Libmonster ID: SE-419

Positioning Iran as a state developing nuclear technologies in the continuing nuclear bipolar system of international relations makes it possible to transform the Iranian-American interaction to the level of parity subject-subject contact. This kind of interaction is reinforced by Iran's special economic position as a fuel powerhouse, which accounts for at least 10% of the world's total oil reserves and ranks second in the world in terms of natural gas reserves. If, according to the principles of the "axis of evil" doctrine, Iran poses a threat to US national interests, then the overall positioning of Iran as a regional political, economic and military center of power makes it possible to fix Iranian-American relations at the level of a curtailed conflict, which does not imply an open armed confrontation between the parties.

The structure of political activity includes a number of basic elements. First, these are different types of political actors that interact with each other within the framework of general communication, represented in the form of a "power-subordination"system. Based on this type of communication, these actors are divided by status into subjects and objects of power-subordinate interaction. Secondly, the structure of political activity includes the goals of politics: domestic and foreign policy. Third, it includes the means and tools to achieve political goals.

Since social and political systems differ from mechanical systems in their substantial multidimensionality and discreteness of their development, as well as in the irreversibility of the processes occurring in them, within the framework of the political process, there is a constant change of roles, a change in the positioning of subjects and objects in relation to each other. As a result, the foreign policy process can go both along the line of subject-subject parity interaction, and along the line of mirroring the first variant of subject-object interaction.

Any political institution is nothing more than a certain group of people who are authorized by society to perform any socially significant, and impersonal functions. In addition, it is also a set of material and ideological means of activity. Understanding a political institution as an impersonal form of activity of specific individuals, it is necessary to realize that this activity is a reflection of the elite's own positions on specific issues of domestic and foreign policy within the framework of the emerging political process.

Therefore, when it comes to the political component of Iranian-American cooperation, first of all, we should analyze a number of foreign policy concepts developed by representatives of the US ruling elite.

page 123

Over the past 15 years, after the collapse of the bipolar system of the world order, the United States has been trying to formulate a foreign policy doctrine that is adequate to its national interests. The main problem areas of such an intellectual search can be identified by considering the polemic of Republicans and Democrats about the positioning of the United States in the international arena. A certain orientation program for the development of the concept of American foreign policy at the present stage was the Republican election program of 2000, outlined by the current US Secretary of State, K. Kropotkin. Rice in the article "Company 2000: Promoting National Interests "[Rice, 2000].

The central theme of this publication is an attempt to determine the place and role of the United States in the modern post-bipolar system of international relations and the recognition of the fact that the existing foreign policy doctrine is" imperfect". This position was based on criticism of the foreign policy course pursued by the Clinton administration. The doctrine of so-called flexible hegemony or the policy of humanitarian intervention, which required the US government to justify its decisions at the level of intergovernmental consultations within the framework of international supranational organizations, such as the UN, was questioned. As an alternative, the concept of "rigid hegemony" was proposed, according to which, in order to protect the national interests of the United States, it is necessary to pursue a rigid defensive course without multilateral consultations with international organizations. The latter (consultations) presuppose the possibility of compromises, and, therefore, would force the United States to make certain concessions. Nevertheless, despite the ongoing controversy between Republicans and Democrats for several years, it is possible to distinguish what is common and special in their positions. If different understanding of the nature of American hegemony is special, then the general one is confidence in the need for widespread dissemination of Western democratic values as universal and understanding that in modern international conditions, unlike the Cold war period, the economic, informational, but not military power of the state becomes the primary factor. "The President should remember that the army is a special tool. This is not a civilian police force, and it is quite obviously not designed to build a civil society" [Rice, 2000].

It is impossible not to see that such a position bears the stamp of political and philosophical ideas about the ideal political world order. However, the US political elite cannot ignore the existing realities, and therefore, along with the ideal model of American foreign policy, a corresponding strategic foreign policy doctrine is being developed.

An indicator of this ambivalence in US foreign policy is the administration's response in Washington to the development of Iran's nuclear program. Ongoing discussions around it cast doubt on the seriousness of claims about the diminishing importance of military force since the end of the cold war. On the contrary, the implementation of missile defense activities in the United States actually led to the termination of the START-1 and START-2 treaties, caused a tightening of the "nuclear bipolarity" regime, and brought to the fore the problem of the lack of clearly developed legislative and diplomatic principles and approaches to solving issues related to the development of nuclear weapons. Ultimately, all this led to the need to recognize the relative success of the United States after 1991.

Thus, it is the fact that a particular state has nuclear weapons in some cases, for example, in the case of Iran, that translates US interaction with this state to the level of parity subject-subject interaction. This thesis can be confirmed by analyzing the foreign policy doctrine of George Bush,

page 124

the so-called" axis of evil", which was essentially a development of the aforementioned concept of"rigid hegemony".


Conceptually, the current US foreign policy is based on the key provisions of the Axis of evil doctrine and other ideological justifications for this policy, the general position of which is primarily the factor of terror as a threat to national security. The main targets of pressure, as you know, are Iran and North Korea (in the recent past, Iraq), i.e. countries that, from the point of view of Washington, firstly, support terrorism and, secondly, are trying to possess or possess weapons of mass destruction (WMD). A similar description of the countries of the "axis of evil", given by US President John Kerry. It does not provide an objective picture of the degree of priority and secondary hazards to which the United States may be exposed. In the system of causal relationships, the factor of nuclear weapons is the cause, and not the consequence, of the threat of terrorism with the possible use of weapons of mass destruction. However, under the axis of evil doctrine, there is a visible substitution of causes and effects, and it is terrorism that is recognized as the basic cause and threat to the security of North America. In particular, it is pointed out that one of the key goals of US foreign policy is to "prevent regimes that support terror from threatening the United States with weapons of mass destruction" (Bush, 2002). On the contrary, it seems that only the position of blocking the possibility of creating and distributing WMD, so as not to provoke the emergence of nuclear terrorism, can give an objective idea of the actual cause-and-effect relationships.

Thus, positioning Iran as a state developing nuclear technologies in the continuing nuclear bipolar system of international relations can transform the Iranian-American interaction in the direction of military confrontation, but not armed conflict, i.e. to the level of parity subject-subject contact. In turn, this kind of interaction is reinforced by Iran's special economic position within the system of international relations. The strategy of nuclear deterrence, which, according to the position of K. Rice, which may be applicable to the United States in relation to new states that possess nuclear weapons, and which involves a retaliatory military strike, in the case of Iran can bring zero gain, even despite the serious quantitative advantage of the United States in the field of nuclear weapons. The deterrent factor in this case is the fact that the implementation of such a strategy may make the hydrocarbon raw materials that are located on the territory of Iran inaccessible.


In general, it should be noted that the role of Iran as a fuel power center, which accounts for at least 10% of the world's total oil reserves and which ranks second in the world in terms of natural gas reserves [Iran Country Analysis...], guarantees it to maintain its position as a geo-economic power center in the system of international relations. Despite the application of US sanctions against Iran (Executive Orders 12957 and 13059 of 1995 and 1997 and the "d'Amato Act", which prohibits trade transactions for the purchase of Iranian oil and imposes an embargo on contracts of US and foreign firms in the oil and gas industry worth more than $ 20 million), the shortage of available hydrocarbons, The experience of leading and developing world economies, in particular the United States, the EU, and the Asia-Pacific region, neutralizes them in practice. It is worth noting that already in 1995, immediately after the introduction of

page 125

Representatives of 40 foreign oil, gas and engineering corporations took part in a conference on the conclusion of investment contracts worth a total of $ 6 billion held in Tehran. The fact that Japan, China and the EU are the leading importers of Iranian hydrocarbons is also evidence of the direct hydrocarbon dependence of European countries and the Asia-Pacific region on Iran. At the same time, the main export markets for Iran are the EU - approximately 25-26% of total energy exports, Japan-21% and China-10%, respectively [Iran Country Analysis...].

In its turn, Iran, which generates 80-90% of its export revenues from oil and gas sales, is also interested in cooperation with foreign companies. This mutual interest of investors and the Iranian government in the development of the country's oil and gas industry has led to the need to remove investment risks of "internal origin", i.e. to liberalize Iranian legislation in the field of economic cooperation.

Speaking about the risks of "internal origin", it is necessary to take into account the specifics of the public administration system in Iran, which is based on the norms of Muslim law. This explains the marked difference between the Iranian approach to entrepreneurship and the generally accepted one. Thus, according to article 81 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, "it is strictly prohibited to grant concessions to foreigners..." [Text of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 1994, p. 83], and this minimizes any possibility of entering into production sharing agreements that are common for business practice in other States. However, this legal obstacle is overcome through buy-back agreements or product repurchase agreements, where the Iranian side pays for investments in the oil and gas industry with proceeds from subsequent oil production. This provision is in line with the principles of Muslim law, which recognizes the profit divided between partners depending on the contribution to the business. These schemes of contractual relations have become one of the models of liberalization of the Iranian investment legislation. In this case, the profit is not referred to as a surplus, since it is not calculated as a percentage, but is divided into shares corresponding to the contribution of each of the participants of the commercial enterprise to the authorized capital, which fully complies with the principle of Islamic justice.

In terms of structure and content, the buy-back agreement consists of two separate parts: 1) a contract for the provision of services during the development and development of the field; 2) a long-term export agreement for the sale of oil (LTEOSA), based on the value of the extracted product, which regulates the return of invested funds at the price (if the prices stipulated in the contract fall), through a return in the form of oil or gas, but not in direct money " [USA forced...].

First, let's talk about the positive aspects of buy-back agreements.

If the investor has not discovered something of commercial value in the field or has not entered into a contract with the National Iranian Oil Company, then the investor has the right to " terminate the original obligations and receive reimbursement of expenses and a certain bonus from INC." Under the current agreement, "the contractor will be paid a specified amount, which includes taxes paid, his expenses, bank loan expenses, as well as some additional remuneration," in the form of a profit of about 15-20% on the investment amount. Within 5 to 8 years, the contractor receives both reimbursement of its own expenses and profit on the amount of investment, as well as compensation, including an interest rate of LIBOR + 1% and a certain monthly remuneration. In the event of a fall in prices for raw hydrocarbons, the investor is not liable for losses, as INC INC undertakes to pay compensation, the amount of which is stipulated in the current agreement. Activities of foreign investors, in particular, on the basis of buy-back agreements, in the following areas:-

page 126

In view of the stable development of the institutions of the religious and political system of Iran, it is protected from any risks associated with domestic political fluctuations.

At the same time, the negative aspects of buy-back agreements for investors are, firstly, the short-term validity of such agreements, designed for about a ten-year period, which creates difficulties for foreign counterparties, "who hope to maintain long-term positions in the Iranian oil and gas sector." However, a contractor can sign a series of buy-back agreements, thus increasing its calendar presence in the Iranian market [Brexendorff, 2004, p. 16-19; Dobrovitsky, 2005]. Secondly, the investor does not profit from an unplanned increase in oil or gas prices in the contract text.

At the same time, some of the disadvantages of buy-back contracts can be partially compensated by new partner investment schemes, for example, by attracting foreign capital under the terms of the developed contract scheme "construction-operation-transfer of the object to the customer" (HERE). It is advisable to apply these contract schemes "in relation to pipeline projects that the Iranian government is extremely interested in promoting. First of all, we are talking about using Iran's territory to transport oil and gas from the Caspian region to foreign markets." At the same time, the investor's working life under the project terms is no longer a ten-year period, as is the case with buy - back contracts, but approximately 15-20 years [Krutikhin].

Speaking generally about the liberalization of the Iranian investment legislation, it should be noted that a serious step towards modernizing this legislation was the adoption in 2003 of the law "On Attracting and Protecting Foreign Investment" (FIPPA), which took into account investment schemes that do not fall under the previous law of 1956 " Norms of this Law it regulates almost all types of activities of foreign investors, whether direct investment or minority participation; it also regulates the activities of legal entities, buy-back schemes and service contracts" (Brexendorff, 2004).

This investment and export interdependence of the parties in the fuel and energy sector, taking into account the factor of Iran's real and potential military power, ensures the policy of "peaceful expansion" of oil and gas importing countries to the Iranian market within the framework of buy-back investment contracts. In addition to its purely economic significance, the investment scheme used by the Iranian government has real domestic and foreign political significance, being one of the tools for maintaining a multi-factor balance of the parties - synchronous activities in the field of the Iranian fuel and energy complex of several states represented by TNCs, which creates competition and a clash of interests, and therefore minimizes the possibility of monopolizing an actor, such as the United States.

Meanwhile, " over the next two decades, i.e. by 2020, America's needs (for example, in crude oil) will increase by one-third, which means that the United States will need to increase its imports of consumed oil by two-thirds. The demand for natural gas will increase by 50%, and this will create the need to import more than two-thirds of the total increase in demand " [Oil in the American Foreign Policy..., 2003]. These data suggest an increase in US dependence on oil and gas importing countries in the coming decades. In this regard, Washington will have to carry out a number of necessary foreign policy actions aimed at minimizing the possible shortage of oil and gas fuel. Thus, in the case of Iran, it is an attempt to establish control over the fuel and energy sector.-

page 127

It is unlikely that the country will be able to develop its energy complex through military expansion or tougher sanctions.

Iran's multi-factor equilibrium scheme has already ensured parity in the US and Iran's foreign policy positioning. So, despite a number of sanctions, the US Treasury Department "issued permission to two American companies-Sharon and Kastol-to import crude oil from Iran" [the US is forced to...That is, it was forced to recognize Iran as a sovereign state, the inflexibility of the sanctions proposed by the United States, their real dependence on the supply of Iranian hydrocarbons, and the need to solve this problem using diplomatic tools.

Another important factor in modern Iranian-American cooperation is the problem of resolving the Iraqi crisis, namely, ensuring access to the oil resources of Iraq for the American side. On the one hand, the post-war legalization of the Iraqi political regime, in particular, the guarantee by the Iraqi constitution of the most-favored-nation regime for foreign investors in the production, processing and transportation of oil and petroleum products, allows the United States to occupy a leading position in the fuel and energy sector of Iraq. However, on the other hand, the practical implementation of the measures specified in article 109 of the Iraqi Constitution, which bring the greatest benefits to the Iraqi people and are based "on the most modern marketing principles, and encourage investment" in the oil industry, can only be implemented under the condition of political stability. At the same time, the ongoing internal political instability in Iraq makes the safety of American investments in the fuel and energy sector of Iraq, and therefore ensuring US energy security, directly dependent on political actors who are able to ensure the manageability of the Iraqi situation, thereby reducing high investment risks.

In this regard, the role of Iran is noticeably increasing, which is able to influence the political and socio - economic situation of the nearest raw material center of power-Iraq, and thereby influence the foreign policy of the United States itself. In particular, this is how one can interpret the meaning of the official statement of the then President of Iran, Mohammad Khatami, made in November 2004 in connection with the Iraqi problem.: "American experts say that their country is in a difficult situation and is immersed in the abyss of problems created by the United States itself in Iraq, and at the moment they are trying to overcome them. We (Iran) are ready to help them get out of this situation" [Al-Hayat, 2004].

Subsequent political steps taken by the American leadership, including support for the federal structure of Iraq (which may lead to the rapprochement of the most oil-rich "Shiite regions of the country with neighboring Shiite Iran" [Sapronova, 2005]), as well as non-resistance to active establishment of Iran-Iraq political and economic cooperation by Teheran1 indicate an indirect agreement of the United States to accept the conditions Iran's position on the Iraqi issue within the framework of the "regional security - Iraqi oil"interaction model.

The instability and investment risks characteristic of the current situation in Iraq, provided that Iran is able to seriously influence its political and economic development, including by using the factor of Shiite religious identity, thus transfer the interaction between Iran and the United States to the level of subjectivity.-

1 Thus, according to the Iraqi Minister of Commerce, the volume of trade between Iraq and Iran could reach $ 1 billion in monetary terms by March 2006.

page 128

In other words, they lead to a rearrangement of the links in the foreign policy hierarchy. If, according to the principles of the axis of evil doctrine, Iran appears as a threat to US national interests, that is, it is understood as an object of American foreign policy, then practical political realities change its status. The overall positioning of Iran in the system of international relations as a regional political, economic and military center of power makes it possible to fix Iranian-American relations at the level of a curtailed conflict, which does not imply an open armed confrontation between the parties [Bush, 2005].

Thus, the transformation of the object-subject scheme of Iranian-American interaction (the object of Iran - the subject of the United States) in the direction of subject-subject and subject-object contact allows us to speak about the declarative nature and inconsistency of the "axis of evil" doctrine in relation to Iran. The changing role and growing importance of Iran in relation to the United States create favorable conditions for a positive transformation of the interaction of these states, minimizing the possibility of radical changes in the political system of Iran through external interference in domestic political processes.

list of literature

Аль-Хайят // 450c35-c0a8-10ed-003a-92db7e22377d/story.html

Krutikhin M. I. Cooperation or prohibitions? Why Iran does not want to open up for foreign investment //

Sapronova M. A. The Constitution of Iraq, approved at the general referendum on October 15, 2005: structure, main provisions, features.

The US is forced to buy Iranian oil //

Text of the Constitution of Iraq //

Text of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran // Spring of Freedom: to the anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Moscow, 1994.

Brexendorff A., Ule C. Changes Bring New Attention to Iranian Buyback Contracts // Oil&Gas Journal. 2004. Vol. 102. N41. Nov. 1

Bush G.W. Interview of the President by Israeli Television Channel 1 //

Bush says Iran a "real threat" // 12-15T012626Z_01_SPI505073_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-BUSH.xml

Bush G. W. President Delivers State of the Union Address, January 29, 2002 /

Dobrovitsky I. Harbingers of Spring: Iranian Oil Projects May Become Easier to Access Soon (20.01.2005) //

High Economic Council // Iran daily /

Iran Country Analysis Brief //

Oil in the American Foreign Policy: Oil Calculations in the War on Iraq. Abu Dabi, 2003.

Remarks as delivered by President William Jefferson Clinton Georgetown University November 7, 2001 // _glf110701.htm

Rice C. Campaign 2000: Promoting the National Interest // -2000-promoting-the-national-interest.html


Permanent link to this publication:

Similar publications: LSweden LWorld Y G


Vera LindContacts and other materials (articles, photo, files etc)

Author's official page at Libmonster:

Find other author's materials at: Libmonster (all the World)GoogleYandex

Permanent link for scientific papers (for citations):

I. V. DOBROVITSKY, THE IRANIAN PIVOT OF THE "AXIS OF EVIL": RESTORING THE BIPOLAR SYSTEM OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS? // Stockholm: Swedish Digital Library (LIBRARY.SE). Updated: 04.07.2024. URL: (date of access: 22.07.2024).

Found source (search robot):

Publication author(s) - I. V. DOBROVITSKY:

I. V. DOBROVITSKY → other publications, search: Libmonster SwedenLibmonster WorldGoogleYandex


Reviews of professional authors
Order by: 
Per page: 
  • There are no comments yet
Related topics
Vera Lind
Uppsala, Sweden
63 views rating
04.07.2024 (19 days ago)
0 subscribers
0 votes
Related Articles
Catalog: Bibliology History 
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
V. A. MELYANTSEV. DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES IN AN ERA OF CHANGE. (Comparative assessment of growth efficiency in the 1980s and 2000s)
Catalog: Bibliology Economics 
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
Catalog: Science 
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
Catalog: Science 
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
Catalog: Bibliology 
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
Catalog: Medicine Science 
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
2 days ago · From Vera Lind
2 days ago · From Vera Lind

New publications:

Popular with readers:

News from other countries:

LIBRARY.SE - Swedish Digital Library

Create your author's collection of articles, books, author's works, biographies, photographic documents, files. Save forever your author's legacy in digital form. Click here to register as an author.
Library Partners


Editorial Contacts
Chat for Authors: SE LIVE: We are in social networks:

About · News · For Advertisers

Swedish Digital Library ® All rights reserved.
2014-2024, LIBRARY.SE is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map)
Keeping the heritage of Serbia


US-Great Britain Sweden Serbia
Russia Belarus Ukraine Kazakhstan Moldova Tajikistan Estonia Russia-2 Belarus-2

Create and store your author's collection at Libmonster: articles, books, studies. Libmonster will spread your heritage all over the world (through a network of affiliates, partner libraries, search engines, social networks). You will be able to share a link to your profile with colleagues, students, readers and other interested parties, in order to acquaint them with your copyright heritage. Once you register, you have more than 100 tools at your disposal to build your own author collection. It's free: it was, it is, and it always will be.

Download app for Android