CC BY
43
References
1 Zayed Abdullah Mesbah, «Foreign policy», second edition, Tripoli, 2013, p. 129.
2 . j^J £MJ IJJ° ^^M' ' "'J^^'^» IJC'JE^»" ' iJ^'u^» ' -^JIMJ^ ' 2013 ' ^ 129.
3. Kazim Hashim Nema, Russia and the Middle East after the Cold war, the
Arabic center of political studies, Lebanon , 2016, p. 20. 4 . ^lif si^ u^ ' JJ^^I J'J^JJ iJij^^ M^J IJCJM IJM'JJ» ' iJfj^j IJ^JM^ JJJJI^ICI JIJJJI^ICI ' JMU'U ' 2016 ' 20.
5. Mishel Yamin, New Russian foreign policy, estimation of success and failure in the Middle East, Strategic Studies Centre, edition 63, Beirut, 2007, p. 12.
6. f^^^J ^'f^u ' iJ^^i^» 'JC'JE^» 'JJJ^^» 'J^J^J» ' ^j^^f iJu^'c J'J^^J ^^
'J^JJ iJij^^ ' fj^j IJJJI^ICI iJi^CijICi^^» ' IJ^JJ 63 ' M^JJ^ ' 2007 ' ^ 12. 7- Monib Abdul Hakim, Russia between rehabilitation of its role and opening
to the world, 2016, p. 91. 8 fj^u £MJ iJc^^f ' JJ^^I M^U I^^^'J» 'JJJJ jlJlu^^'c iJ^'Jf ' 2016 ' ^>91.
VALENTINA SCHENSNOVICH. IRAN: FOREIGN POLICY (ANALYTICAL REVIEW) // The review was written for the bulletin "Russia and the Moslem World."
DOI: 10.31249/rmw/2019.04.03
Keywords: "triple alliances", "RIC triangle", Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, India, China, Russia, Syria, USA, terrorism, cooperation and strategic partnership of the Russian Federation and Iran, "soft power", "hybrid wars", security, strategic stability.
Valentina Schensnovich,
Research Associate, INION RAN
Abstract: In the twentieth century the emergence of "triple alliances" with the participation of Iran has become traditional in Asia. Islamic foreign policy has been significantly influenced by Islamization, geopolitization and globalization. The Islamic
component of the "neither West nor East" principle was implemented in Iran's "third way" policy as an alternative to alliances under the flag of one of the superpowers. For the modern world, the strategic partnership of Iran and Russia in the field of international and national security is important. The cooperation of our countries in Syria is considered by researchers as a factor of consolidating peace and security in the Middle East region.
Introduction
In Asia, there are traditionally distinguished "centers of power," or states, the relations between which determine the balance of power in a particular region. In the Middle East, such centers of power as Iraq (until 2003), Saudi Arabia and Iran form the strategic triangle Iraq - Iran - Saudi Arabia. In the 1990s, the project of a multipolar world was opposed to the American project of monopolar globalization. This served to increase the popularity of ideas on creating regional unions (Eurasian, Islamic, etc.).
The formation of foreign policy of Iran in the early twenty-first century was going on under the influence of Islamization, geopolitization and globalization. The Islamic component of the "neither West nor East" principle was realized in Iran's "third way" policy as an alternative to alliances under the flag of one of the superpowers. In the diplomacy of Iran, this was reflected in the search for formats of equal cooperation in solving regional problems.
Triangular Alliances with Iran
According to the observation of Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor V. Yurtayev [6], the shahdom of Iran (until 1979) actively moved onward in the Indian Ocean, up to South Africa and at the global-regional level, was meant to play the role
of the central player in the strategic triangle ensuring security of the Indian ocean (this triangle, Australia - Iran - South Africa, remained ink on paper). The Shah Iran, together with the leading countries of the region, should ensure the development, security and defense of the countries of the Indian Ocean basin as a "nuclear-free zone" and within the framework of the planned "common market" of the coastal states of Asia, Africa and Oceania. At the same time, Iran in the system of international relations of the bipolar world was considered by the United States as the "gendarme of the Middle East." The Islamic Revolution that won in 1979 did not change Iran's (and the United States') concern for regional stability in order to guarantee oil supplies, but changed the roles of the players. Therefore, the US's desire to have Iran as a hegemon in the Persian Gulf disappeared along with the Shah.
Thus, triangular alliances with the participation of Iran in the 21st century were initiated, as a rule, at the global level, by leaders of the bipolar world, primarily the United States. The researcher notes that traditionally attention was focused on their geopolitical, i.e. conflictive component and orientation. A similar emphasis was observed in other formats of international relations -between two neighboring states (North and South Korea, India -Pakistan, Iran - Iraq, etc.), in regional disputes (in the Middle East, etc.).
During his visit to India in 1998, E. Primakov took the initiative to form the "RIC triangle" (Russia - India - China). The RIC triangle was regarded by Western experts primarily as a counterweight to the U.S.and Western influence, or as a strategic partnership against NATO and radical Islam, which could lead to a new Cold War. The leaders of the RIC group, on the contrary, emphasized the similarities between Russia, China and India, calling for coordination and cooperation in the name of strengthening international peace and security. The key difference between the "Primakov Triangle" consists in its focus on the interaction of participating countries as equal partners.
The victory of the Iranian revolution in February 1979 meant for the United States a collapse of the regional strategic balance. Iran found itself at the epicenter of the U.S.influence. However, after 2001, against the background of the actualization of the problem of international terrorism, the geopolitical coloring of the U.S. foreign policy and the globalization of the foreign policy of Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey became increasingly noticeable. The geopolitization of Iran's foreign policy, the main characteristics of which are based on historical tradition and the specificity of its geographical location, manifested itself under pressure from the United States, especially after the creation of a military-political "canopy" over Iran in 2001-2003 (Afghanistan and Iraq). Thus, on the one hand, a new geopolitical triangle has formed in the region of the Near and Middle East with the participation of the United States and the included spaces of Afghanistan and Iraq. On the other hand, a new strategic triangle of "centers of power" emerged, in which Turkey took the place of the defeated Iraq.
The researcher notes that with the collapse of the USSR, the Iranian traditional foreign policy concept of balancing between the two rival forces (in the 19th century between Russia and England, from the middle of the 20th century - the U.S. and the USSR) became unacceptable in the new world order. Firstly, one of the main principles of Iran's foreign policy, "Neither West nor East - Islam" has partially lost its relevance (the East has disappeared). Secondly, with the weakening of Iraq, the traditional for the 20th-century geopolitics triad "Iran - Iraq -Saudi Arabia" has lost its meaning (as a source of problems and threats within the framework of the "balance of power" strategy). Finally, against the backdrop of threats to Iran related to Israeli military statements and the U.S. "military canopy" on Iranian borders, the security problem has acquired a global dimension. Not surprisingly, Tehran began to consider regional risks in a broad strategic context. Facing the United States and in the situation of international isolation, the religious leadership of Iran
has embarked on a solution to the security problem by including the country in a large regional association whose member status would provide protection from external pressure. At the same time, it was supposed to find a solution for Iran to enter continental cooperation, which was necessary to restore the national economy.
The global orientation and multilayered foreign policy reflected the orientation of Shiite Iran to the role of a regional leader of a new type in the changing world. Iran's foreign policy ambitions fit into the modern interpretation of regional leadership. Such a leader, it seems, should be involved on a parity basis in the projects implemented by the world community on a global scale.
Strategic Partnership of Iran and Russia
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of Moscow State Linguistic University L.G. Ivashov [2] focused on the interaction strategy of Moscow and Tehran in the field of international and national security. According to the researcher, strategic interaction involves:
- a coordinated assessment of the global (regional) situation and its development trends;
- the desired model of the world order and the strategy of building the future world order;
- a close or congruent system of dominant life principles and spiritual values;
- a common understanding and recognition of the international security system based on the principles of the UN Charter;
- interaction and mutual assistance in strengthening the statehood and security of each other.
The author notes that Russia and Iran have experience of such interaction, both at the regional and international levels. The Russian Federation and Iran, primarily the military and special
services, worked jointly and effectively in Afghanistan against the Taliban in the 1990s, supporting A. Massoud, stopped the massacre and stabilized the situation in Tajikistan in 1992-1993, worked together to eliminate terrorism in Chechnya. The results of the interaction of the Russian Federation and Iran in other areas:
- prevention of implementation of the U.S.plan to establish control over Eurasia;
- prevention of the coup d'etat attempts in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan;
- blocking of the USA and NATO plan to set up pro-American regimes in the South Caucasus and send troops into the Caspian zone;
- prevention of armed aggression against Iran;
- organization of a joint defense of the Syrian state;
- not allowing the US to establish full control over the Middle East.
Russia and Iran stopped the serial destruction of states in the ME and changed the geopolitical and military-strategic situation in the region. The author shows the geopolitical results of the actions of the grouping of the Russian Aerospace Forces and Iranian Air Forces in Syria:
- change in the geopolitical map of the ME and the balance of forces in the region;
- creation of prerequisites for the restoration of Islamic civilization and its Arab core;
- launching the process of returning refugees and restoring statehood;
- creating conditions for the negotiation process and political settlement of the conflict;
- increasing the geopolitical status and international prestige of Russia;
- the return of the Russian Federation to the ME as a leading player;
- a change in the balance of power between the West and the East.
This is a positive groundwork for Russian-Iranian strategic cooperation, but more efforts are needed, as the world situation is becoming more complicated.
The researcher gives an expert assessment of the prospects for the development of the modern world. World development trends towards the beginning of the 21st century:
The attempts to build a monopolar world order failed; the world did not accept the dictate of military force, the U.S. economic dominance was shaken, the dollar is no longer the only world reserve currency; the Western system of standards is not perceived as universal values; the world takes on the contours of civilizational multipolarity; the era of civilizations of the Eastern type is coming; the United States has decisive superiority in military power and seeks to use it to maintain global dominance; China has become the first economy in the world and takes control of global strategic communications and global resources. However, Washington is trying to maintain the former monopolar, the U.S.-centric world order, relying on the superiority of military force and the denial of the international legal security system. D. Trump is backed by moderate political forces, ready to recognize the multipolarity of world processes, but to rely on "soft power" operations. But they are no less, and sometimes more dangerous, than direct military aggression, the researcher emphasizes.
Today, the outlines of the world order of the 21st century have become apparent. These are the Eurasian Union - Shanghai Cooperation Organization - a group of BRICS countries. They became a kind of response to the attempts of transnational corporations and shadow structures of world financial capital to monopolize world and regional power. States, most of which are subjugated by transnational corporations, unite in world and local civilizations. And in this process, the world of Islam is represented poorly. According to L. Ivashov, the Russian
Federation and Iran could offer the following on an international and regional scale in the framework of strategic interaction:
- The Council of Civilizations at the UN. Reformat the UN Security Council, where the permanent members of the Security Council will be representatives of world ethnocultural civilizations;
- the geopolitical doctrine of the world of civilizations of the 21st century;
- the strategy of interaction between the Russian Federation and Iran in the construction of a multipolar world order;
- the program for restoring peace and statehood in the ME.
V.V. Karyakin, PhD(Military Sciences), Military University
of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation,[3] considers the Russian-Iranian strategic partnership as a factor of international security. Iran and Russia occupy central geopolitical positions on the Eurasian continent, possessing strategically important natural, demographic and economic resources, as well as significant military potential. Iran and Russia have a common sea border passing along the Caspian Sea, which is rich in hydrocarbon resources, which creates good prospects for cooperation in this area. The Russian-Iranian interests extend to the Caucasus, Central Asia and Afghanistan.
In the Central Asian states that emerged as a result of the collapse of the USSR, nationalist sentiments grow and the movements of radical Islam raise the head, which poses a threat to regional security. Iran acquired the status of a regional power as a member of the anti-terrorist coalition headed by Russia, which significantly strengthens its position in the Islamic world.
Today, the author notes, Iran has taken the leading position in the ME due to economic growth, which is going on despite the Western sanctions, as well as to the development of nuclear technologies, which made it virtually the tenth member of the world nuclear club. In July 2015, Iran and the E3+3 group of international negotiators (a group of representatives from the UK, France, Russia, Germany, the U.S. and China) signed a historic
agreement. In exchange for the control of the international community over the development of the Iranian nuclear program, Tehran lifted the sanctions imposed in the framework of the UN Security Council resolutions in 2006-2012. Moscow made a considerable contribution to the negotiation process on Iran's nuclear dossier, which was completed successfully. The countries of the E3+3 understood that the agreement would change the balance of power in the "large" Middle East. At the same time, considering scenarios of the course of events, they were confident that Iran would not abandon its regional strategy to support Shiites in Syria and Iraq. The parties to the negotiation process took into account the fact that the achievement of specific agreements led not only to lifting of sanctions against Iran, but also to a new alignment of forces in the ME. The sanctions of the West against Iran aimed, through playing the "card" of its nuclear program, to exert pressure on issues of human rights, democratization of the regime and refusal to sponsor terrorism.
Russia is initiating the inclusion of Iran in the negotiation process regarding the Syrian settlement. The United States did not oppose this, although engaging in the negotiations such regional rivals as Iran and Turkey would make it difficult to sign an acceptable agreement. But in future, the situation may change dramatically. If today a weighty basis for rapprochement between Moscow and Tehran is the commonality of their views on the Syrian issue and the confrontation with the West, primarily the United States, then tomorrow everything may look different. If Moscow and Tehran fail to achieve their military and political goals in Syria and its strategic value is devaluated, Iran may abandon confrontation with the West to the detriment of relations with Russia. Therefore, Russian-Iranian relations in the long term are difficult to predict, V. Karyakin believes.
Russia, as well as other hydrocarbon exporters, would benefit from maintaining the status quo regarding Iran, the researcher emphasizes. Sanctions would have preserved the potential competitor of Russia represented by Iran in the global
energy market. In particular, in the Caspian region, it would be better to deal with Azerbaijan than with Iran, whose regional power will increase after the lifting of sanctions.
As of the current moment, Russian-Iranian political, economic and military-technical cooperation has received a "second wind." Among the most significant projects, there should be mentioned implementation of the North-South transport corridor, which can become a good complement to the Chinese Silk Road and connect India, Iran and possibly Pakistan with Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, Tajikistan, Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Another important project was the construction of a navigation canal that will connect the Caspian Sea with the Persian Gulf. It is expected that Russia will join this project. The expected project cost is estimated at $ 7 billion. It is planned to be completed in 2030. Thanks to it, countries with access to the Caspian Sea: Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Russia, Iran - will be able to transport oil and natural gas by water. This channel is of strategic importance for Russia, because it creates the shortest exit to the Indian Ocean basin. All countries with access to the closed Caspian Sea also get direct access to the ocean. Thanks to the Iranian navigation canal, Russian warships will be able to sail into the southern seas without the use of Turkish straits.
The connection of the Caspian Sea with the Persian Gulf is of great geopolitical importance, since a meridional transport corridor will be formed in addition to the new Chinese Silk Road. Construction of the Iranian navigation canal will reduce the cost of transporting goods by more than 20% compared with the transshipment of goods through the Suez Canal. And this project is already being implemented, since Russia and Iran have set up a joint shipping company with the possibility of transporting goods up to 4 million tons per year. The North-South transport corridor, which is a railway line along the western coast of the Caspian Sea, is also under development, which will allow the transit of goods through Azerbaijan, then by road or rail to Iran to the southern Iranian port city of Bender Abbas on the shore of
Persian Gulf and further by sea to Indian Mumbai. In general, the North-South transport corridor - a route from St. Petersburg to India, the port of Mumbai (Bombay) - will have a length of 7.2 thousand km. It is developed to transport goods from India, Iran and other Persian Gulf countries along the Caspian Sea through Russian territory and further to Northern and Western Europe.
The projects of new transport corridors, the author notes, are important for the implementation of the plans of Iran and Russia to increase trade. Iran is primarily interested in purchasing Russian grain. In the future, it is possible to expand the range of supplies. By rail, one can transport food, as well as industrial goods, oil and oil products.
Prospects for the Russian-Iranian military-technical cooperation (MTC) are determined not only by the internal motivation of the parties to advance their relations to a qualitatively different level. There are a number of global and regional factors pushing Moscow and Tehran towards strong military-political ties and the development of relations in the military-technical cooperation. The two largest powers of the Caspian Sea found themselves under the pressure of similar Western sanctions. According to the researcher, if we want to ensure regional security and stability, we need to solve these issues without involving Western partners. To do this, it is necessary to create regional blocs and resolve conflict situations at the regional level.
Iran offers Russia a new level of military-technical cooperation: joint research and development work, which before that Russia conducted only with China. Tehran is striving not only for the role of a buyer of Russian weapons, but also for an equal partnership with Russia in R&D and arms modernization. Western sanctions have caused sensitive damage to the Iranian economy. With the growth of sanctions in Iran, awareness of the need to create their own defense industry was growing. Since the early 2000s, the Iranian leadership has set the task of increasing the country's scientific and technical potential, devoting part of
its efforts to the field of military development and the development of the defense industry. In recent years, Iran's own developments have appeared in military air and naval equipment, high-tech means of warfare (unmanned aerial vehicles, ballistic missiles). Iran does not refuse to cooperate with foreign partners. It practices procurement of defense products, the independent production of which does not seem feasible in the near future. Such products include long-range air defense and missile defense systems.
In general, the author notes, the issue of Russian-Iranian military cooperation should be considered primarily in the framework of the security policy that the Russian Federation pursues in the Near and Middle East. Iran is not a member of regional collective security systems, it is a supporter of the solution of all problems exclusively by the forces of regional states. The non-aligned status of Iran, its attitude towards the bilateral development of relations with foreign partners create favorable conditions for establishing close arms cooperation between Moscow and Tehran, V. Karyakin emphasizes. The Russian Federation sees Iran as a strategic partner capable of creating favorable conditions for ensuring regional security based on a balance of forces in the Near and Middle East to moderate the geopolitical ambitions of Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
According to the researcher, Russia and Iran complement each other politically very well. Such an alliance is a serious problem for the United States and its allies. At the same time, with regard to Syria, our countries adhere to various strategies. If for Russia the military operation in Syria is part of a global plan to create a multipolar world, where Russia will become one of the leading powers, then Iran's goal is to strengthen Shiite power in the Middle East. In addition, Russia is trying to strengthen the position of its naval base in Syria, which provides access to the Mediterranean Sea.
The strategic goals in Syria between Russia and Iran are different. This is explained by the fact that the number of Shiites
in the Russian Federation is small (In the Russian Federation there live 15-20 million Moslems, not counting illegal migrants; about 3 million of them are Shiites). But the immediate tactical goals coincide. This is fight against international terrorism.
Cooperation between Russia and Iran in Syria
Doctor of Sciences (History), professor of Moscow State Linguistic University A. Vavilov [1] notes that Russia has repeatedly warned Western politicians about the explosiveness of unlawful forceful outside interference in the internal affairs of Iraq, Libya and Syria with Yemen, not only for regional, but also global stability and security. However, these appeals were not heard in western capitals and Washington. Guided by their narrowly politicized geostrategic interests, the Western powers, led by the United States and some of their regional partners, grossly violated the sovereignty of the Middle Eastern states, undermined and weakened their state and military structures, which turned the region into a hotbed of international terrorism that threatens global peace and security.
Russia and its allies had to take drastic measures to rectify the situation and neutralize the dangerous consequences of foreign interference in the affairs of the Middle East states. Now its main efforts are concentrated on the search for a political settlement of the crisis in Syria, which has brought untold misery and suffering to its people.
Moscow proceeds from the inadmissibility of imposing any recipes on the Syrian people from outside, from unacceptability for the search for solutions to numerous conflicts, the vicious practice of "geopolitical engineering", far from taking into account the aspirations of the suffering civilian population, attempts to change undesirable regimes, including by force.
From the very beginning of the Syrian crisis, Russia has always stood for its exclusively peaceful solution, while respecting the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of this
ancient country. After all, there is no alternative to the political process, based on a mutually respectful, inclusive, without preconditions, inter-Syrian dialogue while ensuring a cessation of hostilities regime, expanding and increasing humanitarian access, and building up the effectiveness of the fight against terrorism. Moscow and Tehran are unanimous in their support for the immediate cessation of terrorist supplies from outside, for the resumption of inclusive intra-Syrian dialogue with the assistance of the UN in accordance with the international legal framework. To render an effective rebuff to the "terrorist international," according to A.Vavilov, it is necessary to unite all the forces of the world community, refusing to politicize the division of militants and oppositionists into "bad" and "good" ones in hope to use the latter to solve their narrowly selfish tasks.
Russia and Iran will consistently advocate strict observance of the UN Charter and the norms of international law, to protect the sovereignty of states and peoples from attempts to impose on them alien recipes of "democratization" and "freedom," A. Vavilov concludes.
Problems of strategic stability at the beginning
of the 21st century
According to A. Orlov, director of the UN Research Center, and V. Mizin, a leading researcher at Moscow State University for Foreign Affairs [4], NATO's eastward expansion, the US's unilateral withdrawal from the indefinite ABM Treaty of 1972 and , instead of it, launch of the program creation of regional ABM systems unleashed by the Western alliance (with the title role of Washington) under the slogan of "democratic expansion" of aggression in a number of "hot spots" of the planet, primarily in the Middle East, and the growing arms race, fueled by the U.S. astronomical military budget ($ 707 billion - 2018) were the result of the pseudo-theoretical postulate that the United States and its allies can do whatever they want in the world, and all other states should take it for granted. Nowadays, strategic stability does not
boil down solely to the concepts of nuclear confrontation. Today, maintaining strategic stability is, rather, building such a system of world order that can protect individual regions (in this case, Russia and Eurasia), as well as the world as a whole, from major armed conflicts and strategic challenges that threaten the interests of all countries in the event of a political crisis. One of the notable manifestations of the development of American strategy was the concept of the so-called "hybrid wars". We are talking about using all possible means of influence to achieve geopolitical interests, including "soft power" tools, information sabotage, subversive work, organizing "color revolutions," information stuffing through the media and the Internet, etc.
According to researchers, the United States, Western Europe, NATO need a new "eastern policy" no less than Russia needs to normalize relations with the West. Detente should be based on a common desire to overcome the current "peak of tension," which is an unnatural state of international relations in the twenty-first century. However, we have to admit that the "peak of tension" has not been passed so far. The existing system of strategic stability will be undermined by withdrawal of the U.S. from the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF Treaty). In recent decades, the authors of the article note, additional factors of aggression have appeared, a kind of new "philosophy of war," which should be taken into account in the modern concept of strategic stability. In addition to new types and systems of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), these include, first and foremost, cyberthreats, the transfer of the arms race to outer space and economic warfare. Humanity, the authors conclude, is experiencing one of the critical moments of its history today. Without preserving and strengthening strategic stability, which is a combination of military-political factors of security and the norms of responsible, civilized behavior of the leading states of the world, the onward development of our civilization is unthinkable.
Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia S.A. Ryabkov [5] emphasizes that plans for delivering American strikes exist in
relation to all countries that are not included in the list of allies, like-minded states or partners of the United States. The main thing in the "eastern" direction of the U.S.policy is consolidation of the "anti-Iranian front." The task set is the one of a general weakening of Iranian positions in the ME. Various conferences and other events are being started, anti-Iranian formats are being invented. The combination of factors suggests that the situation around Iran is likely to get more complicated, but still there is hope that common sense will win and there will be a chance to avoid new military adventures. Iran has long been living and will live under sanctions. Russia is cooperating with Iran in countering the American policy of dictatorship and effectively interacting with it as one of the guarantor states for Syrian affairs.
Conclusion
In the 1990s, Tehran's triangular diplomacy was actually taking shape. The idea of creating a strategic triangle Iran - China -Russia was expressed in 1997 by the president of Iran A.A. Hashemi Rafsanjani, who solved the problem of the country's exit from international isolation. Assessing Tehran's efforts, observers in 2007 made an assumption about the emerging strategic alliance in the Middle East along the Tehran - Baghdad -Damascus axis. After the coming of Islamic forces to power in Egypt in 2011, scientists began to discuss the prospects for the Egyptian-Iranian-Turkish triangle. In the second decade of the 21st century, following Russia's accession to international efforts to counter the Islamic state (IS) in Syria, experts began to name new possible strategic triangles, including the "Syrian" triangle Iran -Russia - the U.S. In the framework of the strategic "RIC triangle", Russian scientists noted the key role of Russia as a connecting and coordinating link, as a positive unifying center, an arbiter (in relations between India and China) and a trade and economic partner. The format of the strategic triangle found by E.M. Primakov worked not only in the RIC version, but in the mid-
2010s it became one of the most common formats, around which there is a structuring of a new system of international relations in Asia is going on.
Among the current trends in the foreign policy of Iran at the turn of 20-21 centuries researchers also note the problem of expanding relations with all GCC countries, joining the Central Asian region (Central Asian republics of the former USSR), and searching for ways to solve the Caspian problem (oil, ecology, security). As a result of these efforts, by the mid-1990s, Iran entered into an active dialogue with the countries of South-West Asia, offering various formats of cooperation. Iran formed multilateral problem diplomacy, and atomic diplomacy of Iran became the quintessence of it in the beginning of the 21st century.
Researchers pay special attention to the strategic partnership of Iran and Russia in the field of international security. RF and IRI occupy central geopolitical positions on the Eurasian continent, possessing strategically important natural, demographic and economic resources, as well as a significant military potential. Iran and Russia have a common maritime border passing along the Caspian Sea, rich in hydrocarbon resources, and that creates prospects for cooperation in this area.
Syrian cooperation between Russia and Iran prevents the growth of instability. Damascus appreciates the assistance of the Russian Federation and Iran in the fight against terrorism and the expansionism of external forces. Moscow and Tehran are deeply concerned about the dire humanitarian situation that has arisen as a result of the rampant terrorists in Syria under the auspices of the outside, and they are ready to actively cooperate with the Government of the SAR, the Syrian Red Crescent Society and the relevant UN structures to assist the population of this country, exhausted by the war.
Russia and Iran will continue to consistently advocate strict observance of the UN Charter and international law, to protect the sovereignty of states and peoples from attempts to impose on them alien recipes of "democratization" and "freedom," the researchers emphasize.
Literature
1. Vavilov A.I. Cooperation between Russia and Iran in search of political settlement in Syria as a factor of consolidation of peace and security in the Middle East region // Cooperation between Russia and Iran in the political, economic and cultural fields as a factor of consolidation of peace and security in Eurasia: Materials of the International scientific-practical conference of October 19, 2016 M., FSBEI HE MSLU, 2017. P. 99-103.
2. Ivashov L.G. The role of strategic relations between Russia and Iran in the modern world // Ibid. P. 8-11.
3. Karjakin V.V. Russian-Iranian strategic partnership as a factor of international security // Ibid. P. 83-98.
4. Orlov A., Mizin V. Problems of strategic stability at the beginning of the 21st century / / Mezdunarodnaya zhizn [International life], M., 2019, No. 2. P. 66-81.
5. Ryabkov S.A. Frank talk about war and peace // Ibid. P. 12-36.
6. Yurtaev V.I. Features of Iran's regional diplomacy at the beginning of the 21st century / / Cooperation between Russia and Iran in the political, economic and cultural fields as a factor of consolidation of peace and security in Eurasia: Materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference of October 19, 2016 M., FSBEI HE MSLU, 2017. P. 30-35.
VLADIMIR KIRICHENKO. PARTICIPATION OF THE HAZARAS OF AFGHANISTAN IN THE SYRIAN CONFLICT // The article was written for the bulletin "Russia and the Moslem World."
Keywords: Afghanistan, the Hazara, Iran, Syria.
Vladimir Kirichenko,
Research Associate,
Institute of Oriental Studies, RAS
DOI: 10.31249/rmw/2019.04.04
Abstract. The article dwells upon the participation of Afghan Hazara in the Syrian conflict. The author examines the reasons of migration of The Hazara to Iran and the reasons of emergence of the Hazara armed formations in Syria. Attention is
