نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

وجود شاخص‌های مناسب برای نظارت و ارزیابی عملکرد دستگاه‌های دولتی یکی از لوازم اولیه نظارتِ مجلس شورای اسلامی است. هدف اصلی این نظارت و ارزیابی، افزایش کارایی و بهبود عملکرد آن‌هاست. وزارت خارجه مانند سایر دستگاه‌های دولتی از بودجه عمومی کشور ارتزاق می‌کند و نظارت مستمر مجلس شورای اسلامی می‌تواند به کارآمدی آن کمک کند. بنابراین مجلس شورای اسلامی با در نظر داشتن ظرایف و پیچیدگی‌های خاص نظارت و ارزیابی فرایندهای سیاست خارجی و وزارت امور خارجه، می‌تواند به نحو مؤثرتری به ایفای نقش نظارتی خود بپردازد. با توجه به وجود خلأ نسبی در نحوه نظارت و ارزیابی وزارت امور خارجه، سؤال مقاله این است که مجلس شورای اسلامی بر اساس چه شاخص‌هایی می‌تواند عملکرد وزارت امور خارجه را مورد نظارت و ارزیابی قرار دهد؟ در این مقاله از روش تحلیل کیفی متن برای بررسی متون نظری، اَسناد نظارتی و گزارش‌های سازمانی درباره ارزیابی عملکرد وزارت امور خارجه استفاده شده است. پس از جمع‌آوری اَسناد لازم در زمینه ارزیابی عملکرد وزارت امور خارجه، نحوه کاربست‌ و کمیت‌پذیری شاخص‌های ارزیابی عملکرد مورد بررسی نقادانه قرار گرفته‌اند. یافته‌های مقاله نشان می‌دهد که اگرچه عملکرد وزارت امور خارجه را می‌توان از طریق شاخص‌های عملکردی در حوزه‌های دیپلماسی دوجانبه، دیپلماسی چندجانبه، دیپلماسی اقتصادی و دیپلماسی عمومی مورد نظارت و ارزیابی مجلس شورای اسلامی قرار داد، اما خود این شاخص‌ها به دلیل ماهیت سیال و پیچیده فعالیت‌های وزارت خارجه باید مستمراً مورد اصلاح و بازنگری قرار گیرند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation and Oversight by Iran’s Islamic Parliament on Government Agencies: Case Study of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

نویسنده [English]

  • Heidarali Masoudi

Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Establishing appropriate criteria to evaluate the performance of executive bodies is crucial for oversight by Iran's Islamic Parliament. The main objective of the article is to enhance efficiency and improving government performance. Although the Islamic Parliament has dedicated attention to evaluating ministries, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has received comparatively less scrutiny. This lack of attention stems primarily from the complex and sensitive nature of this ministry's activities and actions, coupled with the presumed evasion of oversight in governments' international endeavors. Like other ministries, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is publicly funded and must undergo continuous monitoring and evaluation by the Islamic Parliament. However, there is a dearth of coherent, well-formulated criteria for evaluating this ministry's performance. The central question this article addresses is: how can the Islamic Parliament effectively evaluate and monitor the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' performance?
Materials and Methods
In this research, a mixed-methods approach was employed for the extraction and analysis of performance monitoring indicators about the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Initially, qualitative content analysis was conducted on the supervisory reports from the Islamic Consultative Assembly, the report on specific performance evaluation indicators for executive agencies from the Administrative and Recruitment Affairs Organization, as well as high-level documents related to the activities of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Through this qualitative analysis, and drawing upon the researcher's prior theoretical knowledge, the functional domains of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and their corresponding preliminary indicators were identified. Subsequently, an analytical method was utilized to examine these indicators and assess their measurability and quantifiability. In instances where indicators were not measurable, or where they were measurable but lacked the requisite quantifiability, novel ideas for evaluating and monitoring the performance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have been proposed.
Results and Discussion
Bilateral Diplomacy: In the realm of bilateral diplomacy, certain indicators, such as actions taken to counter the domination system and support the resistance movement, are not readily quantifiable. Such activities are primarily conducted based on the strategic influence of Iran's security and military forces, with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs primarily playing a facilitating role and providing diplomatic support. The impact of such actions cannot be evaluated in short time intervals; moreover, publicly accessible information and data for researchers in this field are limited, aside from some official meetings between Iranian diplomatic officials and resistance movement leaders. Some indicators, such as bilateral diplomacy for resolving disputes between third countries and Iran's disputes with other countries, are amenable to qualitative assessment of the country's overall actions, as such measures are usually carried out within a cross-sectoral framework, involving various decision-making and executive institutions such as the Supreme National Security Council and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Therefore, it is not possible to precisely differentiate the performance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from that of other agencies.
Multilateral Diplomacy: In the domain of multilateral diplomacy, some indicators, such as safeguarding national interests, do not inherently possess quantitative evaluability. First, the realization of Iran's national interests in international organizations must be indexed, and then evaluated. For instance, if we accept that reducing the number of anti-Iranian human rights resolutions in the United Nations, or decreasing the number of countries voting in favor while increasing those voting against or abstaining from these resolutions, aligns with the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran, then the number of correspondences or bilateral meetings with countries likely to change their vote in Iran's favor could serve as an indicator for assessing the positive performance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in protecting the interests of the Islamic Republic in international organizations. Other indicators in this axis can be quantitatively evaluated based on metrics such as Iran's annual membership in international and regional organizations, meetings with counterpart officials from neighboring countries, and legal cases raised in international forums.
Economic Diplomacy: In the sphere of economic diplomacy, in addition to quantifiable indicators such as trade exchanges, trade agreements, and identified economic opportunities in other countries, other indicators can be added. These may include the number of Iranian commercial attachés in other countries, the number of Ministry of Foreign Affairs employees recruited with qualifications related to economic diplomacy, the number of joint meetings with private sector actors at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the number of training courses and participating employees in the field of economic and commercial diplomacy, and the number of reports received by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from commercial attachés.
Public Diplomacy: In the realm of public diplomacy, international indices such as the soft power index can be utilized. Some indicators, like city diplomacy, can be measured based on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' performance in facilitating communication between city officials and agreements between various Iranian cities and foreign cities, including sister city agreements. However, some indicators, such as cyberspace diplomacy, are not readily quantifiable; the virtual space has a complex and decentralized nature, and one cannot make accurate judgments about the diplomatic success or failure based on the number of messages sent by diplomatic officials on virtual networks or the number of likes these messages receive. On the other hand, metrics such as the growth in the number of Persian language learners abroad are shared between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Education, and the performance of both ministries is jointly evaluated, making it difficult to precisely differentiate their respective contributions. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs' performance in improving the global ranking of the Persian language can be evaluated based on the indicator of actions taken by cultural councils and Iranian embassies towards establishing Persian language chairs and learning centers in various countries.
Conclusion
This research represents an initial step towards augmenting the Islamic Consultative Assembly's role in foreign policy. As a manifestation of the general will alongside the executive branch, the Assembly should collaborate with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to achieve national interests and enhance Iran's international standing. Establishing a relationship of trust between the parliament and the Ministry, facilitated by verifiable performance indicators, can lead to domestic force synergy and increased international bargaining power. The Seventh Development Plan's emphasis on an economy-oriented foreign policy approach provides a favorable context for parliamentary evaluation, as the Ministry's activities in these domains are more measurable. Furthermore, the economic involvement of various parliamentary commissions allows for broader participation in the oversight process, extending beyond the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • The Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  • The Islamic Parliament
  • Evaluation
  • Monitoring
  • Performance criteria
فارسی
اخوان کاظمی، مسعود و نیکونهاد، ایوب (1399) سیاست خارجی مکتوب جمهوری اسلامی ایران در پرتو اسناد بالادستی، پژوهشنامه انقلاب اسلامی، سال دهم، شماره 34، بهار، صص 15-44.
افتخاری، حمید (1381) ارزیابی عملکرد دستگاه‌های اجرایی: پیش نیاز توسعه کشور، فرایند مدیریت و توسعه، شماره ۵۸، زمستان.
امامی میبدی، راضیه (1394) اصول عام ارزیابی نظامهای ارزیابی سیاست، دانش سیاسی، سال یازدهم، شمارة اول، بهار و تابستان 1394 ،پیاپی 14 ،صص14-86.
حاجی‌یوسفی، امیرمحمد (۱۴۰۰) ارزشیابی سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران، پژوهشگاه علوم و فرهنگ اسلامی، قم.صص ۲۵-۲۶
حسینی، سید‌محمد‌حسین (1392) جایگاه دیپلماسی عمومی در سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران (مطالعه موردی: منطقه خاورمیانه). سیاست خارجی. 3 (27)، صص 679-700.
دلاورپور اقدام، مصطفی (1400) دیپلماسی پارلمانی (1)؛ مجمع مجالس آسیایی و الزامات فراروی جمهوری اسلامی ایران، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس شورای اسلامی، شماره مسلسل 18118.
دلاورپور اقدم، مصطفی (1401) دیپلماسی پارلمانی (3) اتحادیه بین‌المجالس جهانی و دیپلماسی مجلس شورای اسلامی، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس شورای اسلامی، شماره مسلسل 18189.
دلاورپور اقدام، مصطفی (1402) مجمع مجالس آسیایی؛ موانع، فرصت‌ها و الزامات دیپلماسی مجامع قوه مقننه، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس شورای اسلامی، شماره مسلسل 19660.
سازمان امور اداری و استخدامی کشور (1401) شاخص‌های اختصاصی ارزیابی عملکرد دستگاه های اجرایی سال 1401- وزارت امور خارجه، قابل دسترس در: https://www.aro.gov.ir/_DouranPortal/Documents/%D9%88%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AA%20%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%88%D8%B1%20%D8%AE%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AC%D9%87_20230319_183708.pdf
شفیعی، نوذر (1382). ارزیابی راهبردی سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در افغانستان، مطالعات راهبردی، سال ششم، شماره زمستان، صص 827-851.
صبوری، ضیاءالدین و صالحیان، تاج الدین (1396). بررسی راهبردی دیپلماسی اقتصادی جمهوری اسلامی ایران مطالعه موردی. دولت یازدهم و دوازدهم، پژوهش‌های روابط بین‌الملل 7 (24)، صص 133-158، قابل دسترس در: http://www.iisajournals.ir/article_53757_411c5aa807d9d446ab3c5cd41fa17b3c.pdf.
ظریف، محمدجواد (1399). وزارت خارجه ایران: آماده میانجی‌گری بین ارمنستان و آذربایجان هستیم، 7 مهرماه، قابل دسترس در: https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-54321659
عطایی، فرهاد؛ قادری‌کنگاوری، روح‌الله و ابراهیمی، نبی‌الله (1390). دیپلماسی عمومی و قدرت نرم؛ ایران و آمریکا در عراق جدید. سیاست 1 (41)، صص 189-204.
غلامشاهی کتج، لیلا و دین‌پرست صالح، فائز (1395). «ارزیابی انتقادی تعامل سازنده در سیاست خارجی جمهوری اسلامی ایران در سال‌های 1384-1388»، تحقیقات سیاسی و بین‌المللی، دوره هشتم، شماره 29، صص 187-220
کریمی، امیر هوشنگ (1400). اصول ثابت سیاست خارجی، دیپلماسی ایرانی، ۲۵ فروردین.
کوهکن، علیرضا (1390) با نمایندگان مردم در مجلس نهم. جایگاه و اهمیت دیپلماسی پارلمانی در دستیابی به اهداف سیاست خارجی، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس شورای اسلامی، شماره مسلسل 12111.
لایحه برنامه هفتم توسعه (1402)، سایت مرکز پژوهش های مجلس، قابل دسترس در: https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/news/show/1776775
مشیرزاده، حمیرا (1397). مبانی نظری تبیین و تحلیل سیاست خارجی، تهران: سمت.
مهری پرگو، وجیهه و امیری، مهدی (1388) دیپلماسی پارلمانی؛ محورها و رویکردها، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی مرکز پژوهش‌های مجلس شورای اسلامی، شماره مسلسل 10071.
موسوی، سید‌رسول (1381). نقش ایران در پیشبرد مذاکرات صلح تاجیکستان. مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، صص 7-40 39 (1)،  https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/articlepage/380005.
وزارت امور خارجه (1401). گزارش ارزیابی استراتژیک وزارت امور خارجه، تعیین شاخص‌های بین‌المللی، اداره کل برنامه‌ریزی و نظارت راهبردی وزارت امور خارجه.
 
References
Abb, Pascal (2021). China’s Foreign Policy Think Tanks. Changing Roles and Structural Conditions. German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA).
Abelson, Donald E. (2014). Old world, new world: the evolution and influence of foreign affairs think-tanks. In International Affairs 90 (1), pp. 125–142.
Abelson, Donald E. (2018). Do think tanks matter? Assessing the impact of public policy institutes. Third edition, revised and expanded. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
Abelson, Donald E.; Hua, Xin; Brooks, Stephen (2016). Think tanks, foreign policy and geo-politics. Pathways to influence / edited by Donald E. Abelson, Xin Hua and Stephen Brooks. London: Routledge.
Akbarzadeh, Shahram (2015). Iran and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization: Ideology and Realpolitik in Iranian Foreign Policy. In Australian Journal of International Affairs 69 (1), pp. 88–103. DOI: 10.1080/10357718.2014.934195.
Ashley 1985: in Vasquez, John A. (Ed.) (1985). Evaluating U.S. foreign policy. New York: Praeger.
Atlas, Pierre M. (2012). U.S. Foreign Policy and the Arab Spring. Balancing Values and Interests. In Digest of Middle East Studies 21 (2), pp. 353–385. DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-3606.2012.00158.x.
Aydın-Düzgit, Senem (2018). Foreign policy and identity change. Analysing perceptions of Europe among the Turkish public. In Politics 38 (1), pp. 19–34. DOI: 10.1177/0263395717729932.
Baldwin, David A. (2000). Success and Failure in Foreign Policy. In Annual Review of Political Science 3 (1), pp. 167–182. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.167.
Blinken, Anthony (2021): Secretary Antony J. Blinken on the Modernization of American Diplomacy - United States Department of State. US State Department. Available online at https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-on-the-modernization-of-american-diplomacy
Beloff, Jonathan R. (2020): Foreign policy in post-genocide Rwanda. Elite perceptions of global engagement / Jonathan R. Beloff. 1st. London: Routledge (Contemporary African politics).
Brodin, Katarina (1972): Belief Systems, Doctrines, and Foreign Policy. In Cooperation and Conflict 7 (2), pp. 97–112. DOI: 10.1177/001083677200700203.
Burnell, Peter (2009): Legislative Strengthening Meets Party Support in International Assistance. A Closer Relationship? In The Journal of Legislative Studies 15 (4), pp. 460–480. DOI: 10.1080/13572330903302505.
Forestiere, Carolyn,; Pelizzo, Riccardo (2008): Does Parliament Make a Difference? The Role of the Italian Parliament in Financial Policy. In Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, Lisa Von Trapp (Ed.): Legislative oversight and budgeting. A world perspective. Washington DC: World Bank (WBI development studies), pp. 267–278.
Chaplin, Jonathan; Joustra, Robert (2010): God and global order. The power of religion in American foreign policy / Jonathan Chaplin. Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press.
Chatterjee, Charles (2020): Economic Diplomacy and Foreign Policy-making. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
Christie, Kenneth (2008): United States foreign policy and national identity in the 21st century. London, New York: Routledge (Routledge studies in US foreign policy).
Chubb, Danielle L.; McAllister, Ian (2020): Australian public opinion, defence and foreign policy. Attitudes and trends since 1945 / Danielle Chubb, Ian McAllister. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Clark, John F. (1995): Evaluating the Efficacy of Foreign Policy: An Essay on the Complexity of Foreign Policy Goals. In Southeastern Political Review 23 (4), pp. 559–579. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-1346.1995.tb00076.x.
Clark, John F. (1995): Evaluating the Efficacy of Foreign Policy: An Essay on the Complexity of Foreign Policy Goals. In Southeastern Political Review 23 (4), pp. 559–579. DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-1346.1995.tb00076.x.
Cole, Timothy M. (1994): Congressional Investigation of American Foreign Policy. Iran-Contra in Perspective. In Congress & the Presidency 21 (1), pp. 29–48. DOI: 10.1080/19441053.1994.11770808.
Cooper, Andrew Fenton; Heine, Jorge; Thakur, Ramesh Chandra (2013): The Oxford handbook of modern diplomacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Oxford handbooks in politics & international relations).
Desposato, Scott W. (2008): Explaining Patterns of Oversight in Brazilian Subnational Governments. In Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, Lisa Von Trapp (Ed.): Legislative oversight and budgeting. A world perspective. Washington DC: World Bank (WBI development studies), pp. 193–200.
Emanuel Adler and Peter M. Haas (1992): Conclusion. Epistemic Communities, World Order, and the Creation of a Reflective Research Program. In International Organization 46 (1).
Entman, Robert M. (2004): Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign policy: University of Chicago Press.
Garrison, J. A. (2003): Foreign Policy Analysis and Globalization. Public Opinion, World Opinion, and the Individual by Foyle1.  International Studies Review 5 (2), pp. 155–202.
Griffi ths, Robert J. (2008): Parliamentary Oversight of Defense in South Africa. In Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, Lisa Von Trapp (Ed.): Legislative oversight and budgeting. A world perspective. Washington DC: World Bank (WBI development studies), pp. 229–242.
Hayden, Craig (2012): The rhetoric of soft power. Public diplomacy in global contexts / Craig Hayden. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books (Lexington studies in political communication).
Horne, Alexander; Le Sueur, A. P. (2018): Parliament, Legislation and accountability. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Horne, Alexander; Thompson, Louise; Yong, Ben (Eds.) (2022): Parliament and the law. Third edition. Oxford UK, New York NY: Hart Publishing an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing (Hart studies in constitutional law, volume 11).
Ihalainen, Pasi; Matikainen, Satu (2016): The British Parliament and Foreign Policy in the 20th Century. Towards Increasing Parliamentarisation? In Parliamentary History 35 (1), pp. 1–14. DOI: 10.1111/1750-0206.12180.
Jacobs, Lawrence R.; Page, Benjamin I. (2005): Who Influences U.S. Foreign Policy? In American Political Science Review 99 (1), pp. 107–123. DOI: 10.1017/S000305540505152X.
Jeffrey S. Lantis (2019): “Winning” and “Losing” the Iran Nuclear Deal: How Advocacy Coalitions and Competition Shape U.S. Foreign Policy. In Politics & Policy 47 (3), pp. 464–505.
Keohane, Robert O. (1984): After hegemony. Cooperation and discord in the world political economy / Robert O. Keohane. Princeton: Guildford:  Princeton University Press.
Lindsay, James M. (1992): Congress and Foreign Policy. Why the Hill Matters. In Political Science Quarterly 107 (4), p. 607. DOI: 10.2307/2152287.
Mansfeldová, Zdenka; Rakušanová, Petra (2008): Legislative Budgeting in the Czech Republic. In Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, Lisa Von Trapp (Ed.): Legislative oversight and budgeting. A world perspective. Washington DC: World Bank (WBI development studies), pp. 279–292.
Masoudi, Heidarali; Nourian, Ali (2023): Arbaeen March and Its Effect on Iran's Soft Power in Iraq: Practice Theory. Journal of Contemporary Research on Islamic Revolution 5 (15), pp. 1–18. Available online at https://jcrir.ut.ac.ir/article_91977_7b63e62925daa9ba386fabec1aa942b6.pdf.
McEvoy-Levy, Siobhán (2001): American exceptionalism and US foreign policy. Public diplomacy at the end of the Cold War. Houndmills Basingstoke Hampshire, New York: PALGRAVE.
Morgenthau, Hans J. (1948): Politics among nations. The struggle for power and peace. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Nye, Joseph S. (2020): Do morals matter? Presidents and foreign policy from FDR to Trump. New York NY: Oxford University Press.
Oppermann, Kai; Spencer, Alexander (2017): Narrating success and failure. Congressional debates on the ‘Iran nuclear deal’. In European Journal of International Relations 2 (3), 135406611774356. DOI: 10.1177/1354066117743561.
Page, Benjamin I.; Bouton, Marshall M. (2006): The foreign policy disconnect. What Americans want from our leaders but don't get. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (American politics and political economy).
Page, Benjamin I.; Shapiro, Robert Y. (1983): Effects of Public Opinion on Policy. In American Political Science Review 77 (1), pp. 175–190. DOI: 10.2307/1956018.
Pelizzo, Riccardo (2008): Oversight and Democracy Reconsidered. In Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, Lisa Von Trapp (Ed.): Legislative oversight and budgeting. A world perspective. Washington DC: World Bank (WBI development studies), pp. 29–48.
Pelizzo, Riccardo; Stapenhurst, Frederick (2012): Parliamentary oversight tools. A comparative analysis. Abingdon, Oxon, New York: Routledge (Routledge research in comparative politics, 45).
Rana, Kishan S. (2011): 21st Century Diplomacy. A Practitioner's Guide. London: Continuum International Pub. Group (Key studies in diplomacy).
Remington, Thomas F. (2008): Separation of Powers and Legislative Oversight in Russia. In Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, Lisa Von Trapp (Ed.): Legislative oversight and budgeting. A world perspective. Washington DC: World Bank (WBI development studies).
Schneier, Edward (2008): Evolving Patterns of Legislative Oversight in Indonesia. In Rick Stapenhurst, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M. Olson, Lisa Von Trapp (Ed.): Legislative oversight and budgeting. A world perspective. Washington DC: World Bank (WBI development studies), pp. 201–216.
Snow, Nancy; Taylor, Philip M. (2009): Routledge handbook of public diplomacy. New York: Routledge (Routledge international handbooks).
Stairs, Denis (2003): Myths, Morals, and Reality in Canadian Foreign Policy. In International Journal 58 (2), pp. 239–256. DOI: 10.1177/002070200305800201.
Vasquez, John A. (Ed.) (1985): Evaluating U.S. foreign policy. New York: Praeger.
Weldes, Jutta (1999): Constructing National Interests. The United States and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Minneapolis: the University of Minnesota Press.
Zoellick, R. (1999): Congress and the making of US foreign policy. In Survival (00396338) 41 (4), pp. 20–41. DOI: 10.1080/713660133. 
 Translated References into English
Administrative and Recruitment Affairs Organization. (2022). Specific indicators for evaluating the performance of executive agencies in 2022 - Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Available at: [https://www.aro.gov.ir/_DouranPortal/Documents/%D9%88%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AA%20%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%88%D8%B1%20%D8%AE%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AC%D9%87_20230319_183708.pdf]. [In Persian]
Akhwan Kazemi, Masoud and Nikonhad, Ayoub (2019) Written foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the light of upstream documents, Islamic Revolution Quarterly, Year 10, Number 34, Spring, pp. 15-44. [In Persian]
Ataei, Farhad, Ghaderi Kangavari, Rohullah, & Ebrahimi, Nabiollah. (2011). Public diplomacy and soft power; Iran and America in the new Iraq. Politics, 41(1), 189-204. [In Persian]
Delawarepour, Mustafa (2023) Asian Assemblies; Obstacles, Opportunities and Diplomacy Requirements of Legislature Assemblies, Office of Political Studies, Research Center of the Islamic Council, serial number 19660. [In Persian]
Delawarepur Aghdam, Mustafa (2022) Parliamentary Diplomacy (3) Union between World Assemblies and Diplomacy of the Islamic Council, Political Studies Office of the Islamic Council Research Center, serial number 18189. [In Persian]
Eftekhari, Hamid (2003). Performance evaluation of executive agencies: A prerequisite for national development. Process of Management and Development, 58, winter. [In Persian]
Emami Meybodi, Razieh (2015). General principles for evaluating policy evaluation systems. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Political Knowledge, 11(1), 86-14. [In Persian]
Gholamshahi Kataj, Leila, & Dinparast Saleh, Faez. (2016). Critical evaluation of constructive interaction in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the years 2005-2009. Political and International Research, 8(29), 187-220. [In Persian]
Haji Yousefi, AmirMohammad (2021). Evaluation of the Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture, Qom, pp. 25-26. [In Persian]
Hosseini, Seyed. Mohammad Hossien (2013). The position of public diplomacy in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran (Case study: Middle East region). Foreign Policy, 27(3), 679-700. [In Persian]
Karimi, Amir. Hooshang (2021). Fixed principles of foreign policy. Iranian Diplomacy, April 14. [In Persian]
Koohkan, Alireza (2011) with people's representatives in the 9th parliament. The position and importance of parliamentary diplomacy in achieving foreign policy goals, Political Studies Bureau of Islamic Council Research Center, serial number 12111. [In Persian]
Mehri Pargo, Vajiheh and Amiri, Mahdi (2008) Parliamentary Diplomacy; Axes and Approaches, Political Studies Office of Islamic Council Research Center, serial number 10071. [In Persian]
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2022). Strategic Evaluation Report of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Determination of International Indicators. General Directorate of Strategic Planning and Supervision of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. [In Persian]
Moshirzadeh, Homeira (2018). Theoretical Foundations of Explaining and Analyzing Foreign Policy. Tehran: SAMT. [In Persian]
Mousavi, Seyad. Rasool (2002). Iran's role in advancing Tajikistan peace negotiations. Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, 39(1), 7-40. Available at: [URL provided]. [In Persian]
Sabouri, Ziyaeddin, & Salehian, Tajoddin (2017). Strategic review of economic diplomacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran: Case study of the eleventh and twelfth governments. International Relations Research, 7(24), 133-158. Available at: [http://www.iisajournals.ir/article_53757_411c5aa807d9d446ab3c5cd41fa17b3c.pdf]. [In Persian]
Seventh Development Program Bill (2023), Majlis Research Center website, available at: https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/news/show/1776775. [In Persian]
Shafiei, Nozar (2003). Strategic evaluation of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Afghanistan. Strategic Studies, 6(4), 827-851. [In Persian]
Zarif, Mohammad Javad (2020). Iran's Foreign Ministry: We are ready to mediate between Armenia and Azerbaijan. September 28. Available at: [https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-54321659]. [In Persian]