جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « eurasia » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

Although deterrence can be traced back to the military literature and the writings of Carl von Clausewitz, deterrence theory neverthelessflourished in the Post-World War II era and after the advent of nuclear weapons. The deterrence strategy is especially important in some regions such as the Middle East, Eurasia and South Asia, which are among the most intense  conflict zones in the world.Research question: What are the conceptual coordinates of the internationalization of deterrence as a theoretical framework and its application to Iran's deterrence strategy in the peripheral regions?

Research hypothesis:

 In response to the main question of the article, using the case study method, the author proposes the concept of internationalization of deterrence and examines its application first by the great powers of the world and then by Iran in its peripheral regions including the Middle East, Eurasia and South Asia. The internationalization of deterrence means a situation where the deterrent power provides part of its military and security capabilities including weapons, forces, and allies to other actors who intend to raise the level of deterrence, increase its effectiveness and expands its geographical scope, thereby creating fundamental changes in the strategic calculations of a potential aggressor. Internationalization of deterrence using missile power and paramilitary groups has been a part of Iran's military and security strategy in peripheral regions including the Middle East, Eurasia and South Asia.

Methodology and theoretical framework:

 In this research, using Qualitative case study method, the concept of internationalization of deterrence and its application by Iran at the regional and global level has been analyzed. This paper presents the theoretical framework of the internationalization of deterrence. In the framework of this theory, political actors in the field of world politics transfer part of their military and weapons capacity to allied actors with the aim of strengthening deterrence.

Deterrence theory flourished after World War II and after the advent of nuclear weapons. The United States as the first nuclear power, maintained a monopoly on nuclear weapons for four years. During the Cold War, as part of the nuclear sharing policy, the United States deployed tactical nuclear weapons in Europe to counterbalance the conventional superiority of the Warsaw Pact countries. Nuclear sharing was in fact a kind of internationalization of US nuclear deterrence. In addition to nuclear deterrence, world powers internationalized their conventional deterrence at lower levels. The deployment of Jupiter missiles in Turkey, the deployment of Soviet missiles in Cuba, the deployment of the American and Soviet missiles on European soil, and the AUKUS treaty are among the most important examples of internationalization of conventional deterrence after World War II. The collapse of the Soviet Union, the end of the Cold War and the emergence of new threats such as terrorism, cyber attacks and limited wars, caused a change in the deterrence strategy of countries and more attention to improving conventional deterrence.Iran is one of the countries that has changed its conventional deterrence strategy in the last few decades. The 1979 revolution can be considered as the origin of Iran's proxy deterrence because one of its most important goals was the export of its revolutionary thinking for the freedom of the nations of the region. Although this ideal did not change any country in the region, it aligned some groups in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Palestine, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and etc.  with Iran’s regional doctrine. The 8-year Iran-Iraq war can be considered as the source of Iran's missile deterrence. In the early years after the victory of the revolution, the structure of Iran's military forces was practically in disarray. Saddam Hussein also tried to use this opportunity to achieve his expansionist goals in the oil-rich areas of Iran. During the war, while the Iraqi army had access to many conventional and unconventional weapons from 80 countries, Iran was under arms embargo and in order to receive a limited number of missiles, it had to enter into tough diplomatic and military negotiations with four countries: Syria, Libya, North Korea, and China. After the end of the war, the development of the missile program became a key to Iran's deterrence strategy. Due to arms embargoes and financial problems after the war, Iran first built its pillars of deterrence on the two bases of proxy and missile deterrence, and in the second stage, it internationalized its deterrence in peripheral regions such as the Middle East, Eurasia and South Asia.

The 1979 revolution and the 8-year war with Iraq prompted Iran to use a different deterrence strategy in its peripheral regions in order to internationalize its deterrence. Financial problems after the 8-year war with Iraq, as well as arms embargos, led Iran to internationalize its deterrence using missile power and allied groups. This policy has changed the strategic calculations of possible aggressive powers and has prevented a new large-scale war against Iran.

Gopolitics, like any other science, has general rules and specific patterns and this issue has provided the feasibility of the school of geopolitics in the field of global thought. In Russian scientific circles, due to the country's role in the balance of international power in the last three centuries, thinking about Russian geopolitics has become a vital necessitybut the important issue in this field has been the dispersion of opinions and the instability of propositions over time and finding a common point of view for the formulation of the special Russian school in this field.

Research questions: 

The main question raised in this research is how to talk about the Russian geopolitical school and understand its central concepts?Research hypothesis: The author's hypothesis is that despite the dispersion of ideas, their common link and point of commonality can be expressed in the concepts such as maritime inaccessibility, territorial vulnerabilities, the problem of strategic depth, the buffer zone and expansionism as the Russian geopolitical school. Among these, two categories of geographical vulnerability and territorial expansion of the central sign are taken into consideration.

Methodology and theoretical framework: 

To examine the hypothesis of the article, I have used the method of qualitative and thematic content analysis of texts related to Russian geopolitical thought. In this regard, various texts have been written in the last three centuries. Although more distant texts are difficult to access, many new texts refer to the main themes of those writings. To review these texts, the author tried to select the most important ones and then by reviewing them, select the most important thinkers in the field of Russian geopolitical studies. The main basis for selecting indicators such as the age of scientist, the importance of thought, thematic coherence and the reputation of the school of thought was created. In the meantime, of course, some approaches such as Eurasian, Atlantic and Eastern approaches have been less difficultbut this issue regarding other approaches has not been an easy task due to existing differences of opinion.

The main factor that has caused the Russian school of geopolitics to remain limited is that geopolitical ideas in this country, unlike other great powers, are very diverse and controversial and this makes it very difficult to understand. The causes of this diversity can be found in important cases such as territorial expansion and the complexity of factors affecting geopolitics, the diversity and expansion of threats and their types, the issue of empire and the crisis of national identity, the instability of borders and the constant intellectual and identity conflict against the West. From the point of view of Russian geopolitical thinkers, this country is very vast and has many neighbors and has a common land border with fourteen countries and faces various threats in the western, southern and eastern directions. Russia has a territorial connection with the two continents of Europe and Asia and has a close maritime neighborhood with the American continent. Russia has a serious relationship with three global geostrategic regions including Euro-Atlantic, Middle East and East Asia, and therefore, from their point of view, this issue is considered very vital. From the point of view of many thinkers of Russian geopolitical knowledge, to overcome the problems and threats caused by the lack of maritime access and defense vulnerability, this country should put strategies such as strategic depth, buffer zone and territorial expansion on the agenda and this is a fact that has shaped its practical policy in post-Mongol Russia from the 15th century to the present day. The collection of these geopolitical propositions in recent centuries have led to two basic issues in Russia: on the one hand, the need for a powerful government and on the other hand, the creation of an imperial state. However, as a result of the powerful and autocratic government, it has faced the development crisisand the inevitable state of the empire, it has also suffered an identity crisis and both have caused instability in the directions of domestic and foreign policy.

Based on the findings of this article and despite some conflicts, we can talk about the Russian geopolitical school whose main concepts and components are common among different thinkers in this country from the 18th century to the present day. It seems that the reason for the lack of recognition is a kind of denial, neglect, cultural and ideological denial of Russia in the past two centuries by Western academic circles and the lack of translation of Russian texts in Iran, except for some articles on Eurasian approach. Therefore, despite the dispersion of views in the field of Russian geographical studies, concepts such as maritime inaccessibility, territorial inaccessibility, defense vulnerability, lack of strategic depth, the necessity of a buffer zone, and expansionist politics are the common variables of these views and geographical vulnerability, especially in the western regions, and territorial expansion in the surrounding environment are the focal points of this geopolitical school.The findings of the article showed that the realities of Russian geography and the concerns of the thinkers of geographical studies have provided important possibilities for the presentation of the Russian geopolitical school along with its other western counterparts and without it, a deep understanding of the country's foreign policy becomes difficult. With its help, important progress can be made for the countries around Russia and especially Iran, which has been one of its victims in a wide area from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean.

After three decades, the Eurasian region is still facing many issues and problems in the field of development and security, and despite the many possibilities for cooperation and convergence, it still appears to be a conflicted and fragmented region, with important missing linkage that is to enter a period of stability, prosperity and progress. The main question in this article is what are the consequences of Iran's regional policy after the membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization for security and stability in the Eurasian region? The hypothesis is that according to the evolution of Russia's approach in the framework of the Greater Eurasia project, China's new role in the Belt and Road Initiative, Expansion of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and Iran's membership, ore opportunities have been provided for Iran's cooperation in the field of trade, transportation and energy transfer, which can have a serious effect on the economic development of the region and strengthen regional security more seriously. The authors have tried to use the theoretical framework of "development and security link" in the new studies of national security to examine the arguments of their hypothesis. To examine the hypothesis, we have used the method of qualitative content analysis of documents, texts, reports and news related to the Eurasian area. The findings of this research show that Iran enters a series of Eurasian cooperation for the third decade of the 21st century, which creates important possibilities for institutionalism, convergence, development and regional security.

Creation of the Shanghai cooperation Organization (SCO) as a Eurasian subject plays significant role in political conditions in the regional and global scale that is influenced by its bold members like Russia, China and India. In the other hand, regarding the imposed vast western sanctions against Iran and capacities of SCO, membership of the Islamic Republic of Iran and this organization could leave positive effects on economic and security interest of Tehran. Regarding significance of this issue, the present paper has focused on considering and elaboration of Iran’s membership in SCO effects on functionality of the sanctions. So, as the pivotal question of his paper we have to ask that “what will be the effects of the permanent membership of Iran in SCO on sanctions issue?” the findings of this paper show that regarding remarkable population of the member states and assuming the demand of some SCO members (China, India and Pakistan) for energy resources and also focus on multilateral agreement between the members or creation of united bank with unique currencies as financial mechanism of this organization as secure tool against US sanctions, the membership of Iran in SCO could create and foster attractive economic opportunities for Tehran in order to improve its foreign trade in global scale. The used methodology of this paper is based on descriptive-analytical approach and collection of the givenIntroductionShanghai Cooperation Organization as a Eurasian institution is of special importance in the field of international relations due to its political, geopolitical and geoeconomic influences. In this regard, Iran, with its full membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, has moved towards strengthening the balance of power and by establishing closer relations with powers such as China and Russia, it can force the western players to give points in the field of demands and desirable areas. do it yourself This diplomatic victory can be a winning card at the critical time of nuclear negotiations. Of course, it depends on how to use this card. Iran should be aware that putting all its eggs in one basket, such as the basket of the Eastern bloc or the basket of the Western bloc, will force it to accept the conditions imposed by that bloc, which can naturally harm the national interests. Therefore, while optimally and intelligently using the opportunity of full membership in the SCO, it should receive its maximum points from the West and think about maintaining the balance of power. Therefore, considering that Iran's foreign policy has common goals with China and Russia; Dealing with the unilateralism of the United States and the possibilities of reaching and interacting with other regional agreements such as ECO, SAARC, ASEAN, actually limit the maneuvering power of the West and NATO. However, the closer the structural axes of the national power of each country, that is, the increase of organizational connections between commercial, economic, security, educational, etc. institutions in a reciprocal way, can lead to the formation of a new security balance’  Theoretical FrameworkThe current research was enlightened by Structural realism holds that the nature of the international structure is defined by its ordering principle (anarchy), units of the system (states), and by the distribution of capabilities (measured by the number of great powers within the international system), with only the last being considered an independent, a body of realist theories that argue states care deeply about the balance of power and compete among themselves either to gain power at the expense of others or at least to make sure they do not lose power. They do so because the structure of the international system leaves them little choice if they want to survive. This competition for power makes for a dangerous world where states some-times fight each other.  MethodologyThe research method in this article is a descriptive analytical method through which the effect of Iran's membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization on the erosion of US sanctions against Iran is investigated.      Results & Discussion Membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization can help expand Iran's regional and international markets, and Iran can set export goals based on this membership. Export target countries are easier to find with membership in international organizations and work is facilitated more quickly. In addition, membership in the Shanghai Organization can lead to the adjustment of some political and non-economic issues and problems. In the financial field, one of the dimensions of structural power, considering that the formation of the joint banking council is one of the most important economic functions of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, it can be said that the movement towards the financing system of joint projects and capacity building to empower talents is one of the characteristics of this. It can also be argued that due to the image of its strategic position, economic potential, energy resources and extensive experience and expertise in dealing with terrorism, Iran can add more value to the current programs of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and use all its capacity as the bridge between the East and the Islamic world will be used to create a common political and economic vision for the region. Therefore, the issues of Iran's cooperation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organizations appear more in the expansion of the synergy of cooperation in the fields of transportation, fighting terrorism, energy and trade.  Conclusions & SuggestionsFrom the point of view of this research, Iran's full membership in the Shanghai Organization is an important step in the direction of drawing a Eurasian identity. This issue is important because the past tensions in Tehran's relations with Dushanbe can be attributed to the lack of a coherent Eurasian policy. Currently, there is a consensus in Iran's strategic community that the Shanghai Organization is a suitable mechanism for advancing the policy of looking to the east of Iran. The evolution of Iran's participation in the Shanghai Organization from observer status in 2005 to full membership in 2021 shows the significant importance of this organization in the strategic calculations of Iran's Eurasian policy.

Eurasia includes the two continents of Europe&Asia.After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it seems that the current world order, which was previously unilaterally determined by the United States for years, has faced serious challenges with the rise of China.America has always been a powerful geopolitical actor in the region, which has been able to shape its relations with its partners considering its national interests.The policy of the Donald Trump administration towards Eurasia has been accompanied by an approach based on pure pragmatism.The interests of the US government in this region mainly include the problem of fighting terrorism, strengthening regional security and regional integration, energy and economicaspects,as well as the alternating restraint of two influential players inEurasia,China&Russia.In addition,the results of the research show that Trump failed to advance American policies in Eurasia because he could not find a strong arm for the United States.The reason for this failure can also be seen from the relative independence of Eurasian countries from world powers and from the other hand the geographical distance between America&Eurasia, because although Eurasian countries have maintained their independence from America and China, they paid more attention to China and Trump Giving them to America was not very successful.

Background and ContextNumerous studies have indicated that the state instability existence in past of countries has not only delayed their development but also influenced their current level of development. The study of political instability in the Eurasian region during the agricultural era (3000 BC to 1600 AD) encompasses a significant portion of the history and the contemporary world geography. It can serve as a basis for examining political instability in the history of Iran. Many scholars have considered the proximity to the Central Asian nomadic societies as one of the factors contributing to instability in Eurasian countries. Some of them argue that the history of these tribes' interactions with neighboring regions forms the core of Eurasian history. There are also a limited number of quantitative studies that have encompassed various aspects of these tribes impacts on neighboring communities. There have been numerous studies on the effects of these tribes on Iran as well, but none of them have covered this temporal and geographical scope.Objective of the ResearchThe main objective of this research is to investigate political instability in Eurasia, particularly in Iran, during the agricultural era. It focuses on the Central Asian nomadic influence tribes on the creation of political instability in Eurasia. The research utilizes this framework of interactions and gathered information to periodize political instability in the history of Iran.Research MethodologyIn this study, political instability is perceived as a low average lifespan of states and a high coefficient of variations (standard deviation-to-mean ratio). The study considers Continental Eurasia (including Europe and Asia, excluding their islands) as the studied region and the agricultural era 3000 BC to 1600 AD as the studied period. To assess the timing and extent of Central Asian tribes' influence on political instability in Eurasian states, a total of 432 Eurasian states in the study period were identified. Subsequently, the time and extent of Central Asian tribes' impact on political instability were examined by applying three categorizations to these states: 1) Regional categorization based on the importance of the region each government could have for Central Asian tribes, dividing into Central Asia, unimportant region, less important region, and highly important region. 2) Since the period of significant influence of these tribes on Eurasian developments occurred between 500 BC and 1600 AD, states that existed before 500 BC were classified as belonging to the first period, while others belonged to the second period. 3) By combining the previous two categorizations, the states were grouped into four categories: (I)Central Asian states, (II)unattractive states, (III)low unattractive states, and (IV) highly unattractive states.Descriptive analysis, Two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test (KS2), and categorical regression were used for data analysis and inference.FindingsThe findings regarding regional categorization show the significant differences in the lifespan of states among regions. The average lifespan of states in unimportant regions is more than 3.5 times that of highly important regions, and the coefficient of variation for highly important regions is higher than for other regions. Regression results confirm the model and regression coefficients validity, indicating that this four-group categorization explains 29% of the variations among states.Statistical analysis demonstrates a significant difference in the mean lifespan of states between these two periods. Specifically, the average lifespan of states in the first period in the Region Two, a significant region, is nearly eight times higher than the states in second period of that region. Additionally, the lifespan of states, particularly in Iran, has decreased during the agricultural era.These analyses also reveal significant differences in the average lifespan of states within the categorized groups, with coefficient determination of 0.429. The mentioned item indicates that this model accounts for a significant portion of the variations in the lifespan of the examined states.Moreover, Iran's status in terms of the number, average lifespan, and coefficient of variation of states is examined within different groupings, and the KS2 test confirms that Iran's belonging to specific groups and the irconcordance lack of other groups, except for its concordance with Central Asia.Several supplementary studies on Chinese history, the timing of the beginning and end of the agricultural era, and the period of Central Asian tribes' influence provide further support for the stability of the results.ConclusionThe statistical analysis results show an inverse relationship between the average states lifespan and the level of threat from Central Asia in various categories of states. Evidently, the agricultural-era states' political instability was significantly affected by the invasions of Central Asian tribes. The four-group categorization explains approximately 43% of the variation in states’ lifespans. Notably, this level of explanation is achieved with only four categorical variables.Regarding Iran, the findings indicate that the political instability of Iranian agricultural-era states was also influenced by interactions with Central Asian tribes. The periodization of Iranian history can be established as mentioned bellow:(up to 600), (600 to 1000), (1000 to 1250), and (1250 onwards), with distinct events in the second period onwards attributed to Central Asian tribes, such as the emergence of the Seljuks and the Mongol invasions. The results demonstrate that political instability in Iran was higher than the average for other regions, with an average government lifespan of 90 years during the fourth period, which lasted for approximately 550 years, slightly exceeding the average lifespan of a human today.

Eurasia includes the two continents of Europe and Asia. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it seems that the current world order, which was previously unilaterally determined by the United States for years, has faced serious challenges with the rise of China. Although China does not have harsh aggressive policies unlike the United States, but with its rapid economic development, it has worried the United States. Perhaps, in their opinion, China is the same as America in the 1940s-1950s. Therefore, the US is inclined to continue its expansion in Eurasia under any pretext. From this point of view, many challenges between China and America are likely. This research has been conducted with the aim of examining the American policies in Eurasia and the challenge with the emerging power of China. Unlike Russia, which has entered a military phase with the West, China's influence is more ambiguous and cautious, and China is more willing to counter through soft power. The results of the research show that although China is willing to use the existing international order to continue playing a bigger role in the multilateral scene and does not agree with military confrontation with the West, but the United States has a tendency to bring China into an environment different from economic competition under various pretexts. Space to ground China.

Power (geopolitical) rivalries in the foreign policy of countries have long had a major impact on the formation of relations between them. Among these, geopolitical foundations are one of the most important variables influencing the formation of foreign policy. The proximity of the Islamic Republic of Iran to various geopolitical and geostrategic regions is one of the most important opportunities related to foreign policy. In order to achieve national goals and interests in its foreign policy, Iran must consider the geopolitical foundations of its geopolitical position and geostrategy, especially in relation to its neighbors. Meanwhile, Turkey, as one of Iran's most important neighbors and actors in the Eurasian region, in order to achieve national goals and interests in its foreign policy, is forced to communicate in various fields and this necessitates the study of relations between the two countries. The present research is applied in terms of the type of research and is qualitative in terms of method which is the type of record-keeping method used. The findings of the research show that in accordance with the policies adopted by both countries in this region, the Islamic Republic of Iran in terms of geopolitical components which includes economic, security, cultural components and such in order to achieve maximum national interests has chosen relations with Turkey from interactive to competitive.The Eurasian region has a special place in the policies of regional and supra-regional powers due to its special geopolitical, geo-economic and geostrategic position. In the meantime, the two countries of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Turkey, due to being located in this region, have always tried to take steps towards their national goals by adopting different policies and thereby secure their national interests. Both countries are trying to expand their influence in the region, given the capabilities and limitations of their foreign policy. On the other hand, with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of new borders, not only did the military threat against Iran diminish, but it also created a variety of new opportunities for Iran. In addition to common religion, Iran has historical, ethnic and cultural ties with most of the republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus, as well as with some of these countries. Also in terms of geopolitical issues, first, none of these republics has direct access to open waters, and secondly, the Central Asian region is located as a barrier between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Russian Federation. Therefore, the I. R. Iran must formulate its foreign policy strategy in such a way that by utilizing its geopolitical infrastructure, it can achieve its national interests with Turkey in the Eurasian region. Since every research revolves around one or more key questions due to its research focus, the research questions are:Research Question: What are the effects of the geopolitical foundations of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran on relations with Turkey in Eurasia?Research Hypothesis: In response to the research question, we can say that geopolitical foundations (regional competition, economic, ideological, political and security issues) have dual and contradictory effects on the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in relation to Turkey; as it formulates the geopolitical relations between the two countries in an interactive-competitive way.

The present research is qualitative in terms of method. Documentary and library methods have been used to collect reliable and first-hand data. In this way, by identifying the most reliable sources related to the research topic, the files were taken and then analyzed in a logical order. Therefore, the paper has used comparative methods, analysis using library, and documentary data.

The Islamic Republic of Iran and Turkey are the main regional actors that play a prominent role in several geographical areas separately in terms of geopolitical weight and identity. Iran and Turkey, using their Iranian-Turkish identity, have sought to influence strategic regions by linking their principles and values to regional issues, in particular the leadership of ideological movements and non-governmental actors. In fact, these two actors are pursuing their national interests in connection with regional policies. Accordingly, instability has become a major feature of bilateral relations. However, ideological differences, geopolitical concerns and regional rivalry between the two countries have sometimes turned into crises. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the limitation of new possibilities and opportunities arising from the developments in Central Asia and the Caucasus, as well as the policies of the West, especially the United States, against Iran's influence in the southern part of the Soviet Union, led to the emergence of new governments.

As discussed earlier, as we move away from the emergence of these new nations in Central Asia and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the governments of Iran and Turkey are aware of the dangers of over-competition especially in the economic and energy sectors (Oil and gas) and also by discovering areas of joint cooperation, including security issues that both countries faced, they have tried to reduce the scope of competition and their relationship towards cooperation or at least a mixture of cooperation and competition. Of course, it should be emphasized that geopolitically, the two countries, despite having sometimes-conflicting interests are forced to cooperate with each other and as the course of relations between the two shows, the two countries cannot have long-term strained relations. In short, the rivalry between Iran and Turkey in Eurasia is not a worrying issue for Iran, especially given the turmoil in the surrounding countries. The Caucasus is more geopolitically important, but Russia’s influence and activities in that region overshadow the sense of rivalry between Iran and Turkey. The same is true of Central Asia. In both regions, Russia remains the main power and its political influence is much greater than that of Iran and Turkey.

In the current international system, countries try to create the desired networks by linking issues with places. India is no exception and is trying to build its own network. The research question is what is the attributes of network building in India's foreign policy and what is the position of Iran in this strategy? The results show, the first pillar of India's foreign policy network building strategy includes its immediate neighbors with the aim of connecting South-West Asia with Southeast Asia. The next circle includes the countries of the Indian Ocean, including Iran. Finally, the third link seeks to connect India with Central Asia and beyond in the form of a north-south corridor. Of course, the three rings are completely connected and together form a network to eurasia. Iran is in the second ring of India's networking, and India is looking to compete with China and Pakistan in Chabahar. However, with a long-term approach, it seeks to implement the North-South corridor with the aim of becoming a major power. This research uses network theory as its theoretical framework and the research method is the method of matching the case with the theory.

Given China's urgent need for sustainable energy to reduce energy vulnerabilities and maximize its growing power in international politics and relations, the rising country has sought to build energy cooperation in recent years. A special political-economic relationship with the countries present in the GCC and the Eurasian Strategic Region will emerge. In this regard, the authors of the present study with a descriptive-analytical-comparative approach and based on library documents, have sought to answer the strategic question that the People's Republic of China in the light of deepening relations by analyzing and examining the growing presence of Beijing in these areas. What are its political and economic goals with the member states of the Persian Gulf Council and the actors in the Eurasian strategic sphere? The hypothesis raised by the above question is that Beijing, taking into account the economic weight of the countries present in the mentioned regions and given their special position in the belt-road initiative, has tried to pursue its new geopolitical strategies through effort. To ensure sustainable security of access to energy, maintain target markets based on the Belt-Road Initiative, as well as increase cooperation with regional partners, extend to the Persian Gulf and Eurasia.

The main purpose of this article is to study the backgrounds and reasons for Iran's new Eurasianism in Rouhani era and to analyze the goals and requirements of this policy. The previous strategy, called "Looking East" did not have clear achievements for some reasons, including inaccurate understanding of Eurasian trends and powers, little consensus, politicization, and anti-Americanization. It was largely a response to US pressure. Although this pressure is still an important variable in Iran's neo-Eurasianism, efforts have been made to address these problems and to take an active approach to adapt to new dynamics in Eurasia and the international arena. This article examines the theoretical and practical aspects of Iran’s neo-Eurasianism with a qualitative-systemic method, considering the interaction of variables, agents and various issues at regional and international levels in the framework of "new intergovernmentalism". Avoiding politicization, trying to moderate pressure rather than confronting the US, greater domestic consensus, multivectoral approach, emphasis on geoeconomics rather than geopolitics and a comprehensive rather than limited view are major characteristics of Iran's new Eurasianism in the Rouhani era. As a result, the paper emphasizes that while US pressure as a "coercive" factor is important in the Iran’s neo-Eurasianism, the "selective" effort to adapt to growing international and Eurasian developments is also a significant variable in shaping this policy.

With the rise of China and its stable economic growth in the new millennium, the New Silk Road has caught eyes and thoughts as the most significant international initiative.  Indeed, One Belt One Road is the most ambitious megaproject, expressing China's will and capacity for external power projection. In the contemporary world, there are rare projects with a huge ramification for the transformation of international security and power arrangement within Iran's periphery, particularly Central Asia.  Within this context, the New Silk Road is an exceptional grand-strategy, affecting geopolitics of Central Asia, in particular, and Greater Eurasia, in general.  Central Asia has been geographically and historically the center of gravity of the Silk Road, controlling roads from China to Iran and the Middle East, as well as South Asia and Southern Russia. From this point of view, the present article shows the significance of Central Asia, Xinxiang and Afghanistan with a huge ramification in shaping trends of the new Silk Road.

Over the past decades, Turkish-Russian relations have been increasingly characterized by a wide range of cooperation and rapprochement. Beyond strong economic bonds, the main reason behind the recent rapprochement between Ankara and Moscow is the general deterioration of Turkey’s relations with its Western allies which is highly interlinked to the outcomes of changing global order. As American hegemony has been declining, two rising Eurasian powers, Russia and Turkey, have started to challenge Western order and supremacy in the shifting international system. This dynamic context has paved the way for the strategic partnership of revisionist powers. Many scholars even began to argue that Turkey-Russia relations could turn into a strategic alliance in the future if Ankara’s relations with Western allies strain further. However, contrary to what many believe, a persistent strategic alliance between Russia and Turkey is rather unlikely due to serious differences in the two countries’ stances on certain major issues in the changing regional and global politics. This article aims to study the changing nature of Turkey-Russia’s strategic rapprochement systematically. The current literature on Turkish-Russian relations suggests that Turkey is strategically reorienting away from the West towards Eurasia, Russia in Particular. Instead, this article seeks to explain the multi-dimensional nature of Turkey’s strategic rapprochement with Russia in a changing international system. It argues that Turkey’s growing interest in closer cooperation with Russia is taking place amidst a transforming global order, shifting regional geopolitics and domestic political dynamics. In this context, Turkey’s rising partnership with Russia does not necessarily mean an axis shift at the expense of its traditional Western orientation. Rather, this growing strategic rapprochement is the outcome of a dynamic reaction to the ongoing power transition in the international system, a rising rift in transatlantic alliances, the crisis in Turkish domestic politics, and the geopolitical developments surrounding the two emerging Eurasian powers. Although the transforming global structures have paved the way for Turkey-Russia strategic partnership, bilateral relations continue to be characterized by significant elements of conflict and geopolitical rivalry and also are highly affected by their relations with the West. Among other factors, the role of asymmetric economic interdependence, divergent energy strategies, authoritarian leadership agency, as well as geopolitical rivalries in the changing geopolitics of the Black Sea, the South Caucasus, the eastern Mediterranean, and the Middle East are highlighted. In the charter of IR theories, the Neorealist school in particular and also in the changing global world order, being Multipolar seems to have facilitated the efforts of rising powers to forge a strategic partnership with each other as well as pursuing Multi-directional and Multi-dimensional foreign policies. For rising non-Western powers, being Multipolar seems to have paved the way for the formation of pragmatic and flexible strategic cooperation while viewing each other as potential rivals on some critical issues. In this theoretical context, despite historical roots of animosity and geopolitical rivalry between Turkey and Russia, as two rising Eurasian powers, Ankara and Moscow have succeeded in compartmentalizing their relations in the changing global order. However, this does not necessarily mean that Turkish leaders are keen to make a strong strategic alliance with Russia. Ankara’s gradual shift away from Western allies in recent years does not demonstrate a strong Turkish commitment to end its strategic and institutional partnership with the transatlantic alliance but it is reconsidering its international standing in more Eastern ways. On the contrary, Turkey’s strategic rapprochement with Russia should be seen as a realist adjustment to the realities of the emerging post-Western multilateral world order. This article concludes by stating that Turkey-Russia emerging strategic partnership in the changing global order faces various structural and normative constraints. The article offers four notable points in this regard: first, Turkey’s strategic relations with Russia is to a very high degree determined by the development of its relations with traditional western allies as Ankara still has a structural security-economic dependency on the West and has important disagreements with Moscow regarding the changing geopolitical issues in the Middle East, Black Sea, East Mediterranean, and South Caucasus. Second, it is worth noting that the intense personal relations between Erdogan and Putin, the two authoritarian leaders, itself is an unstable element in shaping an institutionalized strategic partnership as the two ambitious leaders have an uncompromising distrust of each other. Third, although the high volume of trade has become a key element in improving Turkish-Russian relations, the trade imbalance and asymmetric economic interdependence between the two countries, especially Turkey’s dependence on energy imports from Russia, is an obstacle to drawing the prospect of strategic cooperation between Ankara and Moscow. Over the past decade, various geopolitical developments in their immediate neighborhood with a security dimension interfere with the trade interdependence between the countries. In other words, the fluctuations in Turkish-Russian trade relations also demonstrate the primacy of politics and security for sustained economic interdependence in the longer term. Finally, with all the disagreements in Turkey’s relations with Western allies, the scale and intensity of potential threats to Turkey’s national security and interests emanating from Russia are too high as the two Eurasian powers present competitive perception and intention towards the post-Western order in the making. Although Ankara treats the US and EU differently, Turkey is increasingly instrumentalizing its growing relations with Eastern powers to gain greater diplomatic leverage vis-à-vis Western powers. Therefore, it seems that the contributions over the rising of a strategic partnership between Turkey and Russia are overstated, at least in the foreseeable future, and the recent moves in improving the strategic cooperation of the two countries should be seen as a pragmatic response to sets of common challenges and opportunities in changing regional and global context. All in all, the dynamics of strategic ties between Ankara and Moscow can rarely be stabilized.

Regionalism is the expression of a common sense of identity and purpose combined with the creation and implementation of institutions that express a particular identity and shape collective action within a geographical region. Regionalism and regional convergence are one of the important mechanisms of countries for empowerment development in the new era. Russia is the largest and most powerful country which emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This country has made many efforts in the last couple of decades to establish regionalism and regional arrangements in former Soviet republics, the results of which have been the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) which consists of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and Kyrgyzstan. It is the most important and active union created after the dissolution of the former Soviet Union to foster closer economic cooperation among member states for the well-being of the people of the region. The Islamic Republic of Iran, which has always been excluded or has not entered into the regionalization processes in the peripheral areas of the East and West, has in recent years put cooperation and convergence with the Eurasian Economic Union on its agenda. The signing of the agreement on the Establishment of a Free Trade Zone between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Eurasian Economic Union in May 2018 was an important step for Iran to enter into regional arrangements. The present study seeks to investigate the regionalism policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Russian Federation. What are the goals of the two countries in converging and cooperating in the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union? Methods and Material: The field study of the research is the core of Eurasia. The Eurasian Economic Union is located at the eastern end of Europe, bounded by the Arctic in the north, the Pacific Ocean to the east and Eastern Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Central Asia to the south. The Eurasian Economic Union accounts for about 15 percent of the world's landmass, 2.4 percent of the world’s population, and 2.2 percent of the world’s gross domestic product or (GDP). The Islamic Republic of Iran is adjacent to the south of the Eurasian Economic Union. Iran shares borders with three of five countries of the Eurasian Economic Union. The research and data collection was done by descriptive and analytical methods. Results and Discussion The process of Eurasian integration began immediately after the break-up of the Soviet Union. When the USSR began to fell in 1991, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was created from the ruins of the former USSR. The idea of Eurasian regionalism dates back to 1994. In 1994, during a speech at Moscow State University, the first President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, suggested the idea of creating a “Eurasian Union”. The idea was pursued by Russia and Kazakhstan. With the beginning of Vladimir Putin’s era as a prime minister, Eurasianism politics and regionalism in Eurasia were followed by Kremlin. In 2000, five states of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan established the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC). In October 2007, Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan signed an agreement to create a common customs territory and formed the Customs Union (CU). In December 2009, the leaders of the three countries in the city of Almaty signed the structure and framework of the Customs Union action plan for implementation from June 2010. The Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union was signed on 29 May 2014 by the leaders of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia, and came into force on January first, 2015. Finally, on January first, 2015, the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union took effect. The treaty codified and expanded all prior agreements regarding both the work of the Customs Union and the development of additional areas of integration. Armenia joined the integration union on January 2nd, 2015, and Kyrgyzstan joined on May 8th, 2015. The Member states established the EAEU based on a certain understanding of their long-term economic objectives. Establishing a single market for trading goods, services, capital deployment of labor forces among member states and has the specific and highly ambitious goals of creating a customs union.  The Interim Agreement enabling the formation of a free trade area between the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the Islamic Republic of Iran was signed in May 2018 within the framework of the Astana Economic Forum. The objectives of the Agreement are to liberalize and facilitate the trade of goods between the parties through, inter alia, reduction or elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers concerning the originating goods included in Annex 1 of the Agreement; to create a base for formation of a free trade area in which following international rules, standards and practices, duties and other restrictive regulations on commerce will be eliminated between the Parties and the necessary support for economic and trade cooperation between them will be provided. From the date of the entry into force of this Agreement, the parties will reduce and/or eliminate customs duties on goods listed in Annex 1 of this Agreement. According to Annex 1, in the Agreement, the list of 502 goods and services by the Eurasian Economic Union and 360 items in similar cases by Iran are included. With the policy of Eurasianism, Russia seeks to expand its sphere of influence and rebuild its status as one of the world powers. The Islamic Republic of Iran has realized the importance of regionalism, but it has been left out or not included in almost all processes of regionalism in the East and the West. Iran sees the Eurasian Economic Union as an opportunity to expand its international relations and strengthen its economy during the sanctions period. Conclusion The US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the extensive US sanctions against Iran and also Russia’s geopolitical straits and the challenge to the West, have led Russia and Iran to cooperate within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union. The results show that despite the economic nature of the agreement, its political and geopolitical goals are of high importance for both Russia and Iran.

The Caucasus is a mountainous region in southwestern Russia that has been the site of rivalries between major powers, including Iran, Russia, Turkey, and the United States. In this region, five types of competition and conflict of interest can be classified. First, the rivalry and conflict of interests of the United States and Russia. Second, competition and conflict of interests between Russia and Turkey. Third, the rivalry and conflict of interests of Iran and the United States, the West and Israel, fourth, the rivalry and conflict of interests of Iran and Turkey, and fifth, the rivalry and conflict of interests of the United States and China, which is mostly summarized in economic and energy matters. Among the actors active in the region is Turkey, which is trying to expand its influence in the Caucasus. Since the establishment of the AKP, Turkey has become one of the most important players in its peripheral regions, including the Caucasus, Since the establishment of the AKP, Turkey has become one of the most important players in its peripheral regions, including the Caucasus, and is one of the influential actors in new developments in these regions.

China's growing importance in the world order and its growing power in line with its goals and vision has raised questions about how Russia will fit into the Belt Initiative and China's path In particular, how the asymmetric relations between the two countries pave the way for their convergence and strategic partnership in Eurasia. Understand the dynamics of China's global strategy and how Russia relates to the components that seek its interests in the framework of this plan; the starting point is such an assessment. Accordingly, and as a hypothesis, Russia finds its geographical location very attractive for sustainable development as well as the passage of Western sanctions. The connectivity aspect of the Belt and Road Initiative, which seeks to improve East-West transport links, is inherently consistent with Moscow's desire to transfer energy resources as well as to open up Russia's transit potential in Eurasia. But contrary to China's geopolitical view, Russia's view is purely economic. Hence the elements of Russia's participation in the China Initiative, Belt and Road Initiative; As officials in both countries claim; They have not been systematically defined and evaluated empirically. With this in mind, we first provide a brief history of China-Russia trade and transportation links. We then examine the main projects of the Belt and Road Initiative - which involves Russia - and the key agreements related to this project. Finally, with regard to Russia's risks and considerations, the dimensions and developments of this partnership are taken into consideration.

Although after the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 and its weakening in the international arena, relations between Russia and the West did not face much tension, and even cooperation between the two sides was established, gradually, and especially when Putin took office, Russian-Western relations have been strained. The turning point in changing Russians' view on the West was in 2004, when a series of color revolutions took place in the former Soviet republics. To Moscow, color revolutions were carried out with the help of the West or the US with the aim of creating a color revolution in Russia itself. For the Russian ruling elites, these actions marked the end of the cooperation between the mainstream politicians in the West and Russia, and an important moment in turning Russia's look away from the West and intensifying anti-Western sentiment in Russia. Since then, Russia sought to cement its position in the international system and weaken Western structures, especially the EU. To strengthen its influence in Europe, Moscow uses various tools to weaken the EU. In recent years, Russia has managed to promote Russophilia and Euroscepticism, that are two sides of the same coin. Russia's policy is attractive to parties and countries which see themselves as victims of the European Union. Russia hopes that the rise of right-wing parties in European countries will weaken liberal democracy structures. In recent years, challenging the security structures in the West and undermining the cohesion of the EU, have been the central goal of Russia's foreign policy. The main question is that "what are the main aims of Russia in strengthening its relations with European far right parties?" The hypothesis is that "Russia's main foreign policy is to challenge the Western security structures and Moscow hopes the rise of right-wing parties in European countries will undermine the Western liberal narrative and weaken the liberal democracy structure especially the EUs’". Using explanatory- analytical research method, the author attempts to find an answer to the article's question.

The confrontation with Western civilization united Japanese Asianists and Muslim nationalists a century ago. The global recognition of Japan as a great power paved the way for its advancement in the Eurasian region in the name of Pan-Asianism ideology, the realization of a united Asia, and the liberation of Muslims from Western colonialism. Due to some limitations, Japanese government had to establish informal and secret relations with Muslim nationalist activists of the Russian and Chinese empires’ colonies. By relying solely on military power, the sphere of influence expansion in the vast geopolitical area of ​​Eurasia against these two great powers was impossible.To this end, Japan sought to establish a unified Asia by emphasizing identity, cultural, linguistic, and racial commonalities by adopting a Pan-Asian policy as the ideology of expansionist wars. In order to establish and expand the sphere of influence in the Eurasian region, the Empire of Japan tried to exert control there by virtue of soft power and cultural activities through highlighting common feelings, emotions and narratives and receiving recognition among the people, especially the Muslims of this region. Perceiving the distinct culture, race and language of the inhabitants of this region, Japanese tried to exclude the two main neighboring powers from interfering in this sphere of influence by identity demarcating. Regarding the hypothesis, the Constructivism theory which deals with spiritual and normative elements was applied to examine the correctness or incorrectness of such a hypothesis.

The purpose of the present study is to investigate bilateral ties between India-Eurasia (Russia and the United States) and India-Oceania in new world conditions and also to assess the gradual transformations of India effective in the above 2 regions using the theory of geopolitical region. The hypothesis is that bilateral relations in the triangle of India, U.S.A and Russia is of special importance with regard to the growing history of India in the international realm and an ongoing competition between the U.S.A and Russia to remain faithful to India. Furthermore, with respect to the efforts of New Delhi to become an influential world power, India will have to do more trades; therefore, it makes use of its close relations with Washington and Moscow. The method of the study is descriptive-analysis and the results showed that deteriorating relations between Russia and the U.S.A is a hindrance to achieve trilateral cooperation. Despite traditional friendship and mutual trust between India and Russia, it seems that relations between the two countries cannot meet the realities today. Although Washington and Moscow regard relationship with New Delhi as a sign of growing regional ties in India-Pacific Ocean and Eurasia, they face with a special resistance from the Indian counterpart when it comes to developing ties. China is considered as a key variable in the triangle model between the U.S.A, India, and Russia.