Neighborhood Policy

The importance of the historical study of the Russian and Ottoman neighborhood policy lies in the fact that, in addition to the importance of these two countries in geographical, social, cultural, political and economic dimensions, a large number of Iran's neighboring countries were somehow under the control of these two empires before independence. In this research, the historical process of Iran's relations with these two important neighboring countries has been studied using the descriptive method and discourse analysis of Lacla and Moufe with the approach of historical institutionalism. The results show that during the lifetime of the Ottoman Empire until the disintegration of this empire, coinciding with the Safavid to Qajar governments, we witness two neighboring discourses. The discourse of the first period, the discourse of structural divergence, later with the change of political, economic and social geography and the requirements of the world system, this discourse turns into the discourse of minimal convergence. The discourse of "structural divergence" was formed on the centrality of the neighborhood policy based on the tyranny of the kingdom. The discourse signs of structural divergence included geographical dominance, expansion of religious ideology, political divergence, economic divergence, and world trade. The minimal convergence discourse is based on the centrality of the political signifier based on the court's understanding of global realities. The semantic system of this discourse is based on the main signs of acknowledging the existence of the neighboring country, the unbalanced weight of different aspects of the relations between the two countries, and the continuation of divergence alongside convergence. However, in comparison, the central sign of the discourse of the neighborhood with Russia is tsarist imprudence and court tyranny, and the main signs are passivity against Russia's expansionism, "military weakness in exercising territorial sovereignty, weakness in attracting the Iranian peoples of Central Asia and the Caucasus, and giving in to disgraceful agreements." they give. With the formation of the Soviet Union and the beginning of a new discourse, Russian expansionism in Iran in its territorial form ended and the chapter of ideological confrontations between communism and capitalism began. The discourse of Iran's neighborhood policy with the Ottomans and Russia is like two pieces of a puzzle that are both complementary and effective on each other's growth. If Iran's neighborhood policy regarding Russia and Ottomans had the same importance for Iran's ruling body, it is possible that a different historical path would have been established for the region and Iran.