‍Central Asia and The Caucasus Journal

Abstract The re-emergence of the Taliban in Afghanistan and their seizure of power in 2021 has once again revived legal and political debates surrounding the recognition of governments in international law. While most states and international organizations have refrained from officially recognizing the Taliban, the Russian Federation, by adopting a pragmatic approach, has pursued a path of gradual engagement and even some forms of informal recognition. This article, using comparative and legal analysis methods, examines whether Russia’s recognition of the Taliban aligns with or contradicts the principles and practices of international law. Within this framework, key concepts such as the distinction between “de facto” and “de jure” recognition, non-standard governments, and the transformations of the post-Western international order are explored. The article then analyzes the regional implications of this trend for the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. These include Iran's use of the Taliban's ambiguous legal status to maintain security and diplomatic advantages, secure a rear front amid tensions with the West and Israel, and preserve its value as a bargaining chip for Russia in its negotiations with the West over Ukraine. In conclusion, the article emphasizes the need to reconsider legal frameworks of recognition in light of emerging geopolitical developments.

Abstract After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia sought to redefine its place in the international order and influence European politics. One of Moscow's strategies included strengthening and supporting the far-right movement in key Western European countries such as Germany, Italy, and France. This article uses a qualitative method and a descriptive-analytical approach to examine why and how Russia cooperated with the far-right movement in Western Europe (Germany, France, and Italy) between 1991-2024. From a strategic perspective, Russia sees this cooperation as a tool to weaken the cohesion of the European Union, NATO, and Western liberal values. In return, European far-right parties and movements have benefited from Russia's financial, media, and diplomatic support. This study examines different dimensions of cooperation, focusing on three countries: Germany (centered on the Alternative for Germany party), France (Front national/ Rassemblement national), and Italy (Brothers of Italy and the Lega Nord). The findings show that these relations have not only affected the domestic politics of these countries to some extent, but have also become one of Russia's new geopolitical tools in soft war.

Abstract Since Russia's war with Georgia in 2008, the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014, its intervention in the Syrian conflict in direct opposition to Western interests, the invasion of eastern Ukraine on February 24, 2022, and its interference in the affairs of other countries, discussions about Russia's behavior and intentions have increased significantly in areas that have geographical proximity to Russia. Especially since the "Ukrainian issue" has a prominent non-geopolitical feature, and there are many "nation-states" with this feature in Russia's neighborhood and surroundings. The study of Russian foreign policy trends in the Nordic-Baltic region and the influential component of Russia's "compatriots abroad" can shed light on geopolitical trends in the Nordic and Baltic regions. The main question of this article is how the security dilemma has affected the relations between Russia and the Nordic-Baltic countries? Based on Russia’s understanding of the security dilemma, this research examines the issue that the security dilemma has expanded the scope of Moscow’s security threats to the Baltic and Nordic regions. “Uncertainty,” “self-reliance,” and “anarchy” in Russia’s foreign policy behavior have led to the weakening of national security dilemma in the Nordic-Baltic countries. This research will attempt to analyze Russia’s behavior in dealing with the Nordics and Baltics using the logic of the security dilemma.

Abstract The Middle East has been of considerable importance in the strategy of international powers and plays an important role since the past. China and Russia, as two major international powers, are trying to create a multipolar order, and the Middle East is known as one of their strategic arenas of confrontation and cooperation. Their common goal is to expand their influence by actively shaping regional political and security dynamics to challenge the hegemony of the West and the United States. The present study, by applying a game theoretical framework and employing an explanatory method, seeks to answer the question of what is the strategy of China and Russia in the Middle East? The findings show that since strategies are a function of the tools and mental perceptions of the actors and the existing realities, the two countries are seeking a balanced presence based on defined interests in a division of labor. China's economic strategy is long-term, pragmatic, opportunistic, and flexible, which results in maintaining good relations with all state actors and avoiding challenging the interests of the United States as the main guarantor of stability and security in the region. Russia's military and defense strategy is aimed at pursuing interests, political and military support for certain countries, controlled arms sales, maintaining regional stability, and countering terrorist groups. On the other hand, some of their interests overlap, and both maintain frequent diplomatic and political contacts throughout the region.

Abstract Russia's foreign policy has been significantly shaped by the concept of pragmatism throughout its history, particularly in recent decades. This article seeks to provide a clearer explanation of how this pragmatism can be analyzed in the conduct of Russian statesmen. The central question posed is: how does "Gorchakovism" demonstrate the dimensions of Russian pragmatism in historical and empirical contexts? The hypothesis advanced here is that the restoration of Russia's international status after its defeat in the Crimean War (1853–1857) and the Treaty of Paris, achieved through a step-by-step diplomatic approach and the effective utilization of opportunities within Europe's geopolitical environment, established Gorchakov as a historical emblem of Russian pragmatism. To examine this hypothesis, the authors employ the theory of pragmatism in foreign policy and a qualitative analysis of historical texts, political literature, and Russia's international developments. The primary finding of this article is that in the realm of international politics, national interests can only be effectively pursued through pragmatic, calculated, and incremental diplomacy. Furthermore, abstract ideals, unless they possess tangible applicability, risk leading nations and states toward collapse and failure.

Abstract Today, the role of emerging powers in the Middle East is very important in the framework of global politics and influence in the region. China and Russia, as two countries with unique capabilities in the field of politics and economy, have been able to strengthen their influence in this region. This research examines the new strategic policies of these two powers in the Middle East. The main question of this research is as follows; What strategies have Russia and China used to increase and strengthen their influence in the Middle East? Which one has been more successful? The hypothesis of the research is that Russia and China by focusing on three main strategies namely; Strengthening and developing economic relations, seeking regional leadership through increasing political presence and influence and positive image of themselves in the region are trying to increase their influence and influence in the Middle East. This research tries to investigate this issue with descriptive analytical method and using library sources.

Abstract The Literature of the Russian Energy Security: Future Strategies This study surveys the academic literature on Russian energy security, focusing on developments following the onset of the war in Ukraine. Considering the extensive Western sanctions targeting Russia's energy sector, this study explores the key strategic components shaping Russia's contemporary energy security posture. Employing a systematic literature review methodology, 90 pertinent articles and scientific documents published between 2010 and 2024 were selected and analyzed. The analysis focused on three core areas: concepts of energy security, Russian foreign policy, and economic sanctions. Qualitative thematic analysis of the selected literature was conducted using MAXQDA software. To complement the qualitative synthesis and support the interpretation of trends within the literature, descriptive quantitative analyses (such as frequency counts or trend analysis) were performed using SPSS and OriginPro software. The findings indicate that Russia's "Eastern pivot"—a strategic reorientation of energy policy and exports towards Asia—has gained prominence as a central element of the country's energy security strategy in the wake of the war in Ukraine and subsequent sanctions.

Abstract Within the anarchic framework of the international system, governments adjust their foreign policy by their interests and environmental conditions. Russia has also adopted a policy based on smart power in the Middle East by combining hard and soft power. The country has used hard power to confront fundamentalist groups and, at the same time, has strengthened its position as a balanced actor on the issue of Palestine and Sionist regime by utilizing soft power. This research shows that Russia's main goal has been to maintain geopolitical interests, reduce costs, and increase regional influence. Moscow has also tried to establish its international image as a peace mediator. This dual policy has been a smart response to the geopolitical complexities of the Middle East.

Abstract The intensification of recent global trends—including the war in Ukraine, growing US-China competition, and heightened geopolitical rivalry—has fueled speculation about shifts in the international order, with a particular focus on Eurasia. In recent years, Russia and China have made concerted efforts to reshape the security architecture of Eurasia. This study addresses the central question: What are the nature and characteristics of the regional security order that Russia and China envision for the region? The study argues that Russia and China seek to establish a regional security order based on integration. This envisioned order is explicitly anti-hegemonic and founded on principles such as the distribution of power and responsibility, equality, respect for sovereignty, and, critically, the indivisibility of security. This research employs a qualitative, descriptive-analytical methodology, evaluating the hypothesis through the analysis of official documents, policy statements, and scholarly literature.

Abstract According to the history of European diplomacy, Russia's security hinges on its strategic influence in Central and Eastern Europe. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia's strategy to regain its position and security in Central and Eastern Europe raised concerns among countries in the region. In this regard, the Ukraine crisis in 2014 and the annexation of Crimea by Russia posed serious challenges to the security of the region and Europe as a whole. Consequently, countries in the region turned to forming regionalism patterns characterized by an anti-Russian stance to balance against Russia's power and influence. The Russia-Ukraine war in 2022 further aligned and synchronized anti-Russian behaviors in multilateral regional frameworks. Considering these factors, the question arises: How has anti-Russian regionalism in Central and Eastern Europe threatened Russia's national interests? The research hypothesis posits that anti-Russian regionalism in Central and Eastern Europe has threatened Russia's national interests and security through the political, military, and economic convergence of the regional countries. The research findings indicate that developing strategic relations among Central and Eastern European countries through tripartite cooperation triangles, regional organizations, and multilateral initiatives aimed at balancing against Russia has created military-security, political, and economic threats to Moscow's national interests in the region. The research method is qualitative with an analytical-explanatory approach, using the realist theory of balance of power to explain the subject.

Abstract Russia's military attack on Ukraine and the annexation of the four regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia to the Russian Federation is considered the largest military conflict in Europe after World War II, which explains why the military confrontation between Russia and Ukraine and the annexation of these regions to the Federation makes it necessary. Therefore, the main purpose of this article is to answer the questions that firstly, why Russia decided to attack Ukraine and annexed Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia to the Russian Federation and secondly, what are the causes of the spread of the crisis and the success of these annexations? In response to this hypothesis, the reason for Russia's decision to attack Ukraine and annex these areas to Russia was to eliminate the threats caused by Ukraine's possible membership in NATO, also, the changes in the common values and norms between Ukraine and Russia during the crisis and commonalities and links between the Russian society and the societies of these regions have played an important role in the spread of the crisis and the success of annexations.To answer the research questions, the method of multiple case study and theories of balance of threat and constructivism have been used. The data was also collected in a library method and analyzed with a descriptive-analytical approach. The findings of the article shows that both material and immaterial factors played a role in Russia's military attack on Ukraine and the annexation of these areas to the Russian Federation.

Abstract Central Asia is considered an influential strategic bull's eyes from Russia's point of view, so the mutability in this adjoining country of the region is aforethought Russia's insecurity. Russia seriously fought to reduce instability in Central Asia to ensure stable security in countries bordering Afghanistan by creating a collective security alliance or coalition entente. From 2001 to 2020, we were on the verge of the collapse of the central government of Afghanistan; Russia initiated various security policies for the region according to Afghanistan's security conditions.  interacting with America for fighting against terrorism; this country was the protagonist for overthrowing the Taliban government in 2001, but then to cooperating with the Taliban for the withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan in 2021; Russia made it as a part of its security strategy. Russia’s strategy explained a realist theoretical framework that derived from Mersheimer's bellicose realistic pragmatism. The main query of this research is: "What was the Strategic impact of Russia in Central Asia on the Security condition of Afghanistan during 2001-2020?"  "Russia's strategy in Central Asia after the overthrowing of Taliban aimed for boosting and strengthening security in Central Asia, as considering as prevailing conditions in Afghanistan." Russia's concern about the smuggling of narcotics and the influx of extremists from Afghanistan to Central Asia persuaded this government to fight against terrorist groups. Russia tried in its strategy to prioritize the security of the borders of Central Asia, which is adjacent to this country. This research explained the descriptive-analytical method and library resources.

Abstract As one of the important global actors, Russia has experienced offensive and defensive roles in its lifetime due to the developments in the regional environment such as the Arctic and its power. The importance of the North Pole in this century became apparent when Russia sent a submarine to a depth of 4261 meters in the Arctic Ocean on August 2, 2007, and installed the country's flag on the bottom of this ocean. Russia, in addition to having the best border with the Pole the largest amount of resources estimated in this region, and the largest ice fleet in the world due to the unique geographical location of the North Pole compared to it, in terms of aristocracy in different regions of this country for Any possible military attack has a strategic position. The main research question concerns the principles and strategic nature of Russia's policies in the Arctic region. In response to this question in a descriptive-analytical way and according to the principle of explaining strategies based on interests in the framework of power, Russia's strategies in this region are based on the conditions and the origin and source of the threat. and include a set of strategies, including strategies derived from domestic policy for the exploitation of economic and environmental benefits, foreign policy including the strategy of tension and strong reaction in the face of threats caused by the hegemon (NATO expansion) and its allies. It is a coalition strategy with extra-regional actors (China). As one of the important global actors, Russia has experienced offensive and defensive roles in its lifetime due to the developments in the regional environment such as the Arctic and its power. The importance of the North Pole in this century became apparent when Russia sent a submarine to a depth of 4261 meters in the Arctic Ocean on August 2, 2007, and installed the country's flag on the bottom of this ocean. Russia, in addition to having the best border with the Pole the largest amount of resources estimated in this region, and the largest ice fleet in the world due to the unique geographical location of the North Pole compared to it, in terms of aristocracy in different regions of this country for Any possible military attack has a strategic position. The main research question concerns the principles and strategic nature of Russia's policies in the Arctic region. In response to this question in a descriptive-analytical way and according to the principle of explaining strategies based on interests in the framework of power, Russia's strategies in this region are based on the conditions and the origin and source of the threat. and include a set of strategies, including strategies derived from domestic policy for the exploitation of economic and environmental benefits, foreign policy including the strategy of tension and strong reaction in the face of threats caused by the hegemon (NATO expansion) and its allies. It is a coalition strategy with extra-regional actors (China).

Abstract Iran neighbors four other coastal countries in the Caspian Sea, among which two countries, Russia and Kazakhstan, are among the largest grain and wheat exporters in the world. Iran also has technology and skills in grain processing and food production, which is always semi-active. The main question is, what is the benefit of the grain corridor in the Caspian Sea for Iran, and how can Tehran provide the basis for its establishment and development?
In this research, two theories of "comparative advantage" and "local comparative advantage" are used, based on which Iran has opportunities like advanced technology for grain processing, legal frameworks such as the Eurasian Economic Union agreement, and an accessible and shorter geographical route like INSTC.
Based on the findings of the research, some mistakes regarding the issue of food security and preventing the import of grains have made Iran unable to become an exporter of processed grains in the world. To answer this challenge, the model of Turkey as one of the largest grain exporters in the world has been compared. The results show that Iran can produce the grain it needs internally and process and import more than its domestic production from Russia and Kazakhstan, then by adding value, export it to other countries.
This is the method that Turkey uses and benefits from its income every year. As a result, according to these factors and Iran's potential to transfer these goods, the Caspian Sea can become an international corridor in the field of grains, creating a type of value chain between the three coastal countries.

Abstract The South Caucasus has always been of interest to major powers, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, it became a stage for regional and extra-regional power competition. Iran and Russia are among the countries that have focused on the South Caucasus and have sought to expand their influence in this region. This region holds significant strategic importance for both Iran and Russia. One of the important crises in the South Caucasus is the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which has had various stages throughout history. The First Nagorno-Karabakh War continued from 1991 to 1994. The Second Nagorno-Karabakh War began on September 27, 2020, and lasted for 44 days. According to the authors, the concept of a "shatter belt" can provide a useful framework for analyzing Iran and Russia's approach to the first and second Nagorno-Karabakh war. In this study, the South Caucasus is considered a shatter belt. In response to the question of "what approach Iran and Russia had towards the first and second Nagorno-Karabakh wars and what factors influenced their approach," the authors propose the hypothesis that "factors such as interest in preserving regional independence and security, mediating in regional conflicts, competing with regional and global powers, internal factors of each country, and the need to realize national interests have influenced Iran and Russia's approach to the first and second Nagorno-Karabakh wars." A descriptive-analytical method has been used to answer this question.

Abstract Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 not only damaged Ukraine’s economy but also put so much pressure on Russia and European countries in gas trade due to the loss of big trade partners. This article aims to answer two main questions: 1- What are the impacts of Russia and Ukraine’s war on the United States and the European Union in the energy area? 2-Does it impact the position of Iran in the energy part in global markets? This research has been done based on the narrative review approach. The findings show the gradual loss of former position in global markets for Ukraine, Russia, and the European Union and the increasing dependency of European countries on the United States in the energy area. If European countries avoid cooperating with huge oil and gas resource-owning countries like Iran, besides aggravating their dependency on the United States, they deprive themselves of cheaper energy resources.

Abstract The Russia-Ukraine war in February 2022 caused changes in the international system and blackened the balance of power prospects, especially in a region like Central Asia where Russia has a strong role and influence. Factors such as Russia's military conflict in Ukraine, and this country's focus on its ability to disrupt equations in its favor, which subsequently causes changes in its national and foreign policies, open paths for new questions. Such as whether the war in Ukraine and its consequences have caused Russia's role to diminish, or we can even say Russia's hegemony (especially from a security point of view) in Central Asia? In this case, is China, another influential and powerful actor in the region, going to fill the vacuum of Russian influence? Or will the countries of the region take advantage of the opportunity this time and highlight other regional actors such as India, Turkey, Iran, or trans regional actors such as the European Union in their foreign policy? In order to answer these questions, this research has tried to investigate the variables of China and Russia's sources of power and influence in Central Asia, and their changes after the Ukraine war. After evaluating the prospects of challenges and the opportunities created by this war for the influence of China and Russia in this region will provide scenarios for the future situation in Central Asia and the influential actors in the region.

Abstract The separation of Crimea from Ukraine and its annexation to the territory of the Russian Federation in 2014 and the special military operations of the Russians against this country since February 2022 as linguistic symptoms suggest that Russia is seeking to expand its sphere of influence in the foreign region as much as possible؛ It is close and at the same time preventing the presence of the West in NATO in order to increase its security factor in it. Therefore, due to the fundamental difference in linguistic symptoms, the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine has not only not decreased, but has also developed strongly in the West's support for Ukraine's policies. On the other hand, considering that the issue of discretion or the will of Russian policymakers in the post-historical world is still based on two elements of historical (geopolitical) and ideological mentality in the region, it has eliminated the possibility of a quick regional solution against Russia's interests. Having said that, the question of the article is expressed in this way that according to the will of the power to develop the foundation with different forms of linguistic text; What has been the consequence of deconstruction against the interests of Russia by Ukraine in the near abroad? With the help of linguistic propositions, the answer to this conflict is proposed in such a way that Ukraine's attempt to separate from the centralist regional security complex led by Russia has the same consequences as the separation of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine and the declaration of independence of the Russian-inhabited regions and the tearing of this country into pieces in 2023 had. The method of writing the article is explanatory-analytical and the necessary information has been collected using library sources.

Abstract The Russia-Ukraine war began on February 25, 2022, after months of tension and the presence of Russian military forces on the border of Ukraine, with the order of the Russian president's all-out military attack. Putin's justifications for the military attack on "special military operations" in Donbas and the non-occupation of Ukraine by Russia were based on humanitarian intervention due to the commission of the crime of genocide by the Ukrainian government in the east of this country. But Putin's most important justification is based on individual legitimate defense in advance due to imminent threats from Ukraine and NATO, and collective legitimate defense in support of the self-proclaimed states of the Donbas region, which Russia previously recognized as independent states. Had been recognized and a treaty of friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance was established with the leaders of Donetsk and Luhansk. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine the war between Russia and Ukraine from the perspective of the right to resort to force. Therefore, this research seeks to answer the question: Are Russian legal arguments for resorting to force justified from the point of view of international law? is The research method of this article is descriptive-analytical and the method of collecting information is library-reference. The findings of the research indicate that Russia violates the rules of international law and the right to territorial integrity and political independence of Ukraine, and Russia's reasons for legitimizing military aggression against Ukraine are not justified.

Abstract Conflicts and many of the states’ actions can be analyzed through the theory of ontological security. Sometimes, states take measures which endanger their physical and realistic security. States confront disdain through honor seeking actions. The main question of the present research state: how ontological security triggered Russia to start the war with Ukraine? To answer this question, the hypothesis of the research states that neglecting Russia’s existential security borders from the West – within the form of NATO – led Russia to extensive military conflict with Ukraine in order to remind the West of its existential security borders. In the present research, data gathering method has been based on internet and library documents and the research has been conducted on the basis of descriptive-analytical approach. The findings of the research shows that Russia-Ukraine war has risen within the theoretical framework of ontological security which is based on Eurasianism and Russian nationalism and geopolitics that shape Russia’s biographic narrative. Russia’s attack on Ukraine is considered to be an honorable action to refrain from shame and disdain.
 

Abstract Although the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is mostly interpreted based on geopolitical propositions such as NATO’s expansion towards the Eastern Europe, the cultural identity and the inference of the political elites in both countries also play a significant role in escalating this battle. In some cases, the way of interpreting identities, which are defined on the basis of a sense of individual affection to the society or a specific group according to a set of cultural and social features such as religion and language, has been influential in creating friction in human societies. In addition to expansion of “self and the other” in the mental situation of the citizens, this interpretation has a great impact on the perception of politicians about their ego and its function in relation to other countries. Meanwhile, the conceptual dimensions of this research have been based on cultural revanchism and radicalism. In order to answer the main question of the research, a descriptive-analytical method has been used and the data has been gathered through library and statistical resources. The findings of the present research indicate that reactional policies of both parties regarding one another and in ties with past humiliations and present threats have roots in “contradictory and converging” Russian and Ukrainian cultural identities. These roots, within the framework of historical, ethnic, lingual and religious perceptions, pave the way for escalating the current conflict between the two countries.

Abstract Russia's massive invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the severe financial sanctions imposed against Moscow have not only had an economic impact on Russia; but, the consequence of this crisis has also affected the international economy, including America and Europe’s markets. The inflation caused by the Ukraine crisis, which has currently disrupted most of the world's economies, including the United States and Europe, is constantly increasing due to the sharp increase in the prices of oil, gas, industrial and agricultural products. This article tries to examine the economic impact of the war between Russia and Ukraine in 2022 on the key players of the global economy, especially the United States and Europe, which have imposed severe financial sanctions against Russia. Therefore, the main question of this research is: What effect will the Russia – Ukraine war have on the international economy, especially for the U.S. and Europe?
The hypothesis of the research is that given the fact that the conflict in Ukraine has the political and military dimensions, the leaders of these countries have prioritized the political issues over the economic issues in their decision making process to address this crisis. This has caused the economy to be affected again by high politics issues and faced stagnation and increase in global prices which once was considered as a low politics during the Cold War and then, it became more relevant in the decision-making process of governments after the Cold War.
This paper has applied the descriptive-analytical method to analyze the data.

Abstract Although the war in Ukraine is geopolitically a North-North war or Europe's concern but in effect, it is a great power competition between major world powers which is a manifestation of anticipated decline of U.S. hegemony and openly challenging the Pax Americana. In such a situation, the attitude, conduct and performance of involved actors in the war could have a critical consequence for the future of world politics.
This research seeks to apply the future research methodology and the scenario planning techniques to analyze the Russia – Ukraine war and answer these questions: what will be the future scenarios of the Russia – Ukraine war? What consequences this war might have for the future of the international system? Accordingly , 4 scenarios  could be proposed in 3 categories: a) Favorable scenario: Russia-China political-military alliance; containing the US and NATO and changing the rules of the international game; B) Probable scenarios: 1) peace agreement (with the role of actors such as China, Turkey, Israel, France) and changing the order of the structure of the international system, 2) the continuation of war and the continuation of tension in the international order; C) Possible scenario: the risk of nuclear war. The findings of the present study show that the war in Ukraine as a turning point / stimulus affects the international order and after the war in Ukraine, the international system will enter a new era. The implications of this war on the international level will be the polarization of international security and the geopoliticization of international politics. This war has also strengthened the leadership position of the United States at the global level, at the expense of its European partners. 

Abstract Expansion of NATO and the EU to the East created an atmosphere of strategic uncertainty in Western government relations with Russia, at the cost of intensification of security issue all over Central Eurasia and prompted Moscow into taking tough, and in some cases inconsistent with regional peace and stability, decisions. In these conditions, the convergence of the governments desiring change of global governance can alleviate the aggressive behavior towards the arrogance system and pursue the concept of change in the status quo in a more peaceful manner. The present paper explains this approach based on the impact of “Iran’s Special Ties with Russia in Strategic Spheres” on “Predictability of Moscow Behaviors and Alleviation of Security Challenge in Central Eurasia due to Change of Equation of Russia’s Foreign and Defense Policy from Offence to Defense.” Thus, the paper is seeking a proper answer for the question “What are the reasons and Channels of Iran’s impact on Russian change of approach from offence to defense, and therefore, alleviation of security issues in Central Eurasia?”  The primary answer of the paper to the question lies in “Natural Alliance of Iran and Russia”, and the main reason of Iran’s influence on the development in the Offence-Defense equation of Russia is the “common threats and concerns of Iran and Russia from the West and compatibility of the two countries’ interests in stopping western expansionism in the northern and Western borders”. The current paper is of the Analytical-Descriptive type and the method used is inferential and the findings of the paper which are mostly analyzed based on references to objective-historical evidence and logical reasoning are proof of the truth of the primary answers.

Abstract The collapse of the former Soviet Union, drew the Caspian Sea region out from a pure and calm strategic region and created numerous geopolitical opportunities and challenges for Iran and Russia. This fundamental development caused change in the surrounding Caspian Sea’s political borders and impacted on the legal status of the sea. Iran and Russia’s policies and approaches towards the Caspian Sea legal status fundamentally altered, as well. At the same time, with the emergence of differences of opinions and views among the coastal countries on the legal status and the way to exploit the Caspian Sea resources, there was created a fertile bed for presence and interference of big and extra-regional countries in the Caspian Sea. Under such circumstances, Iran/Russia policy alignment for managing the legal status developments of the Caspian Sea and preventing it from becoming a new hotbed of tensions , as well as, nearing together the opinions and positions of the other coastal countries has been crucial. The pivotal and main question of the present article is what impact Iran and Russia policies toward the legal status of the Caspian Sea can have on the expansion of penta-lateral cooperation among the Caspian Sea coastal countries. In the present paper this question is put to test whether Iran/Russia policies towards the Caspian Sea legal system- apart from the negative historical mindsets between the two countries- due to reasons like geographical continuity, regional requirements, joint destiny and the Caspian Sea vulnerability resulting from presence of the big powers, and concerns about emergence of instability and insecurity in the Caspian Sea, have been more convergent and led to strengthening of cooperation and conclusion of various documents of penta-lateral cooperation among the coastal countries. The present paper is of the Analytical-Descriptive type and the method used is inferential and the data has been analyzed using library and Internet sources.