پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,228 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,752 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,086,962 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,826,854 |
ماهیت تجدیدنظرطلبی روسیه و چین؛ سیاست و منافع ایران | ||
| مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی | ||
| دوره 14، شماره 2، اسفند 1400، صفحه 371-396 اصل مقاله (581.28 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jcep.2021.328326.450023 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| علیرضا نوری* | ||
| استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکدة اقتصاد و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه شهیدبهشتی | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف در این نوشتار بررسی ماهیت تجدیدنظرطلبی روسیه و چین و تأمل در مورد منافع و رویکرد بایستۀ ایران در این زمینه است. در دیالکتیک تشدیدشدۀ موضوعی و کارگزارانه در شرایط گذار به نظم جدید، تجدیدنظرطلبی این دو کشور بیش از گذشته برجسته شده است و پیامدهای ملموسی بر سیاست بین‌الملل و منافع ایران دارد. در این نوشتار با رویکردی نظام‌مند و در چارچوب مفهومی تجدیدنظرطلبی میانگیر ماهیت تغییرخواهی روسیه و چین را تحلیل می‌کنیم. این دو کشور تا یک دهه پیش به‌دلیل دسترسی اندک به منابع «خارج نظام» در ردیف تجدیدنظرطلبان همگرا بودند که مترتب بر تغییرطلبی در چارچوب نظم موجود، بدون چالشگری جدی است. در سال‌های اخیر با تقویت منابع خارج نظام، تجدیدنظرطلبی آن‌ها به نوع میانگیر متمایل شده است که در آن تمایل و امکان تغییرها افزایش و هزینۀ تغییرطلبی کاهش می‌یابد. بنابر یافته‌های این نوشتار، نظر به اینکه همچنان بخش عمده‌ای از منابع این دو از «درون نظام» تأمین می‌شود، ماهیت تجدیدنظرطلبی آن‌ها نه معطوف به اساس نظم موجود، بلکه اصلاح‌بخشی، تدریجی و غیراساسی برخی روندها و تمرکز بر نفی نسبی نیروی مسلط بر نظم موجود یعنی آمریکا و غرب از بعضی روندها و ساخت‌ها است. با توجه به وجود وابستگی و آسیب‌پذیری متقابل و اینکه آمریکا و غرب بیشتر توان شبکه‌ای و نهادی خود را تا آیندۀ پیش‌بینی‌پذیر حفظ خواهند کرد، تغییرخواهی نسبت به آمریکا و غرب نیز تدریجی، غیراساسی و عملگرایانه است. بر این اساس، منافع و رویکرد ایران در فهم واقع‌گرایانۀ این مسئله است و تجدیدنظرطلبی تهران با روسیه و چین مشابه نبوده است و فرض امکان دریافت حمایت پایدار از آن‌ها به این دلیل، دقیق نیست. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| آمریکا؛ ایران؛ تجدیدنظرطلبی میانگیر؛ چین؛ روسیه؛ نظام بین‌الملل | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The Nature of Russian and Chinese Revisionism; Iran’s Policy and Interests | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Alireza Noori | ||
| Assistant professor, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The main purpose of this article is to examine the nature of Russian and Chinese revisionism and Iran's approach to this issue. In the context of transition to a new international order, their revisionism has become more prominent than before, and this has tangible consequences for world politics and Iran. This paper analyzes the issue with a systematic approach and considering the interrelationship of agencies and thematic categories in the international arena and in the context of bridging revisionism. Until a decade ago, Moscow and Beijing were integrated revisionists because of their limited access to resources “outside the order”, arranging them for change within the existing order. In recent years, with strengthening these resources, their revisionism has shifted to bridging one, according to which the desire and possibility of change increases and the cost of change decreases. According to research findings, given that most of the resources of these two are still provided “from within the order”, their revisionism is not directed to the basis of existing order, but on gradual and non-radical modification of some processes. Their greater focus is on the relative negation of the dominant force in the existing order, the United States, certain processes and structures. This revisionism is also non-radical and pragmatic, as the US maintains its most institutional strength for the foreseeable future, and interdependencies intensify. Accordingly, some speculations in Iran about the possibility of receiving continued support from Russia and China, because of the similarity of Iran’s revisionist approach to them, are inaccurate. Introduction: The Main purpose of this article is to examine the nature of Russian and Chinese revisionism and Iran's approach to this issue. In the context of transition to a new international order, their revisionism has become more prominent than before and this has had tangible consequences for the world politics and Iran. This paper analyzes the issue with a systematic approach and considering the interrelationship of agencies and thematic categories in the international arena and in the context of bridging revisionism. Until a decade ago, Moscow and Beijing were “integrated revisionists” because of their limited access to resources “outside the existing order”, arranging them for change within the existing order. In recent years, with strengthening these resources, their revisionism has shifted to “bridging one”, according to which the desire and possibility of change increases and the cost of change decreases. Research Question: The question of this article is what are characteristics of Russia and China’s revisionism and what is Iran’s approach in this regard. Iran, due to the special conditions of its foreign policy and its regional and international situation, is affected by the relations of the great powers, especially between Russia, China and the United States. This effect has been exacerbated in the context of Biden's emphasis on “smart pressure” and the continuation of “maximum pressure”, especially as Tehran insists on active deterrence, including through the development of relations with Russia and China. In this regard, Iran, especially following the military cooperation in Syria, has deepened its relations with Moscow and is seeking a long-term strategic agreement with it. On the other hand, the 25-year strategic agreement with China is a clear indication of Tehran's determination to expand relations with China. The acceptance of Iran as a permanent member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is also a sign of efforts for multifaceted interaction with Moscow and Beijing. These developments increase the complexity of Iran's relations with the great powers and also increase Tehran's sensitivity to the state of Russia-China relations with the international and US order. The Methodology and Theoretical Framework: This paper analyzes Russian and Chinese revisionism with a systematic approach and within the framework of "bridging revisionism" concept, referring to Stacie E. Goddard’s notion on four types of revisionists; integrated, bridging, isolated and rogue. Results and discussion: According to research findings, given that most of Russia and China’s resources are still provided “from within the order”, their revisionism is not directed to the basis of existing order, but on gradual and non-radical modification of some elements and trends. Their focus is on the relative negation of the dominant force in the existing order, the US, of some processes and structures. This revisionism is also non-radical and pragmatic, as the United States retains most of its institutional power for the foreseeable future, and as a result, interdependencies intensify. So the reason is that, firstly, Russia and China are in a state of complex interdependence and mutual vulnerability with the existing order and the powers that dominate it, so fundamental changes in the order will damage Moscow and Beijing (in particular), and secondly, they acknowledge that despite some weaknesses, the United States has retained much of its network and institutional strength, so a radical confrontation with it would be detrimental. Accordingly, Russia has a strategic agreement with Washington on strategic stability and security, and China on international economic stability, which keeps them away from a radical confrontation. On the other hand, due to the interconnectedness of the order and its dominant powers with China and Russia, it is not possible to radically limit them and apply unaccounted systemic pressures on them. Applying these pressures can be costly by creating a strategic challenge for the order and dominant powers. The fact that the policies of China and to a lesser extent, Russia are not illegitimate and unacceptable and have the potential to unite and use “out of order” resources, makes it difficult to put radical pressure on them. Accordingly, the existing order and the dominant forces, especially the United States, are involved in inciting the revisionism of Russia and China and its depth and scope. For example, by imposing and forcing the two to obey laws that are of interest to the West, they lead them to revisionism. Therefore, if, on the one hand, this approach and, on the other, the efforts of Russia and China for greater participation in world politics continue, their revisionism will become more aggressive and complex. Conclusion: As noted, Russian and Chinese revisionism and their confrontation with the US is not radical. Therefore, the assumption that Iranian revisionism is similar to Russia and China, and that this similarity is a precondition for long-term relations and continued support for Moscow and Beijing, is incorrect. Consequently, propositions such as “Iran-Russia-China alliance” or “Iran-Russia strategic cooperation” are also inaccurate. Contrary to these assumptions, Moscow and Beijing's revisionism are not focused against existing order or to remove the United States from international politics. They do not have the ability to achieve this goal, if any. They take advantage of current trends in the existing order, so the stability of the order is important to them. For this reason, they are cautious in dealing with anti-order/anti-US forces, including Iran, and do not want their relations with Tehran to disrupt their “intra-system” interactions. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| the US, Iran, Bridging Revisionism, China, International Order, Russia | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Allison, Graham (June 1, 2017) "What Xi Jinping Wants, The Atlantic". The Atlantic, avalibale at: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/ archive/2017/05/what-china-wants/528561/ (Accessed on: 11/2/2021) Allison, Roy (2019) "Russian Revisionism, Legal Discourse and the ‘Rules-Based’ International Order", Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 72, No. 6. pp 976-995 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2020.1773406). Attar, Saeed and Tajmiri, Marzieh (2019) "Game Theory and the Ups and Downs of Russian-European Relations in the New Millennium", Journal of Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 12, No 2, pp 399-417 (https://doi.org/10.22059/JCEP.2019.264783.449791) [in Persian]. "Brussels Summit Communiqué" (June 14, 2021), avalibale at: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_185000.htm (Accessed on: 30/6/2021) Callahan, William A. (2016) "China 2035: from the China Dream to the World Dream". Global Affairs, Vol. 2, No 3, pp. 247-258 (https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2016.1210240). Chegnizadeh, Gholamali (2008) "While in China Reborn: Snạrywhạy Likely", Public Law Research Journal, Vol. 9, No. 23, pp. 7-40 [in Persian]. Chen, Zhimin and Zhang, Xueying (2020) "Chinese Conception of the World Order in a Turbulent Trump Era", The Pacific Review. Vol. 33, No. 3-4, pp 438-468 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2020.1728574). "China and the World in the New Era" (September 2019), The State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China. Colgan, Jeff. D. (2019) "Three Visions of International Order", The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp 85-98 (https://doi.org/ 10.1080/0163660X.2019.1621657). Cooley, A., Nexon, D. & Ward, S. (2019) "Revising Order or Challenging the Balance of Military Power? An Alternative Typology of Revisionist and Status-Quo States", Review of International Studies, Vol. 45, No 4. pp. 689–708 (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210519000019). Copelovitch, Mark & Hoboltb, Sara B. and Walter, Stefanie (2020) "Challenges to the Contemporary Global Order. Cause for Pessimism or Optimism?" Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 27, No. 7. pp 1114-1125 (https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1678666). Davison, Derek (January 23, 2018) "Mearsheimer and Bacevich on the Future of American Foreign Policy", LOBELOG, avalible at: https://lobelog.com/mearsheimer-and-bacevich-on-the-future-of-american-foreign-policy/ (Accessed on: 12/4/2021) DiCicco, Jonathan M. (2017), "Power Transition Theory and the Essence of Revisionism", Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics (https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.311). Ferdinand, PETER (2016), "Westward Ho—The China Dream and “One Belt, One Road”: Chinese Foreign Policy Under Xi Jinping", International Affairs, Vol. 92, No 4. pp 941–957 (https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1468-2346.12660). Flockhart, Trine (2020) "Is This the End? Resilience, Ontological Security, and the Crisis of the Liberal International Order", Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 41, No. 2. pp 215-240 (https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13523260.2020.1723966). "Full Text: Remarks by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Global Health Summit" (May 21, 2021), Xinhua, avalibale at: http://xinhuanet.com/ english/2021-05/21/c_139961512.htm (Accessed on: 13/6/2021) Ghani, Parham and Asgarian, Abbasgholi (2021), "Barriers to the Formation of the Strategic Alliance between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia: Case Study, Iran-Russia Alliance in the Syrian Crisis", Journal of Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 229-249 (https://doi.org/10.22059/JCEP.2021.299709.449910) [in Persian]. Goddard, Stacie E. (2018), "Embedded Revisionism: Networks, Institutions, and Challenges to World Order", International Organization, Vol. 72, No. 4, pp. 763-797 (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818318000206). Götz, Elias (2019) "Russia and the Question of World Order", European Politics and Society, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 133-153 (https://doi.org/ 10.1080/23745118.2018.1545181). "G7 Rivals China with Grand Infrastructure Plan" (June 13, 2021), REUTERS, avalibale at: https://www.reuters.com/world/g7-counter-chinas-belt-road-with-infrastructure-project-senior-us-official-2021-06-12/ (Accessed on: 19/7/2021) Heritage, Anisa and Lee, Pak K. (2020), "The Sino-American Confrontation in the South China Sea: Insights from an International Order Perspective", Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 33, No 1, pp. 134-156 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2019.1639622). Holslag, Jonathan (2014) "The Smart Revisionist", Survival, Vol. 56, No 5, pp. 95-116 (https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2014.962802). Hynek, Nik and Karmazin, Aleš (2020) "Contemporary Revisionism in the Multilayered Political Order: Operationalisation, Techno-Social Conditions, Dilemmas", Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 72, No. 6, pp. 940-954 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2020.1776222). Hynek, Nik and Střítecký, Vít (2020), "Political Revisionism: Old and New", Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 72, No. 6, pp. 931-939 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2020.1782650). Ikenberry, G John (May 7, 2014), "The Rise of China and the Future of Liberal World Order", Transcript, Chatham House, avalibale at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/field/field_document/20140507RiseofChina.pdf "Interim National Security Strategic Guidance" (March 2021). avalibale at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/NSC-1v2.pdf (Accessed on: 10/5/2021) Jervis Robert (2002) "Theories of War in an Era of Leading-Power Peace", American Political Science Review, Vol. 96, No. 1, pp. 1-14 (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055402004197). Jones, Catherine (2020) "Contesting within Order? China, Socialisation, and International Practice", Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 105-133 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2019. 1674781). Kaczmarski, Marcin (2019) "Convergence or Divergence? Visions of World Order and the Russian-Chinese Relationship", European Politics and Society. Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 207-224 (https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118. 2018.1545185). Kanin, David B. (2019) "The Wests: Decline Management and Geopolitics". European Politics and Society. Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 9-32 (https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09546553.2018.1555994). Karami, Jahangir (2021), "Russia and Rebuilding of its International Position in the Syrian Crisis", Journal of Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 327-352 [in Persian]. Karmazin, Aleš and Hynek, Nik (2020) "Russian, US and Chinese Revisionism: Bridging Domestic and Great Power Politics", Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 72, No. 6, pp 955-975 (https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09668136.2020.1776221). Kitchen, Nicholas (2020) "Why American Grand Strategy Has Changed: International Constraint, Generational Shift, and the Return of Realism", Global Affairs, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 87-104 (https://doi.org/10.1080/ 23340460.2020.1734957). Kitchen, Nicholas and Cox, Michael (2019) "Power, Structural Power, and American Decline", Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 32, No. 6. pp. 734-752 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2019. 1606158). Mastanduno, Michael (2019) "Partner Politics: Russia, China, and the Challenge of Extending US Hegemony after the Cold War", Security Studies, Vol. 28, No. 3. pp. 479-504 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412. 2019.1604984). Maull, Hanns W. (2019) "The Once and Future Liberal Order", Survival, Vol. 61, No. 2. pp 7-32 (https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2019. 1589076). Mousavi Shafaee, Masoud and Shapouri, Mahdi (2016), "The USA and the International System: From a Uni-polar Order to Trans-Polar Order", Strategic Studies Qurarterly, Vol. 68, No. 2, pp. 139-165 [in Persian]. "National Security Strategy of the United States of America" (December 2017), avalibale at: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf (Accessed on: 23/4/2021) Noori, Alireza (2019) "Iran, Russia and Eurasian Integration; Benefits of Active Regionalism", Journal of Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 235-252 (10.22059/JCEP.2019.256084.449759) [in Persian]. Noori, Alireza (2019) "Containment and Deterrence in US-Russian Relations; Implications and Consequences for Iran", Journal of World Politics, Vol. 8, No. 2. pp. 247-290 (10.22124/WP.2019.3702) [in Persian]. Paikin, Zachary (2021) "Great Power Rivalry and the Weakening of Collective Hegemony: Revisiting the Relationship Between International Society and International Order". Cambridge Review of International Affairs. Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 22-45 (https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09557571. 2020.1720602). Panda, Jagannath P. (2020) "Revisiting Beijing’s Revisionist Quest in the Indo-Pacific", Strategic Analysis, Vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 615-622 (https://doi.org/10.1080/09700161.2020.1841108). Piccone, Ted (September 2018) "China’s Long Game on Human Rights at the United Nations", Foreign Policy at Brookings, avalibale at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/FP_20181009_ china_human_rights.pdf (Accessed on: 22/4/2021) Pieper, Moritz (2019) "‘Rising Power’ Status and the Evolution of International Order: Conceptualising Russia’s Syria Policies", Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 71, No. 3, pp. 365-387 (https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09668136.2019.1575950). Pisciotta, B. (2020) "Russian Revisionism in the Putin Era: An Overview of Post-Communist Military Interventions in Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria", Italian Political Science Review, Vol. 50, No. 1. pp. 87-106 (https://doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2019.18). Rouhi Dehbaneh, Majid (2021), "The Art of Covert Influence: China's "Sharp Power" Strategy in the World", Strategic Studies Quartarly, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 183-212 [in Persian]. Sakwa, Richard (2019) "BRICS and Sovereign Internationalism", Strategic Analysis, Vol. 43, No. 6, Pp. 456-468 (https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09700161.2019.1669899). Safari, Farzaneh & Ahmadi, Hamid & Barzegar, Kayhan (2021), "A Study of the Sino-Russian Approach to Regional Order in Eurasia", International Studies Journal (ISJ), Vol. 18, No. 1. pp. 83-102 [in Persian]. Schirm, Stefan A. (2019), "In Pursuit of Self-Determination and Redistribution: Emerging Powers and Western Anti-Establishment Voters in International Politics", Global Affairs, Vol. 5, No. 2. pp. 115-130 (https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2019.1603079). Seligman, Lara (June 15, 2021) "Pentagon Considering Permanent Naval Task Force to Counter China in the Pacific", Politico, avalible at: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/15/pentagon-navy-pacific-task-force-china-494605 (Accessed on: 20/7/2021) Sharma, Shalendra D. (2020) "Trump and the End of an Era? The Liberal International Order in Perspective", The International Spectator, Vol. 55, No. 3, pp. 82-97 (https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2020.1786927). Tishehyar, Mandana and Bakhshi, Esmaiel (2018) "Russia and China’s New Silk Road Plan; Opportunities and Challenges", Journal of Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 13, No. 2. pp. 419-443 (https://doi.org/10.22059/ JCEP.2020.290497.449874) [in Persian]. Yan, X. (2014) "From Keeping a Low Profile to Striving for Achievement", The Chinese Journal of International Politics, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 153–184 (https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/pou027). "Концепция Внешней Политики Российской Федерации" (ноября 2016), availible at: https://www.mid.ru/foreign_policy/official_ documents/-/asset_publisher/CptICkB6BZ29/content/id/2542248 (Accessed on: 7/5/2021). "Путин: на России и США Лежит Ответственность за Стратегическую Стабильность в Мире" (Июнь 16, 2021), ТАСС. avalibale at: https://tass.ru/politika/11667489 (Accessed on: 29/6/2021). "Стратегия Национальной Безопасности Российской Федерации" (Июль 2, 2021), avalibale at: http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/ Document/View/0001202107030001 (Accessed on: 11/7/2021). "75-я Сессия Генеральной Ассамблеи ООН" (Сентября 22, 2020), avalibale at: http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/64074 (Accessed on: 17/5/2021). | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 626 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 452 |
||