تبیین رهیافت های منطقه گرایی جمهوری اسلامی ایران با تاکید بر قفقاز و آسیای مرکزی

یکی از ضروریات دست‏یابی به سیاست خارجی کارآمد و مبتنی بر منافع ملی، منطقه‏گرایی است. در کدهای ژئوپلیتیکی قدرت‏های طراز اول منطقه‏گرایی یک استراتژی فعال و بستری برای تعامل فزاینده با نظام جهانی تعریف شده است. تاریخ سیاست خارجی ایران نشان می‏دهد منطقه‏گرایی و الگوهای آن در دستور کار طراحان و تصمیم‏سازان دستگاه‏های سیاسی ایران از پیش تا پس از اسلام قرار نگرفته است؛ به‏طوری‏که از نظر تاریخی منطقه‏گرایی به‏عنوان یک رهیافت و خط‏مشی در دولت‏های مختلف حاکم بر ایران نادیده انگاشته شده است. غفلت از به‏کارگیری رویکردها و خط‏مشی‏های جغرافیایی تا حدی است که حتی دولت‏های هخامنشی و ساسانی نیز نیازی به تعامل و منطقه‏گرایی با کشورهای تابعه خود احساس نمی‏کردند. با وجود این، جمهوری اسلامی ایران برای نیل به اهداف و منافع ژئوپلیتیکی خود ناچار از تدوین و به‏کارگیری اصول و رهیافت‏های منطقه‏گرایی است. در وضعیت فعلی، اصرار و پایبندی جمهوری اسلامی ایران به رویکرد صرف ایدئولوژیک در روابط خارجی خود تا حدی موجب غفلت از واقعیت‏های پیرامونی و از دست رفتن ظرفیت‏های جغرافیایی و ژئوپلیتیکی خود شده است. در پژوهش حاضر با روش توصیفی تحلیلی و با مبنا قراردادن رهیافت هم‏تکمیلی به تبیین اصول و رهیافت‏هایی به‏منظور فعال‏ کردن رویکرد منطقه‏گرایی در ساختار سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در قفقاز و آسیای مرکزی پرداخته شده است. نتایج نشان می‏دهد از میان رهیافت‏های منطقه‏گرایی سه رهیافت هم‏تکمیلی فرهنگی، هم‏تکمیلی تمدنی و هم‏تکمیلی ژئواکونومیک از جمله مهم‏ترین رهیافت‏های منطقه‏گرایی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در قفقاز و آسیای مرکزی محسوب می‏شوند.

Explanation of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Regionalism Approaches with emphasizing on the Caucasia and Central Asia

Extended Abstract1. IntroductionIran’s regionalism policy and strategies has different versions during the times. During most of the 20th century, the two successor states of the Ottoman and Persian Empires played only a limited role in Middle Eastern politics. Iran did have foreign policy ambitions, and his impact on the Middle East was felt mostly in the region’s east and in its petropolitics. Iran’s ability to project power and influence in its immediate environment and beyond was constrained by Soviet pressure and domestic problems. Turkey, for its part, was ruled by a secular elite oriented toward Europe. As such, during most of the latter half of the 20th century, the regional politics of the Middle East were shaped mostly by the dynamics of interArab relations and by the ArabIsraeli conflict. Iran’s quest for regional hegemony after 1979 and Turkey’s shift away from Europe to its neighborhood transformed the region. The Middle East was now joined by two, large, powerful Muslim states. One important illustration of the new regional reality is the Astana Forum that since 2017 has been the major arena of the efforts to resolve the Syrian crisis. Not a single Arab state is a participant in that forum. Of the two new actors, Iran is the more ambitious and more active. It is driven by religious zeal; the geopolitical ambitions of a successor state to a great imperial past; and the anxieties of a regime worried by the enmity of the United States and such regional enemies as Israel, Saudi Arabia and, until 2003, Iraq. The Iranian leadership may well see some of its actions as defensive, but they serve in fact to exacerbate the anxieties of its rivals, thus creating a vicious cycle of defensiveoffensive action and reaction.2. MethodologyMethodology of this study is descriptive analytical and required information has been collected through library research. The information gathered from sources such as books, magazines, online articles, etc.3. Result and DiscussionAs it marks the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, Iran finds itself as a major actor in a transformed Middle Eastern system shaped to a considerable extent by its own actions. Forty years after its birth, the Islamic Republic is still fueled by a blend of religious zeal, geopolitical ambitions, and vested interest. The question remains open as to when—as has been the case with other great revolutions—a phase of consolidation and moderation will set in. Revolutions are often defined as massbased movements that violently, over a relatively short span of time, bring down a regime and often lead to a restructuring of the polity and the transformation of the class structure of a society. As a result, it is commonly assumed that the country’s foreign policy will also undergo fundamental changes. Iran has made many mistakes in its long diplomatic history. In the postrevolutionary period, and particularly in the early years of the Islamic revolution, Iran’s foreign policy was often characterized by provocation, agitation and subversion. Yet, while the dominant understanding of revolution is heavily intertwined with change, there has been a good deal of continuity in regional policy when it comes to postrevolutionary Iran. To trace this continuity, it is important to understand the ways in which Iran’s regional policies are viewed by elites in the country. The present paper, actually argues that both domestic and regional changes have combined to make of Iran an exceptional case study of how an Islamic revolutionary state might set about managing the postcold war order. Accordingly, in the 1990s it was the new geopolitical realities which came to dominate the agenda of the Islamic republic, bringing Iran closer to its Eurasian hinterland (Central Asia and Cuacasia). In the new millennium, however, geopolitical complexities which has emerged as the single most significant source of threat to Iran, as well as to the West’s regional interests. Attacks on both the Shi’a communities and the West have made tacit, unacknowledged allies of Iran and the West in containing its impact on the status quo in the Middle East. This has been the case, remarkably, despite the ongoing rift between Iran and the United States. The chapter traces Iran’s responses to this dynamic environment and analyzes its impact on Iran’s elites, outlook, and policies.4. ConclusionRegionalism and understanding its dimensions and foundations is one of the necessities of achieving an efficient and national interestbased foreign policy. In the geopolitical codes of the First Powers, regionalism is defined as an active strategy and a basis for increasing interaction with the world system. The history of Iranian foreign policy shows that regionalism and its patterns have not been on the agenda of designers and decision makers of Iran’s political apparatus before and after Islam. Historically, regionalism has been overlooked as an approach and policy in the various governments ruling Iran. The neglect of geographical approaches and policies is to the extent that even the Achaemenes and Sassanid governments did not feel the need to interact and regionalize with their subordinate countries. However, to achieve its geopolitical goals and interests, the Islamic Republic of Iran has to develop and apply regionalism principles and approaches. In the current situation, the Islamic Republic’s insistence on a purely ideological approach to its foreign relations has, to a certain extent, neglected the peripheral realities and depleted its geographical and geopolitical capacities. The present study, using a descriptiveanalytical approach and based on a complementary approach, explores the principles and approaches for activating the regionalism approach in the foreign policy structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Caucasus and Central Asia. The results show that among the regionalization approaches, there are three cultural complementarity, civilization complementarity and geoeconomic complementarity including the most important approaches and patterns of regionalization of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Caucasus and the Central Asia.