysis is conducted on the contradictory positions and most favorable spheres for cooperation. An attempt is made to answer the question, why the promising relations between Baku and Teheran transitioned into a moderately tense state, and what factors influenced this process. Special attention is given to the process of harmonization of relations between the countries at the time of coming to power of the President of Azerbaijan I. G. Aliyev. Based on the acquired results, the authors came to the conclusion that the relations between Azerbaijan and Iran have high potential, first and foremost due to cultural and historical commonality of the nations. At the same time, the conducted research demonstrates profound systemic contradictions that impede achieving potential in development of bilateral relations between Azerbaijan and Iran. Such contradictions may constitute a threat to the regional international relations and often involve other countries (USA, Israel, Turkey, Russia, and Armenia). The novelty this work consists in comprehensive analysis of key events in the history of modern Azerbaijan-Iran bilateral relations, as well as transformation of foreign policy vectors of the countries, namely in the conditions of coming to power of the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev.
19
Al-Qteishat, Ahmad Saher Ahmad. « The Regional Role of Russia after Military Aid to Syria ». RUDN Journal of Public Administration 8, no 4 (15 décembre 2021) : 434–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2312-8313-2021-8-4-434-441.
Texte intégralRésumé :
One of the most important goals of Russian foreign policy during Vladimir Putins presidency is to strengthen Russian influence in the Caucasus region and Central Asia, as well as to develop relations with such countries as Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The Russian government has always expressed concern about the so-called color revolutions that took place in Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan, as well as the fact that many of them were supported by Western forces. Russia believes that the events of the Arab Spring are in some way similar to the aforementioned revolutions, and that with the support of the West they could bring Islamists to power, which is a dangerous model not only for the countries of the region and the countries neighboring Russia, but also for Russia itself. For these reasons, in the Syrian conflict, Moscow sought to preserve the Assad regime, because believes that the Western model in solving regional problems can lead to the general chaos, like it was, for example, in the Iraqi and Libyan models. Despite the difficulties faced by government officials in Syria since the beginning of the civil war, and thanks to Russian military assistance and reforms, Syria preserved the legitimate regime and did not allow destroying all state institutions. Participation in the Syrian conflict brought Russia a significant role in the region and allowed it to become a successful mediator in most regional issues, as well as to strengthen its economic and political relations with the most important players in the region, as Turkey, Iran, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
20
Maratovna-Imasheva, Marina, Aidar Yurievich-Khabutdinov, Dina Abdulbarovna-Mustafina, Linar Fаrgatovich-Abzalov et Sevindj Israfil Gizi-Alieva. « State bodies regulating Russian-Asian trade in the first half of the XIX century ». Revista de Investigaciones Universidad del Quindío 34, S2 (9 août 2022) : 231–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.33975/riuq.vol34ns2.931.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The urgency of the investigated problem is caused by the state regulation of foreign economic relations is one of the priority political tasks. In the first half of the XIX century, when the era of colonial world division ended, the spheres of influence and colonial expansion of the world powers were outlined. During this period, rivalry with England in Central Asia, Iran and Transcaucasia proved strategically important to Russia. These territories had long been economic partners for Russia. The paper aims to show the role of specially created bodies in the Russian Empire in regulating trade and economic relations of the state with the countries of Central Asia, using general scientific and special-historical methods. The leading methods in the presented study are the method of institutional analysis, problem analysis, and comparative-historical method. Results show that In 1819, the Asia Department and the Asia Committee were established within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs due to reorganizations and the search for the best solution to the urgent problems of economic cooperation with Asian countries. A main task of regulating economic relations was customs and tariff regulation. The compilation and enactment of the Asian Tariff was central to the activities of the bodies that controlled Russian-Asian trade.
21
ATAEV, Ruslan A. « THE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE BAMMATULIN DOMAIN WITH NEIGHBORING FEUDAL POSSESSIONS AND WITH RUSSIA IN THE XVII CENTURY ». Herald of Daghestan Scientific Center of Russian Academy of Science, no 82 (30 septembre 2021) : 16–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.31029/vestdnc82/3.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to the history of the emergence and political position of the Bammatulin domain in the XVII century. Being one of the largest feudal possessions, it played a significant role in the political life of Daghestan at the time. The Bammatulin rulers pursued an independent foreign policy and had relations with Russia, Iran and Turkey.
22
Kireeva, Irina. « Extra-regional aspects of Uruguay’s foreign policy (2010-2015 ». Cuadernos Iberoamericanos, no 4 (28 décembre 2016) : 94–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2016-4-94-106.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article analyses extraregional aspects of Uruguay’s foreign policy during the presidency of José Mujica (2010-2015), namely the development of relations between Uruguay and the USA, the European Union, Russia and countries of Asia and Middle East such as China, India, Iran, Palestine and Israel. This aspect of Uruguayan foreign policy is particularly relevant amid the crisis in Mercosur, when Uruguay is trying to mitigate its adverse consequences for the country’s economy by expanding trade ties with the other countries, both within Latin America and beyond it. The relations between Uruguay and Latin American countries are touched upon in some investigations while Uruguay’s active foreign policy in other regions isn’t studied at all
23
KIDIRNIYAZOV, DANIYAL S. « THE PEOPLES OF THE NORTH CAUCASUS IN RUSSIA'S FOREIGN POLICY IN THE 40-50S OF THE XIX CENTURY ». CASPIAN REGION : Politics, Economics, Culture 66, no 1 (2021) : 50–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.21672/1818-510x-2021-66-1-050-059.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Based on documentary material and scientific literature, the article highlights the place of the North Caucasus in Russia's foreign policy at the time under review. The progressive decline of Shah's Iran and Sultan's Turkey, and the active entry of Peter's Russia into the international arena put the question of the fate of the Caucasus, in particular the North Caucasus, in the circle of important problems of world politics in the period under study. Having become one of the main sources of contradictions in relations between Russia, Persia and the Ottoman Porte, the Caucasus, due to its important geostrategic positions, attracted the attention of the European leading powers - Britain and France. In addition, the role of Ottoman and Western emissaries in Russia's foreign policy during the period under study is considered. Western States, along with the implementation of the "Eastern barrier" policy in Europe, incited the confrontation of Iran and Turkey with the Russian Empire in the Caucasus in order to prevent the advance of St. Petersburg to the Caspian and Black seas, and Russia's exit to the middle East. To this end, the European powers sought to use the support b ases of the Ottoman Sultan and the Crimean Khan, created on the approaches to the North Caucasus in the XVI-XVII centuries. The contradictions between Britain and France on European Affairs, on the one hand, and between Iran and Turkey, on the other, did not exclude the possibility of temporary compromises between the rival States, which was also facilitated by the obvious anti - Russian orientation of their policy in the Caucasus. The Pro-Russian attitude of the local population in the Crimean war and their active desire to fight on the side of the Russian troops are also shown.
24
Ziegler, Charles E. « Sanctions in U.S. - Russia Relations ». Vestnik RUDN. International Relations 20, no 3 (15 décembre 2020) : 504–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2313-0660-2020-20-3-504-520.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Given America’s leading position in the global economy, the U.S. government has frequently leveraged that power to punish “rogue states”, discourage nuclear proliferation, promote democratization, and create pressure for regime change. Washington relied on economic incentives in relations with Russia after 1991, but since 2012 the United States has utilized a broad range of economic sanctions against Russian side, leading to a significant deterioration in what was already a troubled relationship. In contrast to earlier comprehensive sanctions like those imposed on Iraq and Haiti, the U.S. is now crafting “smart” or targeted sanctions designed to exert maximum pressure on selected Russian elites and firms. Rather than evaluating the effectiveness of these measures on changing Russian behavior, the author explores the neglected domestic dimension of the U.S. sanctions process to improve understanding of U.S. foreign policy. This article draws on primary sources in the form of Congressional legislation, executive orders, and official statements to analyze U.S. sanctions imposed on Russia, and develops three brief case studies - the Magnitsky Act, post-Ukraine sanctions, and the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act - to explicate the main issues and actors driving U.S. sanctions. The author argues that domestic factors, including Congressional pressures and interest group activity, are critical to understanding U.S. sanctions regimes. While President Donald Trump has frequently resisted congressionally imposed sanctions, expectations for a more conciliatory approach towards Russia under the Trump administration have not materialized.
25
Khanaliyev, Nuradin U. « TRIANGLE “RUSSIA-TURKEY-IRAN” IN THE CONTEXT OF US STRATEGY IN THE MIDDLE EAST ». RUDN Journal of Political Science 21, no 1 (15 décembre 2019) : 66–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2313-1438-2019-21-1-66-77.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is an attempt to identify and analyze some key principles of the US foreign policy in the Greater Middle East region, which, concurrently, factor into the rapprochement between Russia, Turkey and Iran in their opposition to the policies of the West as a whole and Washington in particular. The main attention is focused on the complex and controversial nature of the relations in the Russia- Turkey-Iran geopolitical triangle and, at the same time, the relations of each of the countries with the United States. As a result of the analysis, a conclusion was made that the very logic of Washington’s aggressive policy pushes the three countries to coordinate their efforts in ensuring national security and protecting national interests in the region. However, certain doubts were expressed regarding the possibilities of forming any strong long-term alliance between the three of them.
26
Sokolova, Tatiana, et Mohammad Rasouli. « Tudeh Party and North Oil Score ». International Journal of Social Science Research and Review 4, no 3 (1 octobre 2021) : 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.47814/ijssrr.v4i3.93.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The Soviet Union and before that, Russia as one of the most powerful neighbors of Iran in history, despite its abundance of oil resources always looked at Iran's oil resources for specific purposes. In examining the impact of oil on the relations between the two countries of Iran and Russia, it turns out that they were trying to reach the Iranian oil resources in some cases, one in 1299/1921and the other in 1920/1941. At the time of Iran's occupation of the Second World War, the Russians, though at every turn did not succeed in their goals, during the occupation of Iran in September 1941 by the Allies they used all the necessary tools. For example, they used the Tudeh Party, the first and most organized Leftist party in Iran, to achieve its oil targets. At this stage, the Russian Foreign Ministry Deputy Foreign Minister, Sergey Kavtaradze came to Iran and formally requested for a license to exploit North Oil. The Tudeh Party, while previously opposed to any transfer of privilege to foreigners, when the Soviet Union- their spiritual and co-professional supporters came out, by providing the Balance Scheme they granted the southern oil share to the British and the North Sea's privilege to the Soviet Union. Because the American companies were set to exploit the oil scorecard in northern Iran, immediately the Soviet Union entered the scene and the Tudeh party also met with them. This oil demand was rejected by the Iranian parliament and the Iranian government opposed any new privilege because of the prevalence of war conditions in the world. In this context, the efforts of the Tudeh Party to satisfy the Iranian government and parliament in order to agree with the Soviet demand for oil in their own way can be considered.
27
Gladkova, E. L., et N. V. Melekhina. « ON THE STUDY OF IRANIAN-RUSSIAN RELATTIONSHIP DEVELOPMENT IN THE PERSIAN LANGUAGE POLITICAL DISCOURSE ». Philology at MGIMO 20, no 4 (20 décembre 2019) : 109–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.24833/2410-2423-2019-4-20-109-118.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article attempts to study the development of relations between Russia and Iran (20152019) in the Persian political discourse. The aim of the paper is to represent the main characteristics of Iranian-Russian relations based on the research of Iranian leaders’ and other officials’ speeches and statements related to cooperation and relationship between the two countries. The methodology was based on a qualitative-quantitative express content analysis of the texts extracted from media resources. To reach the above mentioned goals the study was carried out in five stages: determination of the analysis categories (measurement units “relations” / “relationship” and “cooperation”); selection of content units (articles); count of word usage according to the selected categories; systematization of subcategories i.e. qualitative characteristics of the selected categories; conclusions. The findings confirming the positive dynamics of the Iranian-Russian relations in the period of 2015-2019 may be helpful for the international relations’ experts, foreign policy officers as well as interpreters.
28
Ларин, А. Б. « The Ups and Downs of the Agreed Course : Russia, Britain and the Persian Crisis of 1911 ». Vestnik of Northern (Arctic) Federal University. Series Humanitarian and Social Sciences, no 2 (10 avril 2021) : 11–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-v083.
Texte intégralRésumé :
This article covers the interaction between Russia and Great Britain on the Persian Question in 1911, when a number of internal and external factors caused a serious political crisis in Qajar Iran, which directly affected international relations in the Middle East. In late 1910 – early 1911, the Persian government initiated an invitation of foreign experts to reorganize the finances of Qajar Iran. As a result of a rather complex discussion between St. Petersburg, London and Tehran, it was decided to invite a group of American specialists headed by William Morgan Shuster, an American financial adviser who had previously been involved in similar activities in the Philippines. This choice was later proven unfortunate: in many ways, it was Shuster’s approach that provoked the emergence and contributed to the deepening of the 1911 crisis. In addition, the paper considers the main factors and stages of development of the crisis, Shuster’s role in the events, St. Petersburg’s and London’s policies on the issue, as well as the differences in the approaches of Russian and British diplomacy to its resolution. It is demonstrated that in the face of a significant threat to the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, the Foreign Office (represented by Sir Edward Grey) displayed a willingness to make compromises on the Persian Question in order to prevent a break in diplomatic relations with Russia. At the same time, the crisis clearly demonstrated how fragile the balance of positions of the two Powers in the region was and how easily even a regional conflict can jeopardize the relationship between the two Powers in a wider context.
29
Potapov, Yu B. « On main foreign policy priorities of Iran’s government ». Diplomaticheskaja sluzhba (Diplomatic Service), no 4 (11 août 2022) : 304–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.33920/vne-01-2204-06.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article discusses the main foreign policy priorities of the government of Iran headed by President E. Raisi and its activities in achieving these goals in the fi rst year of its existence. It is emphasized that the ongoing changes in this area do not fundamentally change Iran's foreign policy, the main purpose of which is to ensure favorable foreign policy and foreign economic conditions for the functioning of the Islamic State and for Iran's transformation into a regional center of power. President E. Raisi declared that Iran's main foreign policy priorities are "relations with neighboring states" and "multilateral economic integration." In regional policy, the priority is the development of cooperation along the so-called "axis of resistance", namely, the establishment of strong ties between Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon under the auspices of offi cial Tehran. The above-mentioned "axis of resistance", in fact, is a mechanism for multilateral political and economic regional integration in Western Asia, which is designed not only to strengthen political ties and promote the formation of an anti-American and anti-Israeli bloc, but also to allow Iran, under Western sanctions, to signifi cantly increase the volume of its economic cooperation with the above-mentioned countries. The Afghan issue also occupies an important place in the foreign policy activities of the Iranian Government, which is interested in resolving the Afghan crisis and is taking steps to prevent a new wave of Afghan refugees, the growth of drug and arms smuggling into its country, on the one hand, and on the other hand, to resume and expand economic cooperation with Kabul. Another priority direction of the foreign policy of the new government of Iran is the Asian track. The Government of President E. Raisi seeks to build and intensify Iran's political and economic strategic cooperation on a long-term basis with such friendly and influential states as Russia and China.
30
Skorospelov, P. P. « The Russian Globalization Project in the XX Century. Anatomy of a Military-Political Strategy ». Russia & ; World : Sc. Dialogue, no 3 (21 août 2022) : 122–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.53658/rw2022-2-3(5)-122-149.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article discusses the main components of the military-political strategy of Russia in the «short» 20th century – from 1900 to 1991. Special attention is paid to how the foreign policy and the use of Armed Forces were planned. Reconstructing the intellectual ideas that created the framework of the foreign and military policy of the Russian state at that time, the author focuses on the elements that unite the leaders of Russia of the 20th century from Nikolai Romanov to Mikhail Gorbachev. Such issues as the «globalization» of the USSR in world affairs, relations with neighboring Asian centers of power, such as China and Iran, the sphere of «special state interests» of the USSR in Eastern Europe are discussed in the work. The evolution of Russian military strategy in the 20th century is studied: from betting on victory in the World War in the first half of the century to focusing on the actions of expeditionary groups during the Cold War. The article analyzes in detail the strategic deterrence measures carried out by the Armed Forces of the USSR in the 1950-1970. The issue of the resources of military-political strategy is considered separately.
31
Malysheva, D. « International Political Competition in the Post-Soviet Central Asian Space ». World Economy and International Relations 65, no 7 (2021) : 106–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-7-106-115.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article analyzes the innovations that determine the main directions and specific characteristics of international political competition in Central Asia. Particular attention is paid to political alternatives presented by the leading partners of the Central Asian countries – Russia, China, Turkey and Iran. In the context of the rivalry unfolding in the post-Soviet Central Asian space, the multi-vector policy of the five Central Asian states opens up a “window of opportunity” for various external forces to influence political and economic processes in the region in such a way that its states become objects of multilateral contention. Russia, which has the most powerful economic and military-political resource in the CIS, has a serious potential to promote its interests in Central Asia. They are primarily aiming at maintaining political stability in the Asian part of the post-Soviet space. Russia is also initiating many integration innovations in Central Asia, developing military cooperation with the countries of the region. At the same time, in Central Asia, Russia is confronted by rival forces. In the forefront is China. This great power has significantly expanded its influence in Central Asia, especially within the framework of the One Belt, One Road initiative. Economic, political, and cultural structures operating in Central Asia under the aegis of Turkey act often as alternatives to Russian integration projects. But Turkey, like Iran, has restrictions on its activities in Central Asia. Therefore, the effectiveness of the policy of these large Middle Eastern states is lower than that of Russia and China. China, Russia, and Iran are motivated to limit US influence in Eurasia, which occasionally drives them closer. In a sense, Turkey agrees with the idea of reducing the political presence of non-regional states in Central Asia. But when the US ceases to be a priority in the foreign policy of all four states, the rivalry between them may re-emerge. This will inevitably lead to a clash of interests, an increase in competition of ideas, integration projects, political and military strategies.
32
Abalian, Anna I. « Middle Eastern policy of the Russian Federation in the post-soviet period : Dynamics of development ». Political Expertise : POLITEX 16, no 2 (2020) : 263–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/spbu23.2020.205.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is an overview of the main directions of the policy of the Russian Federation in the Middle East from 1991 to the present. Certain stages are identified when the transformation of the paradigm of the Middle East foreign policy and, accordingly, the change in the role of Russia in the regional arena took place. Various domestic and foreign policy factors are considered, which caused the loss of Russia’s influence in the countries of the region in the 1990s and early 2000s, but with the change in geopolitical realities, they lost their significance. This made it possible from the mid-2000s to begin the process of restoring ties with traditional Middle Eastern partners, simultaneously with the development of new areas of cooperation, in particular, with Israel and the monarchies of the Persian Gulf. The article also identifies strategic priorities that affect the nature of relations between Russia and such key countries of the region as Iran and Turkey as well as determine the dynamics of their development. Particular attention is paid to the comparative analysis and assessment of the geopolitical consequences of the policy of “active neutrality” in the early stages of the “Arab Spring”, which led to the weakening of bilateral relations with the countries of the Middle East and North Africa in addition to Russian positions in the region as a whole, and Russia’s armed intervention strategy within the current Syrian crisis. In conclusion, the author argues that there is a need for further development and diversification of contacts with the countries of the Middle East region in the formation of Russian foreign policy taking into account new trends in the world political and economic arena.
33
БЯЗРОВ, А. В., et Б. Г. КОЙБАЕВ. « THE CAUCASUS IN RUSSIAN-IRANIAN POLITICAL AND DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS AT THE END OF THE XVI CENTURY ». Известия СОИГСИ, no 42(81) (9 décembre 2021) : 5–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.46698/vnc.2021.81.42.017.
Texte intégralRésumé :
В статье исследуется «кавказский вопрос» в российско-иранских политико-дипломатических отношениях в конце XVI в. В 1580–1590-х гг., в условиях усилившейся османской экспансии, между Сефевидским Ираном и Русским государством были налажены политико-дипломатические отношения. В указанный период отмечалась активизация внешней политики Ирана и Русского государства на Кавказе, которая была обусловлена его геостратегическим значением. Однако дальнейшему развитию двустороннего сотрудничества воспрепятствовала проблема разграничения сфер политического влияния в кавказском регионе. Важным условием достижения политического господства Казвина и Москвы на Кавказе являлась внешнеполитическая ориентация кавказских народов, которая была предопределена целым рядом факторов: географической близостью, общностью национальных интересов и традиционных культурных ценностей и стремлением к сохранению независимости путем политического лавирования между интересами трех держав. Кавказские народы, с одной стороны, принимали активное участие в организации освободительной борьбы против внешних завоевателей, с другой – стремились заручиться поддержкой могущественных соседних государств, выражая готовность к сохранению внешнеполитической ориентации, соответствовавшей их национальным интересам. На основе широкого круга архивных документов и мемуарной литературы комплексно исследуются политика Ирана и России на Кавказе, российско-иранские политико-дипломатические отношения, определены роль и место кавказского региона во взаимоотношениях двух стран в конце XVI в., а также показано воздействие турецкого фактора на трансформацию российско-иранских двусторонних отношений. Методологическую основу исследования составили методы исторического познания, основанные на принципах историзма, научной объективности и системного анализа. Caucasus, Iran, Russian state, Ottoman Empire, political and diplomatic relations, foreign policy. The article examines the "Caucasian question" in the Russian-Iranian political and diplomatic relations at the end of the XVI century. In the 1580s – 1590s, under the conditions of intensified Ottoman expansion, political and diplomatic relations were established between Safavid Iran and the Russian state. During this period, the intensification of the foreign policy of Iran and the Russian state in the Caucasus was noted, which was due to its geostrategic significance. However, the further development of bilateral cooperation was hampered by the problem of delimiting the spheres of political influence in the Caucasian region. An important condition for the achievement of the political domination of Kazvin and Moscow in the Caucasus was the foreign policy orientation of the Caucasian peoples, which was predetermined by a number of factors: geographical proximity, common national interests and traditional cultural values, and the desire to maintain independence through political maneuvering between the interests of the three powers. The Caucasian peoples, on the one hand, took an active part in organizing the liberation struggle against external conquerors, on the other hand, they sought to enlist the support of powerful neighboring states, expressing their readiness to maintain a foreign policy orientation that corresponded to their national interests. Based on a wide range of archival documents and memoirs, the policy of Iran and Russia in the Caucasus, Russian-Iranian political and diplomatic relations are comprehensively studied, the role and place of the Caucasian region in relations between the two countries at the end of the 16th century is determined, and the impact of the Turkish factor on transformation of Russian-Iranian bilateral relations is shown. The methodological basis of the research was formed by the methods of historical cognition based on the principles of historicism, scientific objectivity and systems analysis.
34
Poghosyan, Benyamin. « US policy in the South Caucasus prior to and after the 2020 Karabakh War in the Context of the Evolving Regional and International Geopolitics ». Journal of Political Science : Bulletin of Yerevan University 1, no 3 (29 décembre 2022) : 36–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.46991/jops/2022.1.3.036.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article analyzes the main directions of US foreign policy in the South Caucasus before and after the Artsakh war in 2020, taking into account new regional and geopolitical challenges. It is shown that the United States considers the policy in the South Caucasus in the context of Russian-American relations. In recent years, the South Caucasus has not been included in the US foreign policy priorities, yielding to both the Asia-Pacific region and Ukraine. Under US President Trump, the three main US goals in the region were to include the South Caucasus in a policy of maximum pressure on Iran, launch the Southern Gas Corridor, and contain Russia. The US took a rather passive position during the 2020 Artsakh war, limiting itself only to calls for a cessation of hostilities and the organization of a meeting between the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Washington. As a result of the study, it was substantiated that after the end of the Artsakh war, the main goal of the US was to eliminate the Russian monopoly in the process of resolving the conflict. After the outbreak of the war in Ukraine on February 24, 2022 and the complete breakdown of Russian-American relations, the weakening of Russia’s position in the South Caucasus became the cornerstone of US regional policy.
35
Yadav, Ranjitabh Singh. « Energy Diplomacy In Azerbaijan’s Foreign Policy ». Think India 22, no 3 (18 septembre 2019) : 570–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.26643/think-india.v22i3.8340.
Texte intégralRésumé :
In the 21st century, the relations between states are being shaped by factors deriving from the national interest and the national security agenda. Many countries have shifted their foreign policies towards an economization strategy, i.e. assigning a particular importance to the economic priorities and instruments in foreign policy, as in the case of the small state of Azerbaijan, bordered by large neighbors and influenced by yet larger powers. Before Azerbaijan’s independence, Regional powers such as Russia, Turkey and Iran were active and after the independence, the US and EU, added to the competition over the rich oil and natural gas resources of the Caspian region. All of these countries created an external pressure and influence in Azerbaijan, turning the Caucasus region into a new playing field of the Great Power Game. Thus, the geopolitical ambiguity combined with oil and gas resources and further with geographical imperatives will shape and pose challenge to the country’s foreign policy.
36
KARPOVICH, Oleg. « PROSPECTS FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH IN LATIN AMERICA AT THE PRESENT STAGE ». Russian Journal of Management 7, no 4 (28 janvier 2020) : 111–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.29039/2409-6024-2019-7-4-111-115.
Texte intégralRésumé :
. In the XXI century, cardinal changes continue in the financial and economic situation of Latin America. New influential non-regional partners besides the US and the EU, China, Iran, India, Russia, have come to the fore, significantly expanding the range of foreign relations of Latin American and Caribbean countries, which significantly increases the role of Latin America in the international arena. In economic terms, Latin America is experiencing a period of increased international dynamics, characterized by the intensification of intraregional interactions and the search for new non-regional partners and markets.
37
Smirnova, Veronika A. « Sino-Iranian Economic Cooperation under Sanctions ». Problemy dalnego vostoka, no 6 (2022) : 125. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s013128120023005-6.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The current stage of Sino-Iranian relations is characterized by a high level of economic cooperation. Its key elements are the spheres of energy and infrastructure construction, including that within the framework of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. It is noteworthy that cooperation has shown relevance and strong efforts to maintain ties through complicating cooperation mechanisms, despite the drop in trade based official figures under sanctions pressure. This article attempts to distinguish specific mechanisms of Sino-Iranian economic cooperation and trace their transformation under the sanctions. At the same time, the specific mechanisms of cooperation have differed depending on the level of sanctions pressure. Along with the last round of US policy tightening towards Iran in 2019-2020 Sino-Iranian cooperation has acquired a more cautious character, but has not been curtailed at all. First of all, the intermediaries’ network involved in trade accounts and supplies has become even more complicated. In addition, building new business relationships has focused around narrow-profile platforms and funds that organize relevant events. The article contains a detailed analysis of cooperation cases between companies and specialized institutions of China and Iran in various industries The experience gained by China in building mechanisms for cooperation with the sanctioned Iran can partly be applied in relations with Russia. Relations between China and Russia are entering a new phase and will be transforming. Relevant practices can be primarily used when developing mechanisms for foreign trade accounts, taking into account the effect of existing restrictions and the risks of secondary sanctions for Chinese companies.
38
Ramazanova, Aytan. « Dynamics and main directions of the foreign policy of the Republic of Azerbaijan in the south Caucasus ». Scientific Bulletin 4 (2020) : 99–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.54414/bywi9850.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Azerbaijan occupies an important geopolitical and geo-economic position in the South Caucasus. The article is about geopolitical priorities and interests of Azerbaijan in the South Caucasus. The main attention is paid to the priority directions of the foreign policy of the Republic of Azerbaijan in the regional context. The key points of the bilateral relations of the Republic of Azerbaijan with the states of the region are analyzed, the main trends of their development are identified, the degree of confrontation on key regional issues is assessed. The author also made an attempt to graphically illustrate and show the dynamics of bilateral relations with regional states in a historical perspective, showing periods of warming and cooling in relations with the main countries of the region, special attention being paid to relations between Azerbaijan and Iran, Turkey, Russia, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan. In the research process, there have been used methods such as analysis of the situation, induction, deduction, systematic approach and so on.
39
Kameneva, M., G. Lukyanova et D. Tavberidze. « Foreign Relations and Inter-Civilizational Interaction from a Social-Political Perspective : The Case of Russia, Iran and Egypt ». EUROPEAN RESEARCH STUDIES JOURNAL XXI, Issue 2 (1 novembre 2018) : 499–513. http://dx.doi.org/10.35808/ersj/1018.
Texte intégral
40
Zongze, Ruan, et Debasish Chaudhuri. « Contemporary International Situation and China-Russia-India Relations ». China Report 41, no 4 (octobre 2005) : 375–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000944550504100402.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The trend of Bush's policy and its impact in international affairs is worth noting during the second presidential term of George Bush. The US, besides persisting in pushing forward its ‘democratisation plan in the greater Middle East’, has been intensifying its attempt to penetrate into Central Asia. For some time now, the main focus of US foreign policy has been Iraq, the Gulf and the Middle East, but it has given equal importance to containing the so-called ‘North Korean nuclear weapon’ and to the ‘Iranian nuclear issue’. There were new developments in China-Russia-India tripartite relations. China and India agreed to establish a strategic partnership, greatly promoting bilateral relations between them. The developmental process in these countries, Russia-China and India, has provided ample scope for strengthening trilateral cooperation among them.
41
Aghazada, Mirmehdi M. « Azerbaijani-Iranian Relations : Main Directions and Features in 1991-2019 (Historiographical Overview) ». Vestnik RUDN. International Relations 21, no 4 (27 décembre 2021) : 803–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2313-0660-2021-21-4-803-821.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article is devoted to the study of bilateral relations between Azerbaijan and Iran in 1991-2019, as well as historiography on this topic. The author analyzes the priority areas of cooperation, such as trade and economic relations, tourism, cooperation on trilateral platforms, as well as the factors that influenced the dynamics of their development: Azerbaijani Turks living in Iran; the issue of the legal status of the Caspian Sea and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The author also identifies six stages of bilateral relations: 1) building relations (1991-1993); 2) trouble trusting in a relationship (1994-2000); 3) the most tense period (2001-2003); 4) enhanced cooperation (2004-2010); 5) sharp deterioration (2011-2013); 6) normalization and rapid development (2014-2019). It is indicated that because both states had different foreign policy strategies and international positioning on regional issues, in 1991-2019, bilateral relations were characterized by inconsistency - cooperation, on the one hand, and confrontation, on the other. However, thanks to the efforts of the presidents of both states, bilateral interaction during this period was generally able to maintain its constructive nature. Special attention is paid to the cooperation in the regional triangles: Azerbaijan - Iran - Russia and Azerbaijan - Iran - Turkey, which had different goals and different expectations. If the trilateral cooperation between Baku, Tehran and Moscow is mainly aimed at the implementation of the North-South International Transport Corridor, then the cooperation between Baku, Tehran and Ankara is aimed at strengthening trust and confidence in interstate relations. In conclusion, the author stresses that thanks to the efforts of political elites, especially the Presidents of Azerbaijan and Iran, in general bilateral relations in 1991-2019 were able to maintain their constructive character.
42
Kidirniyazov, Daniyal S. « IN THE POLITICS OF RUSSIA, PERSIA AND THE OTTOMAN PORTE IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE ‘30S – ‘50S OF THE XVII CENTURY ». History, Archeology and Ethnography of the Caucasus 14, no 4 (27 décembre 2018) : 32–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.32653/ch14432-43.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article, based on a wide range of archival data and special academic literature, provides a science-based description of the political situation of the state formations of the North Caucasus of the period under study. Against the background of the complex historical events of the time in question, the role of local peoples in relations between Russia and Shah Iran and Sultan Turkey (its vassal - the Crimean Khanate) is shown. In addition, much attention is paid to the internecine war that broke out in the region in the early ‘40s of the XVII century, which led to a change in the balance of power of the North Caucasian ruling elites of different foreign policy orientation.Over the course of several centuries, the North-Eastern Caucasus became the object of expansion of the adjacent great power of the time, Shah Iran. Shah Iran sought not only to maintain its influence in the Caucasus, especially in the Caspian Sea basin but also to push the northern borders of the Shah possessions to the Terek.According to the author, the Persian shahs, in achieving their goals, tried by any means to attract influential local rulers to their side and make them an instrument of their policy in the Caucasus. In such a complex international political situation, the North Caucasian rulers, primarily the Tarkovsky shamkhals, deftly tacked Iran and Russia in contradictions, successfully defending their independence.
43
Sultanova, Nigar Tahir qizi. « Year 2019 and international agenda of the European Council ». Международное право и международные организации / International Law and International Organizations, no 1 (janvier 2020) : 45–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.7256/2454-0633.2020.1.32299.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The European Council represents the supreme level of political cooperation between the EU member-states. Diverse questions pertaining to international politics are discusses on the various levels: summits (in 2019 EU – League of Arab States summit, EU –China summit, EU – Ukraine summit in Kyiv, EU – Canada summit in Montreal, G7 summit); conferences and informal meetings; council boards on foreign affairs; joint conferences; association councils, etc. A new strategic agenda 2019-2024 adopted by the European Council determines he priority areas that guide the work of the European Special Councils and other EU institutions. Transatlantic relations, crises in Syria, Ukraine and other parts of the world, relations with Russia, Iran nuclear deal, and other question remain on the agenda of the European Council. The article explores the legal framework of the actions of European Council in the area of foreign policy. The overview of foreign policy agenda of the European Council allows analyzing the role of the European Union on the international arena.
44
Stephen, Matthew D. « Book Review : International Relations : Worldviews of Aspiring Powers : Domestic Foreign Policy Debates in China, India, Iran, Japan and Russia ». Political Studies Review 12, no 2 (7 avril 2014) : 279–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1478-9302.12053_51.
Texte intégral
45
Kunovski, M. N., et N. V. Pomortseva. « GENDER APPROACH TO THE ORGANIZATION OF PEDAGOGICAL INTERACTION IN AN INTERNATIONALLY ORIENTED UNIVERSITY ». Izvestiya of the Samara Science Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Social, Humanitarian, Medicobiological Sciences 23, no 78 (2021) : 42–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.37313/2413-9645-2021-23-78-42-48.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The growing popularity of the Russian higher education in the world and the growing number of foreign students in the universities of Russia arouse interest to the issues of interethnic interaction and adaptation to the academic environment of an internationally oriented university. The article is devoted to the problem of higher education enhancing in the modern multinational academic environment of Russian internationally oriented universities. The purpose of the study is to analyze the gender specificity of the interethnic relations between the representatives of different ethnic groups in the process of pedagogical interaction in the Russian-speaking educational environment of an internationally-oriented university. The study reveals how gender stereotypes of a student and a teacher are determined by the national culture with its inherent traditional structure of gender roles.There was conducted a survey among the foreign students of the pre-university and other faculties of RUDN University. 98 students from China, 46 students from Iran, 10 students from Azerbaijan, 18 students from Afghanistan, 25 students from Vietnam, 18 students from Lebanon, 21 students from Mongolia, 33 students from Turkmenistan, 15 students from Uzbekistan and 18 students from Ecuador (a total of 348 foreign students) took part in the survey. Having analyzed the answers of the respondents, the authors made the conclusion about the influence of gender on the interethnic relations in an internationally oriented university, in particular, in the pedagogical interaction process in multiethnic groups. On the basis of the data presented, the authors prove the presence of ethnocultural features of gender and the importance of taking them into account for harmonizing interethnic interaction and the educational process enhancing
46
Filin, Nikita A., Vladimir O. Koklikov et Aleksandr S. Khodunov. « EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION IN THE VIEWS OF THE IRANIAN EXPERT COMMUNITIES ». RSUH/RGGU Bulletin. Series Eurasian studies. History. Political science. International relations, no 3 (2020) : 40–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.28995/2686-7648-2020-3-40-54.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The article considers the development of Iran’s relations with the Eurasian Economic Union, as well as the views of Russian and Iranian experts on further prospects for cooperation. It is shown that the economic potential of Iran, despite existing economic difficulties, is comparable to the potential of the most developed countries of the organization. Iranian authorities are in favor of stepping up relations with the Eurasian Economic Union, which the organization itself is committed to. Russian and Iranian experts generally support further intensive development of Iran’s trade and economic relations with that organization, but they note on a number of issues in the way. According to Iranian experts, the Free Trade Agreement with the Eurasian Economic Union will allow Iran to overcome the severe American sanctions and revive its economy through a sharp increase in exports. But some experts oppose an active rapprochement between Iran and the Union, seeing that as a danger to weak domestic production or to relations with Western Europe, which occupies a much larger place in Iran’s foreign trade than the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union.
47
Kokeev, A. « Trans-Atlantic Relations in Germany's Foreign Policy ». World Economy and International Relations 59, no 11 (2015) : 38–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2015-59-11-38-46.
Texte intégralRésumé :
Relations between Germany, the US and NATO today are the core of transatlantic links. After the Cold War and the reunification of Germany, NATO has lost its former importance to Germany which was not a "frontline state" anymore. The EU acquired a greater importance for German politicians applying both for certain political independence and for establishing of a broad partnership with Russia and China. The task of the European Union Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) development has been regarded by Berlin as a necessary component of the NATO's transformation into a “balanced Euro-American alliance”, and the realization of this project as the most important prerequisite for a more independent foreign policy. Germany’s refusal to support the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to the first serious crisis in US Germany relations. At the same time, there was no radical break of the deeply rooted Atlanticism tradition in German policy. It was Angela Merkel as a new head of the German government (2005) who managed to smooth largely disagreements in relations with the United States. Atlanticism remains one of the fundamental foreign policy elements for any German government, mostly because Berlin’s hope for deepening of the European integration and transition to the EU CFSP seems unrealistic in the foreseeable future. However, there is still a fundamental basis of disagreements emerged in the transatlantic relationship (reduction of a military threat weakening Berlin’s dependence from Washington, and the growing influence of Germany in the European Union). According to the federal government's opinion, Germany's contribution to the NATO military component should not be in increasing, but in optimizing of military expenses. However, taking into account the incipient signs of the crisis overcoming in the EU, and still a tough situation around Ukraine, it seems that in the medium-term perspective one should expect further enhancing of Germany’s participation in NATO military activities and, therefore, a growth in its military expenses. In Berlin, there is a wide support for the idea of the European army. However, most experts agree that it can be implemented only when the EU develops the Common Foreign and Defense Policy to a certain extent. The US Germany espionage scandals following one after another since 2013 have seriously undermined the traditional German trust to the United States as a reliable partner. However, under the impact of the Ukrainian conflict, the value of military-political dimension of Germany’s transatlantic relations and its dependence on the US and NATO security guarantees increased. At the same time, Washington expects from Berlin as a recognized European leader a more active policy toward Russia and in respect of some other international issues. In the current international political situation, the desire to expand political influence in the world and achieve a greater autonomy claimed by German leaders seems to Berlin only possible in the context of transatlantic relations strengthening and solidarity within the NATO the only military-political organization of the West which is able to ensure the collective defense for its members against the external threats. However, it is important to take into consideration that not only the value of the United States and NATO for Germany, but also the role of Germany in the North Atlantic Alliance as a “representative of European interests” has increased. The role of Germany as a mediator in establishing the West–Russia relations remains equally important.
48
YEŞILBURSA BEHÇET, KEMAL. « FROM FRIENDSHIP TO ENMITY SOVIET-IRANIAN RELATIONS (1945-1965) ». History and Modern Perspectives 2, no 1 (30 mars 2020) : 92–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.33693/2658-4654-2020-2-1-92-105.
Texte intégralRésumé :
On 26 February 1921, the Soviet Union signed a «Treaty of Friendship» with Iran which was to pave the way for future relations between the two states. Although the Russians renounced various commercial and territorial concessions which the Tsarist government had exacted from Iran, they secured the insertion of two articles which prohibited the formation or residence in either country of individuals, groups, military forces which were hostile to the other party, and gave the Soviet Union the right to send forces into Iran in the event that a third party should attempt to carry out a policy of usurpation there, use Iran as a base for operations against Russia, or otherwise threaten Soviet frontiers. Furthermore, in 1927, the Soviet Union signed a «Treaty of Guarantee and Neutrality» with Iran which required the contracting parties to refrain from aggression against each other and not to join blocs or alliances directed against each other’s sovereignty. However, the treaty was violated by the Soviet Union’s wartime occupation of Iran, together with Britain and the United States. The violation was subsequently condoned by the conclusion of the Tripartite Treaty of Alliance of 29 January 1942, which permitted the Soviet Union to maintain troops in Iran for a limited period. Requiring restraint from propaganda, subversion and hostile political groups, the treaty would also appear to have been persistently violated by the Soviet Union: for example, the various radio campaigns of «Radio Moscow» and the «National Voice of Iran»; the financing and control of the Tudeh party; and espionage and rumour-mongering by Soviet officials in Iran. Whatever the Soviet’s original conception of this treaty may have been, they had since used it one-sidedly as a treaty in which both countries would be neutral, with one being «more neutral than the other». In effect, both the 1921 and 1927 treaties had been used as «a stick to beat the Iranians» whenever it suited the Soviets to do so, in propaganda and in inter-governmental dealings. During the Second World War, the treaty between the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and Iran, dated 29 January 1942 - and concluded some 5 months after the occupation of parts of Iran by allied forces, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union were entitled to maintain troops in Iran, but the presence of such troops was not to constitute a military occupation. Nonetheless, Soviet forces in the Northern provinces used their authority to prevent both the entry of officials of the Iranian Government and the export of agricultural products to other provinces. The treaty also required military forces to be withdrawn not later than six months after «all hostilities between the Allied Powers and Germany and her associates have been suspended by the conclusion of an armistice or on the conclusion of peace, whichever is the earlier». This entailed that the Soviet Union should have withdrawn its forces by March 1946, six months after the defeat of Japan. Meanwhile, however, there emerged in Iranian Azerbaijan, under Soviet tutelage, a movement for advanced provincial autonomy which developed into a separatist movement under a Communist-led «National Government of Azerbaijan». In 1945, Soviet forces prevented the Iranian army from moving troops into Azerbaijan, and also confined the Iranian garrison to barracks while the dissidents took forcible possession of key points. At the same time, Soviet troops prevented the entry of Iranian troops into the Kurdistan area, where, under Soviet protection, a Kurdish Republic had been set up by Qazi Mohammad. In 1946, after Iran had appealed to the Security Council, the Russians secured from the Iranian Prime Minister, Qavam es Saltaneh, a promise to introduce a bill providing for the formation of a Soviet-Iranian Oil Company to exploit the Northern oil reserves. In return, the Soviet Union agreed to negotiate over Azerbaijan: the Iranians thereupon withdrew their complaint to the Security Council, and Soviet forces left Azerbaijan by 9 May 1946. In 1955, when Iran was considering joining a regional defensive pact, which was later to manifest itself as the Baghdad Pact, the Soviet Government threatened that such a move would oblige the Soviet Union to act in accordance with Article 6 of the 1921 treaty. This was the «big stick» aspect of Soviet attempts to waylay Iranian membership of such a pact; the «carrot» being the conclusion in 1955 of a Soviet-Iranian «Financial and Frontier Agreement» by which the Soviets agreed to a mutually beneficial re-alignment of the frontier and to pay debts arising from their wartime occupation of Northern Iran. The Soviets continued their war of nerves against Iranian accession to the Pact by breaking off trade negotiations in October 1955 and by a series of minor affronts, such as the cancellation of cultural visits and minimal attendance at the Iranian National Day celebrations in Moscow. In a memorandum dated November 26, the Iranian Government openly rejected Soviet criticisms. Soviet displeasure was expressed officially, in the press and to private individuals. In the ensuing period, Soviet and Soviet-controlled radio stations continued to bombard their listeners with criticism of the Baghdad Pact, or CENTO as it later became. In early 1959, with the breakdown of the negotiations for a non-aggression pact, Iran-Soviet relations entered into a phase of propaganda warfare which intensified with the signature of the bilateral military agreement between Iran and the United States. The Soviet Union insisted that Iran should not permit the establishment of foreign military bases on its soil, and continued to threaten Iran despite the Shah’s assurance on this issue. Consequently, the Iranians denounced Articles 5 and 6 of the 1921 treaty, on the basis of which the Soviet Union was making its demands. Attempts by the Secretary-General of the United Nations to improve relations met with little success until September 1959, when Russia offered massive economic support on condition that Iran renounced its military agreements with the United States. This offer was rejected, and, as relations continued to become strained, the Soviets changed their demand to one neither for a written agreement that Iran would not allow its terrain to be used as a base of aggression nor for the establishment of foreign missile bases. The publication by the Soviet Union of the so-called «CENTO documents» did nothing to relieve the strain: the Soviet Union continued to stand out for a bilateral agreement with Iran, and the Shah, in consultation with Britain and the United States, continued to offer no more than a unilateral assurance. In July 1962, with a policy of endeavouring once more to improve relations, the Shah maintained his insistence on a unilateral statement, and the Soviet Government finally agreed to this. The Iranian undertaking was accordingly given and acknowledged on 15 September. The Instruments of ratification of the 1957 Agreements on Transit and Frontier Demarcation were exchanged in Moscow on 26 October 1962 and in Tehran on 20 December, respectively.
49
Magomedov, Amirbek J., et Madina A. Omarkadieva. « TRADITIONAL CRAFTS OF DAGESTAN IN THE CONTEXT OF HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RELATIONS WITH THE REGIONS OF RUSSIA, COUNTRIES OF THE CAUCASUS AND THE MIDDLE EAST ». History, Archeology and Ethnography of the Caucasus 18, no 2 (23 juin 2022) : 284–305. http://dx.doi.org/10.32653/ch182284-305.
Texte intégralRésumé :
The present study examines the formation and mass development of artistic crafts in Dagestan for the past millennium. The evolution of traditional arts and crafts of Dagestan can be seen through the history of their formation, contacts of the inhabitants with foreign cultures. The leading approach in the study of the problem that combines historical-cultural, historical-comparative and artistic-descriptive methods, which allow for a comprehensive consideration of the cultural influences of neighboring (Transcaucasia, Russia) and the Middle Eastern countries on the development of arts and crafts in Dagestan over the past millennium. The article shows that the spread of Islam, close contacts of Dagestan with the peoples of Transcaucasia, Iran, the Middle East, the accession of Dagestan to Russia, foreign cultural influences of the Soviet era provided prerequisites for the development of professional and folk arts and crafts in Dagestan. At the same time, the craftsmen of Dagestan not only borrowed, but also redesigned many other cultural and ethnic traditions, creating new artistic forms and phenomena, often of a world and regional level. The historical development of Dagestan, associated with the spread of Islam, the influence of the Transcaucasian, Iranian, Middle Eastern, Russian-European, Soviet traditions of artistic culture, contributed to the formation in Dagestan of the traditions of religious architecture, ordinary, glazed and painted ceramics, carpet weaving, weapons, jewelry, coppersmithing, decorative stone and wood carvings, embroidery with gold and silk thread, etc. The provided material is of great scientific value for historians of culture and art, ethnographers, practitioners of arts and crafts and fine arts, for specialists engaged in educational practice in schools and universities.
50
Rakel, Eva. « IX. Paradigms of Iranian Policy in Central Eurasia and Beyond ». Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 2, no 3 (2003) : 549–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156915003322986398.
Texte intégralRésumé :
AbstractIran and CEA have historically close links going back as far as the sixth century BC when the Persian Achaemenid Empire conquered the region. For a long time, Persian was the main language of the elite in CEA. Since the disintegration of the USSR, Iran has been determined to re-strengthen its position in CEA, particularly in economic and security terms. Iran is an active player in the Economic Co-operation Organization (ECO). It also promotes the construction of southern pipelines from CEA to export the region's oil and gas resources as it hopes to profit from it for its own oil and gas export. However, it has to be noted that Iran in no way is a dominant player in the region. The rivalry between the various political factions of the Iranian political elite - the Conservative Traditional Right (Rast-e Sonati), Traditionalist left (Chap-e Sonati), Revolutionary or New Left or Hizbollah, Conservative Modern Right Rast-e Modern - leads to incoherence in Iran's foreign policy and makes Iran an unreliable actor to cooperate with not only the countries of CEA but also for other countries interested in the region (i.e., the United States, European Union, Turkey, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia). Additionally, the great national economic problems in Iran are an obstacle for Iran to become more active economically in CEA.