On May 14, 2012, the Iranian branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences held a scientific conference "Peculiarities of the Iranian policy during the Presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad". It was attended by representatives of scientific and educational institutions - Institute of International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, IMEMO, RISI, MGI (U)Ministry of Defense, as well as practical organizations in Moscow and the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Russian Federation, the Moscow Office of the International Foundation for Iranian Studies.

During the conference, a wide range of issues related to the internal political problems of modern Iran, the economic and cultural policy of the country's leadership, and certain aspects of its social development were discussed. The main trends in Iran's foreign policy were analyzed, including in US-Iranian relations and in connection with the "Arab Spring", as well as in the assessments of Turkish experts. Russia-Iran, Pakistan-Iran and Iran's relations with the Central Asian region received special coverage.

Mohsen Heidarnia, head of the recently opened representative office of the International Foundation for Iranian Studies in Moscow, spoke at the beginning of the morning session and noted that the organization he heads attaches great importance to Iranian studies in Russia, which dates back more than 200 years. He stressed the importance of tens of thousands of Iran-related manuscripts and archival documents stored in Russian libraries and collections, as well as a large number of Iranian works. The Foundation's task is to present them to the Iranian scientific community. The speaker focused on such important aspects of the Foundation's activities as the organization of the Congress of Iranists of the Russian Federation in October 2011 on the basis of the Institute of Islamic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences with the publication of a collection of materials based on its results and the first issue of the journal "Iranistics". At the end of his speech, M. Haydarnia noted that he often attends conferences of the Iranian sector, where priority is always given to the scientific factor.

The conference was opened by N. M. Mammadova, Head of the Iran Sector of the Institute of Information Technology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, with a report on "Economic Policy of Iran during the reign of M. V. Putin". Ahmadinejad." She retaliated that after the election of Ahmadinejad as the country's president, Iran's approaches to solving the nuclear program have changed dramatically since mid-2005, which cannot be said about the economic course. In the first years of his presidency, M. Ahmadinejad launched a number of initiatives that had the character of social justice. But the global crisis that also affected Iran, and most importantly the tightening of the sanctions regime, forced the president in 2008 to take the initiative to carry out a number of economic reforms, the most important point of which was an attempt to combine different economic levers - to introduce market instruments, but with the least social losses. For more than two years, the government failed to fully implement these reforms, but VAT was introduced, privatization was initiated, and at the end of 2010, a five-year program to eliminate subsidies was launched. But even this step towards liberalizing the market in Iran was accompanied by unprecedented measures for social protection of the population - almost 80% of the Iranian population received access to funds in compensation accounts. In general, in 2005-2012, the economic policy of the Ahmadinejad government became more independent from other authorities and more focused on the interests of private business. Iran's transition to a market-based economy has been painful, although the Government has sought to minimize social costs and thereby avoid economic collapse, at least until mid-2012.At the same time, the Government has been forced to tighten its economic policy. Under the threat of a military solution to the nuclear problem and the expansion of sanctions, the trend towards militarization of the economy is becoming increasingly noticeable in economic practice, as a result of which the course towards liberalization can be adjusted towards strengthening state control over the country's economic life.

A. I. Polishchuk (IB RAS) devoted his speech to the issues of social and economic policy of the Ahmadinejad government. In his opinion, the socio-economic policy can be divided into two periods. Thus, at the beginning of his first term as President, Ahmadinejad pursued a traditional policy of social support for the population, which was adopted shortly after the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Expenses on energy carriers, basic foodstuffs, and railway transport were subsidized.,

aviation and partly public transport, which required huge budget expenditures and gradually became an unbearable burden for the state. In addition, in practice, state subsidies were more profitable for the most affluent segments of the population, and poor citizens were in a worse position. Under the pressure of economic and social factors, already in the middle of the first presidency of M. Ahmadinejad, it was decided to gradually switch to market prices and introduce rationing of gasoline sales at low prices. Speaking about the second term of Ahmadinejad's presidency, the speaker drew attention to the implementation of the "Law on Targeted Allocation of Subsidies" through the Mejlis, the main idea of which is to link the prices of petroleum products and gas on the domestic market to world prices. Its implementation began at the end of 2010. In accordance with the law, prices for electricity, water, sewage services, bread and a number of other food products were subject to revision. In May 2012, the second phase of the law's implementation began. Overall, according to the speaker, socio-economic policy M. Ahmadinejad can be described as a shift from providing subsidies on a national scale to targeting the less affluent segments of Iranian society.

E. V. Dunayeva (Institute of Internal Affairs of the Russian Academy of Sciences) was devoted to the analysis of the internal political processes in Iran in the period from 2005 to 2012, where it was noted that against the background of the destabilization of the situation in the Middle East, increasing international pressure on Iran, expressed in attempts to tighten the sanctions regime and even apply a military scenario, crisis within the ruling elite. It manifested itself in the deepening of disagreements between the President and the government, the Mejlis, the judiciary and religious authorities, not only in criticism of each other, but also in non-compliance with decisions, inconsistency of actions, attempts to interfere in the affairs of other bodies. The lack of a single line among the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran can be traced both in its economic activities and in cultural and social policy, as well as in the foreign policy sphere. It was emphasized that, although since 2005 all the institutions of state power have been in the hands of conservatives, the confrontation between them continues to grow. This is primarily due to the heterogeneity of the conservative wing itself (moderates or traditionalists - pragmatists or technocrats - radical conservatives or neoconservatives). This is also largely due to the manifestation of protest moods in the Iranian society after the 2009 presidential election. After them, reformers were forced out of all power structures, their parties are practically not represented in the political arena, and in general, the reform camp is experiencing a severe crisis. Those who remain in the country are now emphasizing their separation from the opposition forces abroad and are trying to regain their positions, advocating for the preservation of the Islamic regime and supporting the velayate of Faqih. At the same time, hopes for resolving the internal crisis in the country were associated with the results of the parliamentary elections, but there were no significant changes in the composition of the Mejlis. And since the current president still retains his powers, the confrontation between the authorities will continue and it will not be possible to resolve the internal crisis in the near future.

A block of reports was devoted to various aspects of the foreign policy activities of the Ahmadinejad government. Irina Fedorova (Institute of Foreign Policy of the Russian Academy of Sciences) considered the problem of American-Iranian relations and the main trends in their development. In her opinion, the goal of Iran's foreign policy during Ahmadinejad's time in power, as in previous years, was to provide optimal foreign policy conditions for turning Iran into a regional power center, strengthening and spreading the Iranian Shiite model of social development. However, the emphasis on pursuing a foreign policy course has changed-the aggressiveness of foreign policy rhetoric and its anti-American and anti-Israeli orientation have sharply increased, and the position on the nuclear program has become tougher. These are the key points in determining the main vectors of development of US-Iranian relations. The report noted that the deterioration of relations between the two countries in 2010-2012 was due to both external and internal factors. First of all, during this period, Iran's regional role sharply increases due to the operation conducted by the coalition forces in Iraq, the strengthening of Shiite influence there, as well as the prospects for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014. The real economic success of the country in the field of military construction and the nuclear program, as well as the strengthening of contacts between the two countries, were also important. Ahmadinejad's relations with Latin American countries, which is the subject of particular irritation on the American side.

The main directions of US policy in the analyzed period, according to the speaker, include the implementation of an anti-Syrian operation in the regional dimension, in the country of the Syrian Arab Republic.-

pto develops scenarios for a military strike on Iran, attempts to dilute the Iranian regime from within, and the introduction of sanctions. In general, we should not expect any drastic changes in US-Iranian relations in the near future.

The report of L. M. Kulagina (Institute of Internal Affairs of the Russian Academy of Sciences) was devoted to the peculiarities of Iran's foreign policy in connection with events in the Arab world, which noted that the "Arab Spring" was positively received in Iran, as, according to Iranian leaders, it contributed to the implementation of Iran's far - reaching domestic and foreign policy plans related to a new Egypt that is committed to developing relations with Iran. At the same time, the suppression of Shiite protests in Bahrain against the Sunni regime by the troops of Saudi Arabia and Oman caused sharp protests in Iran. Iran's foreign policy in defending its gains in the Middle East was severely tested by the revolutionary events in Syria, which were directed against the regime of Bashar al-Assad, which is supported by Iran. In April 2012, the Iranian Foreign Minister said that the situation in Syria should be resolved "prudently and without foreign influence." At the same time, the Arab monarchies under the leadership of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and Qatar openly finance and arm the Syrian opposition and advocate a foreign invasion of Syria in order to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad. The confrontation between Iran and the Arab states of the Persian Gulf is becoming increasingly acute. The countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) conducted major military exercises together with the United States near the Iranian coast. In response, the Iranian president visited one of the three disputed islands for Iran and the United Arab Emirates, which caused sharp protests in the Arab world. Iran has declared its sovereignty over the islands and confirmed that it will respond by force to any threats to its territorial integrity. In general, according to Kulagina, Iran, despite all the difficulties that have arisen in connection with the" Arab Spring", is unlikely to give up its position in the region.

The country is now facing a great threat and must prepare for the struggle for survival. D. S. Purzhinsky (Institute of Demography, Migration and Regional Development) touched upon the policy of Iran under the President of the Russian Federation. Ahmadinejad on the Central Asian direction, noting that since Iran has a special nature of relations with each of the republics of this region, it is incorrect to talk about a unified Iranian policy towards the whole of Central Asia. During the analyzed period, Iran maintained the closest ties with Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. Projects in the energy sector occupy a special place in the Iranian-Tajik economic cooperation, and the trade turnover between the two countries is constantly growing. As for the Iranian-Turkmen economic relations, they are developing even faster. Thus, in 2006, the trade turnover between the two countries amounted to $ 1.4 billion, and in 2011-already $ 3 billion. Iran's cooperation with Kazakhstan is stable. At the same time, in recent years, there has been a decline in trade turnover between the states - from $ 2,099 million in 2006 to $ 1,120 million in 2010, the main reason for which the speaker sees in the multi-vector policy pursued by Kazakhstan. Economic relations with Uzbekistan began to reach a new level in 2005, when its leadership began to move away from the pro-American foreign policy orientation. With M. Ahmadinejad's assumption of office, there was a noticeable activation of them, as Tehran began to attach great importance to Uzbekistan, understanding its importance in the region. The most promising area of cooperation between the two countries is the transport sector, among the projects of which we can single out the future transport corridor Uzbekistan-Turkmenistan-Iran-Oman-Qatar. As for relations between Iran and Kyrgyzstan, according to the speaker, they can be called stable, and they are carried out primarily within the framework of the participation of both states in a number of international organizations - the UN, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation. In general, it can be stated that during the reign of M. Ahmadinejad, Iran did not become a leading partner for the republics of the Central Asian region.

Sergey Pritchin (Institute of Foreign Policy of the Russian Academy of Sciences) analyzed the Caspian direction of Iranian President Ahmadinejad's foreign policy, which occupies a prominent place in it. For Iranian diplomacy in the Caspian area, it is extremely important to solve two problems: maintaining the status quo in the issue of the unresolved legal status of the Caspian Sea, since Iran is categorically not satisfied with its sectoral division; and intensifying cooperation with its Caspian neighbors in order to ensure the security of the northern borders and avoid economic and political isolation in the context of international sanctions initiated by the United States. According to the speaker, the Iranian leadership managed to effectively achieve its goals. During the reign of M. Akhma-

Two summits of the heads of the Caspian states were held in Tehran and Baku in 2007 and 2010, respectively, and the results of their work are of great importance.

I. A. Svistunova's report (RISS) attempts to summarize the perception of Iran's foreign policy by Turkish experts during the presidency of M. V. Putin. Ahmadinejad. The speaker noted that these assessments do not represent the official position of Ankara, but reflect the most common views of the Turkish public, academic circles, political scientists and journalists. Turning to the problem of Iran's foreign policy and Ahmadinejad's personality, Turkish experts agree that his personality plays a significant role in shaping Iran's foreign policy. They see the Iranian president as a" radical conservative " with a penchant for populist rhetoric. In relations between Iran and the Middle East, Turkish researchers note that M. Ahmadinejad was the first representative of the Iranian leadership after Ayatollah Khomeini to publicly declare that Israel has no right to exist, but unlike the imam, he strives to maintain good relations with the Arab world. According to Turkish analysts, the personality factor of President Ahmadinejad plays into the hands of the United States in its policy towards Iran, which consists in replacing the Islamic regime with a pro-American one.

As for relations between Iran and the EU, they have been cooling during the analyzed period. The EU supported the US policy towards Tehran, which includes pressure, isolation and the use of force. Iran-Russia relations are united by the rejection of the unipolar world order and the hegemonic aspirations of the United States. At the same time, Russia, while cooperating with Iran in the nuclear and military spheres and receiving economic benefits from this, is making efforts to preserve relations with the West. Finally, in the opinion of Turkish experts, security issues, the Iranian nuclear issue, and trade and economic relations, which received a powerful impetus during the rule of M. Ahmadinejad, occupy a priority place in the Iranian-Turkish relations.

The development of relations between Persian-speaking states during the presidency of M. Ahmadinejad was touched upon by E. B. Boev (Nizhny Novgorod State Pedagogical University). un-t). He reviewed the relations between Iran, Tajikistan and Afghanistan, paying great attention to highlighting the prospects for the development of integration processes in the context of Iran's relations with other countries of Persian culture. The important role of the Iranian President in implementing the policy aimed at bringing the Persian-speaking countries closer together in the fields of economy, culture and strategic cooperation was noted.

The problem of military tension around Iran in connection with the Iranian nuclear program during the rule of M. Ahmadinejad was considered in the report of V. I. Sazhin (IB RAS). He noted that M. Ahmadinejad, by turning Iran's nuclear program into a national fetish, contributed to the creation of a particularly confrontational period in the country's history. Since 2006, the situation around the nuclear program has been constantly changing. The UN Security Council adopted six resolutions, four of which contained sanctions measures, simultaneously with which the United States, the European Union and many countries that joined them imposed unilateral sanctions against Iran. In the last months of 2011, the situation around the Islamic Republic of Iran escalated to the limit, but in April there was some warming-negotiations between Iran and the" six " resumed in Istanbul and, contrary to many forecasts, did not end in failure. According to the speaker, if the negotiation chance is not used, the situation will become worse than before the meeting in Istanbul, and a war against Iran will become possible. The main thing now is the success of the upcoming negotiations between Iran and the "six", which is completely dependent on Tehran. The most important, if not decisive, factor could be the ratification by the new composition of the Mejlis of the Additional Protocol to the Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA on the Implementation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). This will indicate that Tehran is ready to end the confrontation and start a new positive stage on the way to resolving the Iranian nuclear issue. At the same time, maximum diplomacy is required from Iran's opponents so that a positive development of events does not look like a defeat for Tehran.

Alexander Baklanov (Institute of International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences) focused on the problem of cooperation between Tehran and Moscow in the framework of resolving the diplomatic conflict over the Iranian nuclear program during M. Ahmadinejad's tenure in power. Russia seems to be an active intermediary in negotiations with Iran, and the effectiveness of Russian activities in this area is extremely difficult to assess. Russia failed to persuade Iran to accept EU proposals to suspend uranium enrichment, but succeeded

in the issue of nuclear fuel waste removal. The initiative to create international enrichment centers has also not become a panacea for resolving the Iranian issue, but the Russian proposal has potential, and it is likely to become an effective tool for combating the expansion of Iran's nuclear program. Moscow is trying to maintain equally good relations with both the West and Iran, which inevitably leads to reputational costs for each of the parties and provokes accusations of inconsistency in its foreign policy. However, today Russia is one of the most important actors in resolving the Iranian problem, as its position is always distinguished by a balanced and consistent approach.

X's report was devoted to the specifics of the development of Russian-Iranian relations during the presidency of M. Ahmadinejad. Mahdiyana (Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Russian Federation). The speaker stressed that from the very first days of his work, the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran has focused on intensifying relations with Russia in all areas. Russia was also interested in developing relations with Iran. President Vladimir Putin's visit to Tehran in 2007 to attend the summit of the heads of the Caspian littoral states and his meetings with the spiritual leader and President of Iran opened a new page in relations between the two countries. With the departure of Vladimir Putin from the post of president, the Iranian side has a feeling that the new leadership of Russia has become more inclined to the West. So, there was a statement that the Iranian nuclear program contains unclear points that cause concern to the world community. Russia was annoyed that Iran did not show an immediate reaction to its proposal to enrich Iran's uranium in Russia and then send it to France for final refinement to be placed in fuel rods. Russia, along with other members of the Security Council, voted in favor of resolutions that imposed anti-Iranian sanctions, and not only does not support Iran's full membership in the SCO, but is also one of the main initiators of the plan, according to which none of the observer states of this organization, in respect of which the Security Council resolution was adopted, can claim full membership membership in this organization. And this happened when Russia had a high positive status in the eyes of Iran and Iran counted on its help. In 2010, according to the speaker, Russia's critical attitude towards Iran's nuclear program increased, which was followed by a decree of the Russian leadership prohibiting the supply of S-300 air defense systems to Iran, which was regarded by Iran as a result of the influence of the United States and Israel. After the meeting of the presidents of Iran and Russia at the third summit of the Caspian littoral states in Baku in November 2010, relations between the two countries improved, although the case of the S-300 and Iran's claim against Russia has not yet been closed.

L. M. Ravandi-Fadai (IB RAS) discussed some aspects of the national policy under M. V. Shishkin. Ahmadinejad. One of the most important tasks of the country's leadership is to preserve the integrity of the multinational Iranian state. Attaching great importance to reducing the level of opposition sentiment in national countries, the President immediately after his election began to visit the most economically backward regions. He was the first president to draw attention to the country's remote undeveloped areas. According to the government's decision, part of the funds from oil sales was allocated for the development of depressed regions, and the Mejlis agreed that part of the stabilization fund should be spent on their needs. At the same time, we can talk about the development of national opposition movements based abroad, the influence of the external factor associated with the development of the nuclear program, the tightening of economic pressure on Iran from the United States and Europe, their attempts to weaken the regime by supporting separatist sentiments, on the ethnic situation in the country. It can be assumed that the ethnic factor will continue to influence the stability of social and political life in Iran.

The report of M. S. Kameneva (Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences) was devoted to the analysis of three periods in the development of Iranian culture after the Islamic Revolution, including during the reign of M. Ahmadinejad. The problems of Iranian culture have always been and remain in the center of attention of the Iranian society, but for more than thirty years since the formation of Iran, the attitude of the country's power structures to their culture and its role in public life has changed, and the cultural factor has been quite actively used and is currently being used by them for their Thus, in the first of the conditionally selected periods, covering approximately the first decade after the Islamic Revolution, Iranian culture is understood as the Muslim culture of Iran with a pronounced anti-Islamic nature.-

western orientation. The culture of the second period, which, according to the author of the report, begins in the late 80s of the XX century and continues almost until recently, is a combination of the Islamic culture of Iran and traditional native Iranian civilizational values, while maintaining its anti-Western orientation, but at the same time allowing for a cultural dialogue with the West. This is due to the modernization and development of Iranian society, in the depths of which new cultural doctrines are being formed. Along with the growing interest in the cultural heritage and history of Iran, there is an interest in the culture and history of other civilizations, which stimulated the emergence of the concept of a dialogue of civilizations. The third period, which is being formed today, is closely associated with the name of M. Ahmadinejad and is characterized by the preservation of previous trends in cultural development with the planned strengthening of the Iranian factor itself, which is free from religious overtones and is designated in Persian by the term "iraniyat".

Elena Gladkova (MGIMO) focused on new trends in the socio-political vocabulary of the modern Persian language. A thorough linguistic analysis of the texts conducted by the speaker based on the material of the Iranian President's speeches at the UN made it possible to present the language arsenal used by M. Ahmadinejad in the international arena.

The conference ended with a discussion. Head of the Iranian Sector N. M. Mammadova noted that the conference was successful, and various points of view were expressed on the issues discussed.

Permanent link to this publication: