حسن خداوردی

Oil became one of the pillars of Iran's economy from the beginning of the 14th century AH, and its traces can be seen in all political, economic and social developments since then. Iran's economy is affected by oil and its revenues through various mechanisms. The problem of this research is to analyze one of the dimensions of the effect of oil on Iran's political economy, that is, the government's economic policies between 2013 and 2021. The purpose of the research is to identify the effects of oil on the government's policies and to provide the basis for reducing the negative effects. The descriptive-analytical research method and the method of data collection will be library studies and official statistics. According to research data, domestic and international developments have caused fluctuations in oil production, price, and income, and these fluctuations are caused by certain economic policies such as financial indiscipline, inflationary programs, and relative neglect of the tax system. And it has resulted in an increase in the Gini coefficient. These policies lead to the occurrence of some economic-social phenomena and the fluctuation of economic indicators, such as the failure to achieve the goals of development plans, rising inflation rates, increasing or decreasing the class gap, creating employment in a limited way and ultimately disequilibrium. Industry, agriculture and service sectors have grown. Although in some cases, such as job creation, oil income has had positive consequences, but mainly the consequences of oil income fluctuations have been negative and hindered economic progress.

The Middle East and North Africa constitute one of the strategic and most significant regions in the world with a turbulent history. The region witnessed the birth of various countries and tense developments from the second decade of the 20th century until the middle of the century, and most of the countries in the region, including Arabic countries and Israel, emerged during the period. In this regard, the countries in the region have experienced conflicts, wars, invasions, and, sometimes, peace, in their relations with Israel. The latest development in this respect is the Saudi-led normalization of ties between some Arabic countries and Israel to oppose Iran and its axis of resistance. Though this has posed a number of threats to Iran’s national security, some opportunities are evident in it, as well. Thus, the main question of the present study is what opportunities the normalization of ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel can have for the empowerment of the axis of resistance. The study utilizes a descriptive and analytical methodology to answer the question, and the overall result of the study – i.e., the tested hypothesis – shows that opportunities like the creation of chasms between the government and society in Saudi Arabia, the pressure felt by Fatah and the need to reconcile with Hamas, Muslims’ reaction to the negation of the Palestinian Dream by Saudis, the creation of chasms between the government and society of Israel, and the gradual withdrawal of the U.S. from the region are all factors that can boost the axis of resistance based on the existence of groups who oppose the process of normalization across Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Islamic world at large.

Since the beginning of human settlement, the most important factor in facing various natural and un-natural disasters and facilitating development in a society has been solidarity and unity. However, this can only be achieved through the performance of rulers and the formation of governments. As different societies have formed and various cultures have emerged, and as humanity has progressed toward evolution and excellence, the model of this consensus has also undergone changes. With the establishment of governments, based on the decisions of societies in their modern form, multiple fac-tors have played fundamental roles in shaping this unity, while progressive human thought undoubt-edly influencing this process. However, what prompts further reflection on this issue is how this co-hesion emerges when needed and how its fragmentation being prevented under a governance struc-ture. It is evident that a national governance structure plays a significant role in shaping different pol-icy approaches. Due to the influence of various ideas on the formation of governments and the relent-less efforts of scholars and thinkers to develop a suitable and superior governance model, the concept of "good governance" has gained attention in recent decades. Good governance, when properly aligned with a structure that suits a society’s prevailing conditions, can play a crucial role and evolve over time. Principles such as participation, accountability, transparency, the rule of law, etc., are among the fundamental aspects of governance. Each of these principles can be extensively analyzed, but in this discussion, the focus is on the formation of public consensus or, more appropriately, "so-cial convergence" within a desirable "governance structure." Undoubtedly, this structure plays a key role as a fundamental prerequisite for comprehensive and effective implementation of governance thought in fostering social convergence across various sectors of society and government.

Iran, one of the powerful players in West Asia, from the beginning of the crisis in Syria, al-ways tried to sensitively take a completely different position from other regional players in supporting the political system of Syria, as one of the important priorities in foreign policy, follow his military and security. Iran's positions in the Syrian crisis were based on the overlap of the national security interests of this country and the Syrian nation-state, because the vic-tory of fundamentalist Salafist groups in Syria could be the biggest security threat to the axis of resistance, Iran's national interests, and Shia geopolitics in the long run. The region should include Shamat and Iraq. These conditions also existed for Russia, which envisions its own interests in the region of West Asia and the Eastern Mediterranean. Due to its energy re-sources and geopolitical location, this region is considered an influential and unforgivable area for actors like Russia. By presenting ISIS as a security concern, Tehran and Moscow succeed-ed in limiting the American effort to have a serious presence in Syria through close coopera-tion in addition to eliminating the threat of ISIS. In this article, an attempt was made to an-swer this question by relying on the theory of realism, how the crisis in Syria has affected the relations between Iran and Russia between 2010 and 2017 by emphasizing military-security cooperation.

The Syrian civil war, which has been labeled as one of the most significant crises in the Middle East, has turned this region into a scene of cooperation and competition among regional and trans-regional powers. The geographical scope of the conflict, the occurrence of extremely severe violence, and the direct and indirect involvement of international actors in operational battlefields have made this crisis one of the unique examples in the last decade. The nature of international phenomena has shown that regional and major powers, in a multilateral framework, are seeking to stabilize the balance of power in the international environment alongside cooperation and competition. The crisis in Syria has shown signs of such relations between Russia and Iran since 2010. Now, the question that arises here, which this article aims to examine and find an answer to within the framework of realism theory, is: "What impact has the Syrian crisis had on increasing political cooperation between Iran and Russia during the years 2010-2017?" Based on this question, the proposed hypothesis is that "the relatively common perspective of Iran and Russia on regional and international developments, although with sometimes differing foundational goals, provided the groundwork for joint cooperation between the two countries in various dimensions, particularly in the political sphere, within the framework of supporting the established government in Syria."