US Sanctions Against Iran

Iran-US relations have historically been of particular importance to both sides. The ups and downs of this relationship and its causes and factors have always been considered by international relations researchers and thinkers, including the two countries' experts. This article aims to examine Israel's role in perpetuating the strained relations between Iran and the United States. The continuing turmoil and the severance of official relations between Iran and the United States, given the historical background of relations between the two countries, the existence of shared regional interests, along with the opportunities to repair and improve relations, raises the question of international relations researchers why relations between the two countries are still strained as Iran enters the fourth decade of its revolution. What are the leading causes and factors of the continuation of the strained relations between the two countries? In response to various hypotheses, the author cites a drastic change in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran towards Israel-compared to the pre-revolutionary period-the main factor in the continuation of hostility between the two countries and Iran's opposition to Israel. Therefore, considering the opposition to the Middle East peace process as the main factor of the current situation, it has tried to confirm the mentioned hypothesis by presenting evidence and analyzing documents. This article has been written with a genealogical (historicalanalytical) approach and has a review nature. To attain the specifications of this research, a descriptive methodology will be used. The advantages presented by this method include enabling the collection of a significant amount of data at once. The scientific findings of this study indicate the undeniable effect of the Israeli variable on Iran-US relations.

There is a substantial hype in the tempo against countries considered adversaries to the USA and the tone is abnormally high.  Much of it is against Russia and in support of the Ukraine, China comes next as the US has been sending it dire warning not to venture and take over Taiwan. At the on-going nuclear talks which the US abandoned, Iran is is confronted heavily as it seeks to remove the sanctions, and it is threatened openly by Israel

Such flurry normally occurs as a prelude to an upcoming military action as the US prepares the public and builds support for the administration. The timing is significant since the first half of 2022 and being the second year of an administration magnifies the risk and for good reasons that are explained.

This paper analyzes the possibilities and including the vulnerabilities of certain countries, the volatile Middle East and the risks inherent in what may become an uncontrolled disaster, and offers viable options to defuse and contain the threat of war

Economic sanctions have been a prominent part of American statecraft since World War II. Sanction usually consists of a ban on the sale and shipment of products to a country and on the purchase of its exports. This study focuses on short and long-term effects of sanctions on Iranian regime and its people. The US sanctions on Iran provide an interesting case for examining various arguments and can shed light on how the sanctions’ are working, is it effective or counterproductive. This paper has measured the role of economic sanction on market, lower economic growth, oil export, inflation and currency rate as well as study the effect on health, military spending and the overall targeted regime. And also Tehran’s adjusted responses to these sanctions.

Collective punishment is widely regarded as violating the ethics of war and the Geneva Convention. And yet, governments frequently use indiscriminate economic sanctions to bring about changes in their opponent's behaviour. Taking this discrepancy as a point of departure, it's worth reflecting on the ethics of American sanctions on Iran and alternatives available under the Magnitsky Act.

The Iranian nuclear crisis which started in 2003 has transformed into a tense scenario due to a transatlantic alliance which seeks to put pressure on Iran and force it to negotiate, as a result of the last wave of oil embargoes and by Iran’s threat of closing the Strait of Hormuz in response. The main subject of this paper is the threat to blockade the Strait of Hormuz, which emerged in a period of mutual showdown, psychological warfare and propaganda. This paper investigates the questions of why Iran has put forward this card, whether Iran will really carry out this card and what the possible consequences of such an initiative would be. And finally, the possibility of blocking the strait will be analyzed.

Iranian nuclear deal has been the much awaited political event in past decades. This is a rare coincidence in global politics where the outcome of events has larger ramifications for and beyond regions. Iran’s geostrategic position has always placed it in much important position in the region. It is a region that can simultaneously set the direction of the global economy, global politics and global climate has rarely seemed as full of contradiction: breakthrough is juxtaposed with impasse, conflict and failure. Of course, aside from the historical and geopolitical significance of the Middle East, the key link between the region and the world is through its sway over oil supplies. The uncertainty in the oil price is not good for the country like India in the long run, which has greater oil dependence on it. But beyond this, Iran is much important for security needs of India. And once the deal materializes it would allow country like India to renew its ties and work for greater good. The deal has inherent risks too, which can’t be ignored. Looking at the past instances, it is tough to say that deal would be accepted without any hitch. But, unlike past, this time all the parties are willing to strike a deal.

Signed on July 14, 2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) concluded the longterm negotiations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran and the P5+1. Following this document's signature and only six days later, on July 20, 2015, the Security Council Resolution 2231 was adopted. All previous sanctions of the United Nations Security Council were terminated, and Security Council asked all parties of the JCPOA to implement the action plan completely. The negligence of Western parties, especially the United States, in the months following the implementation of the JCPOA and, more specifically, after President Trump's inauguration, conflicted with the good faith in implementing the UNHCR's international obligations. As part of accountability and critical analysis of the measures to control the enrichment of uranium in Iran and its access to nuclear power, this paper will seek to find the impact of the United States' exit from the agreement on both Iran and the United States' security. Considering the Security Council Resolution 2231 on the need for full implementation of the U.N. Security Council and refraining from any action undermining this instrument of cooperation, the remarks of the U.S. President and some actions taken by his administration and the Congress on UNSC undermined this document and was contrary to the spirit of the U.N. Security Council and binding Resolution 2231, acknowledged as well by the European Union, European countries and Russia. To attain the specifications of this research, a descriptive methodology will be used. The advantages presented by this method include enabling the collection of a significant amount of data at once; it is less costly and presents the researcher with diverse ways of collecting primary data, which is key in establishing existing circumstances on the impact of U.S. exit from the JCPOA agreement. In terms of data collection, the study will use both quantitative and qualitative approaches. A qualitative approach will be used to collect data in numeral form, while a quantitative will be used to collect data describing attitudes and views from interviewees.

Since President Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA, Washington has been pressing allies to end all imports of Iranian oil by a November 4. deadline Moreover, in a briefing on June 26, a senior State Department official was quite firm that the U.S. doesn't anticipate offering any extensions or waivers to that timeline. This statement created a feeling of emergency, and oil prices jumped by more than 3.5 percent. Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh also blamed President Trump's actions for the high oil prices during an interview with CNN. Ultimately, the price hike serves the interest of oil-dependent economies like Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iraq, especially since they can serve as substitutes for Iranian oil.

ABSTRACT

This study examines the 2010-2015 comprehensive sanctions against Iran led by the United States, the United Nations and the European Union to slow the development of their nuclear program, and their effect on various actors within the Iranian economy, which can be loosely categorized into ‘privileged insiders and the unprivileged outsiders’ in a national context. Existing research, various macroeconomic indicators, and datasets were conducted to measure secondary (non-objective oriented) effects. The results suggest that while sanctioning parties including the USA, the European Union and the United Nations were successful in making the regime of Iran comply with their requests to restrict the development of their nuclear program, parts of Iranian society vulnerable to volatility (especially youth, low-income, and gendered groups) experienced sustained economic consequences both during and after the sanctions, leading to various adverse social effects, except in the first two years. During the first two years, resource redistribution and cash payments favored the poor in both urban and rural area and middle-income deciles in urban areas, but high inflation as a result of the sanctions devalued these cash payments, causing a sharp decrease in real values of the payments and making them ‘losers’ in medium-term. Sanctions appear to have negatively affected democratic and human rights indices, income inequality, women and child mortality, asylum conditions, first and middle-income deciles’ welfare, healthcare quality, and the environment. Finally, this study sheds more light on the ‘mechanisms’ at work in a sanction game; an important point which is absent in the related literature. 

Keywords: Sanctions, Iran, Embargoes, Welfare, Macroeconomics, Public Choice Theory, New Political Economy

https://www.breithorn.org/product-page/who-were-the-main-targets-of-sanctions-against-iran-insiders-or-outsiders

Das Jahr 2020 wird im Zeichen der Covid-19-Pandemie, die aktuell immer noch die Welt erschüttert, in die Geschichte eingehen. Einige Staaten sind aufgrund der internen Versäumnisse der Vergangenheit jedoch wesentlich schlimmer betroffen als andere. Unter ihnen der Iran. Bis zum 19. September 2020 sollen laut Angaben des iranischen Gesundheitsministers bislang 24.000 Menschen durch Covid-19 ums Leben gekommen sein. Doch auch wenn die Pandemie das Land mit voller  Wucht traf – enorme Spannungen und politische wie soziale Erschütterungen gab es bereits vorher. Eine Einschätzung zur aktuellen Entwicklung.

The present article seeks to analyze the discourse-political foundations of Donald Trump's remarks about the JCPOA and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's reaction to his remarks. The critical discourse analysis approach prioritizes the relationship between politics, language, society, power, ideology, and discourse. The research method of this article is descriptive-analytical and based on the Fairclough model. We examine Trump and Khamenei's statement. The findings of this article show that there is an interrelationship between ideology and language and between the use of language and political and social relations and language. In addition, the formability of political relations, can be a useful tool in shaping power relations and political interactions; Therefore, each country's leaders have tried to use their linguistic and political abilities to express their views. The results show that both leaders in their speeches see the JCPOA as a fragile and flawed agreement between two enemies and not a contract to strengthen the friendship between them.

One of the most critical questions for Iran today is the nature of its relations with Japan and China. Both Asian countries have been recently expanding their presence in the Middle East by investing in national resources or tying military and economic trade agreements with specific countries, like Iran. Japan has been nurturing its relations with Iran since the 1960s as it played an important role in supplying resources (mostly energy) during Tokyo’s rapid economic growth post-WWII. Even after the Islamic Revolution, Iran’s relations with Japan remained steady. Meanwhile, China recently renewed its ties with Middle Eastern countries, such as Israel and many Gulf States, investing in local infrastructure while promoting alternative models for economic growth. In addition, China has also recently settled a 25-year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Iran, bringing particular international attention to the matter.
However, what has played an important role in Iran’s relations with both Japan and China is the US-imposed sanctions. As a matter of fact, these bans brought Iran closer to the Asian continent: since the US withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and imposed new sanctions, China has continued to purchase oil from Iran making it clear it will not abide by the US embargo. Consequently, political engagement has been an important variable in Chinese and Japanese bilateral relations with Iran, impacting economic investments, trade, and furthering new relations and agreements.

The article examines the current state of the U.S. sanctions policy towards Iran and its transformation prospects. Specifically, it describes new provisions of the sanctions regime under the “Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act” of 2017, as well as other acting provisions of this policy. The authors present the current discourse on the subject in the American political establishment. The U. S.-Iran relations are traditionally of adversarial nature. For more than 30 years, the Islamic Republic of Iran is considered by the United States as a hostile, terrorism-sponsoring nation that threatens regional security in the Middle East. Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, the Iranian government has been under a number of U.S.-imposed sanctions which only intensified through decades, although their efficiency was questionable until recently. The most serious impact on Iran’s economy was made by multilateral sanctions imposed by the U. N. Security Council resolution 1929 (2010), which forced Iranian officials to participate in P5+1 negotiating process. The eventually adopted Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA (October 2015) stopped Iranians from getting a nuclear weapon. Since implementation of the deal (January 2016), the U.S. has lifted sanctions on Iran’s economy in compliance with it. This sparked a political debate in the United States on whether Washington should unilaterally withdraw from the agreement or not. The opponents of the JCPOA, predominantly republicans, argue that Iran is using the relieved resources to fund terrorism, its destabilizing activities in the Middle East and to threaten U.S. allies in the region. The supporters of the deal, mostly democrats, presume that the withdrawal would only stimulate Iranians to get a nuclear weapon hence the failure of diplomatic means to solve the problem. Nevertheless, both parties consider Iran as a hostile regime, and in order to impose additional pressure on it for its policies, Congress almost unanimously passed the “Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act” (2017). The Act severed the other existing sanctions not lifted by the JCPOA. By analyzing the U.S. sanctions policy towards Iran and the current discourse in the political establishment on the subject, the authors come to a conclusion that a unilateral withdrawal from the deal is not likely to happen. The United States will probably pursue a containment strategy towards Iran and will provoke its government to violate the JCPOA provisions – in order to re-impose severe sanctions on a multilateral basis, which would deliver the U.S. from undermining its relations with its allies.

It it's amazing that in the current nuclear negotiations taking place in Vienna between the P5+1 nations and Iran no one in the public media is making the slightest attempt to present the Iranian perspective. That perspective is crystal clear and the US public needs to understand it to keep from going off the rails in paroxysms of irrelevant blather.

Briefly stated in Iran's position everything is based on the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to which Iran is a signatory and from which Iran derives its "inalienable right" to peaceful nuclear development.

There are 189 signatories to the Treaty (not including Israel, India, Pakistan or North Korea). The United States and its five allies do not have the power or the authority to deprive Iran of its rights under the treaty, including the right to enrich uranium and build nuclear reactors, a principle accepted for years by the Europeans and only recently called into question ONLY for Iran.

The Trump Administration recently imposed a new round of sanctions on the Iranian regime. The sanctions are said to be some of the harshest in history. They are designed, among other things, to convey a sense of shock to the populace so that they revolt against the regime and put it under domestic pressure so that the regime, in addressing the nationʼs problems, is forced to concede to American demands, if not completely toppled by a nationwide revolution. However, the regime uses a set of "shock-:absorbing" techniques to counter the sanctions

THE SCOPE AND VISION OF IRAN’S PETROLEUM AND GAS SECTOR ON 22ND  WPC
Dr Amir Hossein Zamaninia, İran    Deputy Minister of Petroleum
For Trade and International Affairs, Ministry
By Çiğdem Yorgancıoğlu


This article is a preliminary analysis and facts study, recorded during 22nd World Petroleum Congress and views of Iranian Deputy Minister of Petroleum Dr. Amir Hossein Zamaninia attended the 22nd World Petroleum Congress at the Istanbul Convention Center in Istanbul, held in Turkey between 9th to 13rd July, 2017 The views implied herein cover not only the facts and issues in Iran and in the Region but also prospective close cooperation intentions and plans with Turkey. The Region mentioned in this article is not exclusively limited with Territories and regions within the Middle East or Persian (Arabian) Gulf but also includes the Region-territory where İran has her own interest and influence. The strategies intended to be followed by Iranian Ministry of Petroleum in order to resuscitate its oil and gas sectors in the aftermath of sanctions relief following the nuclear deal between the P5+1+EU and Iran on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) during WPC and revision of the new strategy after Jul 18th, 2017 shall be subject to consecutive articles. Recently, opposing Iran's rising influence in the broader Middle East is a foremost goal of the Trump Administration and slapped new economic sanctions against Iran on Tuesday over its ballistic missile program and said Tehran's " malign activities " in the Middle East undercut any " positive contributions " coming from the 2015 Iran nuclear accord. On Jul 18th 2017

Now that serious talks with Iran over its nuclear program are underway, one seemingly insurmountable issue is whether Iran has the right to enrich uranium. The short answer is: Yes.
Those who are trying to torpedo the ongoing talks, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, want Iran to be forced to agree to the whole monty--a complete cessation of uranium enrichment and a dismantling of all enrichment facilities.

Iran claims that it has the inalienable right to enrich uranium as guaranteed in the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) to which it is a signatory.

  Iran-US relations have historically been of particular importance to both sides. The ups and downs of this relationship and its causes and factors have always been considered by international relations researchers and thinkers, including the two countries' experts. This article aims to examine Israel's role in perpetuating the strained relations between Iran and the United States. The continuing turmoil and the severance of official relations between Iran and the United States, given the historical background of relations between the two countries, the existence of shared regional interests, along with the opportunities to repair and improve relations, raises the question of international relations researchers why relations between the two countries are still strained as Iran enters the fourth decade of its revolution. What are the leading causes and factors of the continuation of the strained relations between the two countries?

Economic sanctions have been a prominent part of American statecraft since World War II. Sanction usually consists of a ban on the sale and shipment of products to a country and on the purchase of its exports. This study focuses on short and long-term effects of sanctions on Iranian regime and its people. The US sanctions on Iran provide an interesting case for examining various arguments and can shed light on how the sanctions' are working, is it effective or counterproductive. This paper has measured the role of economic sanction on market, lower economic growth, oil export, inflation and currency rate as well as study the effect on health, military spending and the overall targeted regime. And also Tehran's adjusted responses to these sanctions.

NÜKLEER ANLAŞMANIN ÇÖKÜŞÜ SONRASI  İRAN’DA ENERJİ  SAHASINDAN  YANSIMALAR
Cigdem Yorgancioglu
22 Mayıs 2018
Giriş İran’a 2006-2015 yılları arasında uygulanan uluslararası yaptırımlar ülke ekonomisine ciddi manada zarar vermiş  2012 ve 2013 yıllarında kümülatif olarak yaklaşık yüzde on  daralan İran ekonomisi, 2015 senesinde bir nebze toparlanmıştı . Hatta içinde bulunduğumuz 2018 senesinin bu bağlamda nükleer anlaşmanın semerelerinin alınmaya başlanacağı bir yıl olacağı öngörülmekteydi. Ne var ki işler umulduğu gibi gitmedi. Önce  2017’de başlayan  ve 2018 yılının ilk günlerinde  daha da genişlerek  siyasi bir eksende dalgalanan  sokak olaylarının da etkisiyle  ülkede risk algısı bir hayli yükseldi. Risk algısındaki artışın da etkisi ile İran para birimi yabancı paralar karşısında  ciddi miktarda  değer kaybına uğradı. Üstüne bir de  Nükleer Anlaşma kararı zaten daralan ekonominin daha da olumsuz yönde seyretmesine  tuz biber ekti.


ABD Başkanı Donald Trump, 12 Mayıs’ta (2018) yapacağı açıklamayı bir kaç gün daha öne çekerek İran ile Viyana'da  Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyi'nin 5 daimi üyesi olarak  imzaladığı  P5+1 (ABD, Çin, Rusya, Fransa, İngiltere ve Almanya)- arasıdaki Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action - JCPoA -(Ortak Kapsamlı Eylem Planı’ndan (OKEP)  kısaca Nükleer Anlaşma’dan çıktığını ve  2015'te askıya alınan İran ekonomik yaptırımlarının en güçlü şekilde yeniden hayata geçirileceğini Beyaz Saray'da düzenlediği basın açıklamasıyla duyurması gündemin kalbine yerleşti. İran'a eski yaptırımların 90 gün içinde uygulamaya gireceğini  bu şekilde bildiren ABD, İran'a karşı gemicilik, petrol ve enerji alanlarında da eski yaptırımların yeniden uygulanmaya başlayacak. Trump, 2015'te yapılan nükleer anlaşmanın İran tarafından kendi amaçları için kullanıldığını savunarak, "Öyleyse bugün ABD'nin İran'la nükleer anlaşmadan ayrılacağını ilan ediyorum. Tahran'a en üst düzey ekonomik yaptırımları yeniden getireceğiz." şeklinde konuştu .Mezkur basın açıklamasında "İran'ın nükleer silaha sahip olma çabasına yardım eden herhangi bir ülke güçlü bir şekilde yaptırıma uğrayacak. Amerika nükleer şantajın rehinesi olmayacak" değerlendirmesinde bulunan Trump, yaptırımların yeniden devreye girmesinin ardından İran'la iş yapacak ülkelere de bir mesaj gönderdi. İran'ın nükleer anlaşmadan faydalanarak nükleer çabalarına ve silah yapımına devam ettiğini savunan Trump, somut anlamda detaylara değinmeksizin  İran'ın "yalan söylediğini" iddia etti. İlaveten Trump Tahran rejiminin bölgede terör unsurlarına yardım ettiğini ve anlaşmadan elde ettiği kazanımları nükleer ve askeri programlara yatırdığını savundu.İran Tesnim Haber Ajansının haberine göre ABD Maliye Bakanlığı, önümüzdeki 90 gün içerisinde İran'a yönelik döviz sektörü, metal ticareti, devlet borcu ve otomobil sektörü gibi alanlardaki eski yaptırımları tekrar uygulamaya koyacaklarını açıkladı. Habere göre, ABD Maliye Bakanlığı'nın açıklamasında, önümüzdeki 180 gün içerisinde, İran'a karşı gemicilik, petrol ve enerji alanlarında da eski yaptırımların yeniden uygulanmaya başlanacağı kaydedildi. ABD, 5 Kasım'a kadar tekrar İran'ın tüm devlet ve finansal kurumlarını yaptırım listesine alacak. Bu makale bu beyan ve Trump’ın Nükleer Anlaşmadan çekilmesi sonrası İran’da enerji görünümünden, AB’nin, Avrupalı firmaları ABD’nin muhtemel İran yaptırımlarından korumak için 1996 yılından kalma Blocking Statute  adlı eski bir yasayı yeniden devreye alarak Brüksel’in İran ile nükleer anlaşmanın muhafazası için yaptığı ilk hamleyi ve Mayıs ayı içinde Yenileebilir Enerji sektörü de dahil olmak üzere kesitler vermeyi amaçlamaktadır.

The fate of the nuclear negotiations between Iran and P5+1 and the future of the Iranian-Western relations are hot topics for academics and researchers working on the Middle
East. If the ongoing negotiations give 􀀃􀂃􀂐􀀃􀂃􀂉􀂔􀂇􀂇􀂏􀂇􀂐􀂖􀇡􀀃􀂕􀂋􀂉􀂐􀂋􀏐􀂋􀂅􀂃􀂐developments may occur both at the regional and global level. In order to
fully understand this critical process and its possible consequences, theömotivations and objectives of the
parties involved should be carefully analysed.

Abstract
Sanctions are one of the foreign policy instrument of states taking its roots from the depth of the history. This
instrument restricts activities utilized by one or more international actors, upon any other international actor
-like certain institutions, individuals or private companies of a certain country- in order to achieve foreign
policy goals or for making that actor change its behaviour. These restrictive activites may be in the form of
political, economic, financial restrictions or some of them together.
Financial sanctions are relatively younger tools than the other kinds and they are used as suplementary to
economic sanctions to increase their forcefulness. But, as well as conventional methods to evade financial
sanctions, there is also a transformation process about the existing global financial mechanism. In this article,
effeciency of the financial sanctions will be analysed by the Iran sanctions case during the 2010’s, taking into
consideration newly developed evasion methods and the changing global financial environment.
Key Words: Iran Sanctions, Financial Sanctions, Sanctions Efficiency, Sanction Evasion, SWIFT Alternatives.
Öz
Yaptırımlar, devletlerin dış politikalarında kullandığı, köklerini tarihin derinliklerinden alan araçlardan biridir. Bu araç, bir devletin kendi dış politika hedeflerine ulaşmak veya bir aktörün davranışını kendi istediği yönde değişmesini sağlamak için bir veya daha fazla uluslararası aktör tarafından, belirli bir ülkenin kurumları, bireyleri veya özel şirketleri ve diğer uluslararası aktörlerinin faaliyetlerini kısıtlamak üzere kullanılır. Bu uygulama aracı, politik, ekonomik, mali kısıtlamalar veya bunların bir kısmının birlikte uygulanması şeklinde olabilir. Mali yaptırımlar, diğer türlere göre nispeten daha yeni araçlar olup hedefe ulaşmak için diğer ekonomik yaptırımlara ek olarak kullanılırlar. Bununla beraber mali yaptırımlardan etkilenmemek için geleneksel yöntemlerin yanı sıra mevcut küresel finansal mekanizma kapsamında dönüşüm süreci kullanılabilmektedir. Bu makalede, mali yaptırımların etkinliği, yeni geliştirilen kaçınma yöntemleri ve değişen küresel mali ortam göz önünde bulundurularak 2010'lu yıllardan itibaren İran yaptırımları örneğinde ele alınmaktadır.

Many individuals and companies make their economic decisions based on political developments. This article examines an important political event, namely the withdrawal of the United States from JCPOA and its impact on the Iranian capital market. With the withdrawal of the United States from the JCPOA and the United States' threats to resume sanctions, Iran's economy had experienced turmoil and drastic changes, which clearly saw in the days before and after the resumption of sanctions in Iran's financial markets. In this study, we intend to examine the changes resulted from the US withdrawal from JCPOA, its impact on Iran's oil-dependent economy, financial markets, analyze the spread, and severity of turbulence in the Iranian economy, especially the Iranian financial markets using multivariate GARCH methods. In this regard, the multivariate GARCH model (DCC) and analysis of variance are used to investigate these events' effect on the Tehran Stock Exchange index.

The election of Hassan Rouhani in 2013 as the President was hailed as a ‘victory of moderation’ in Iran, signaling the fact that Iran would embrace moderation after the ‘fierce rule’ of Ahmadinejad, former Iranian President. However, a chronic failure of moderates' agenda in Iran during former's tenure has now changed the power distribution in the country leading to conservative faction's win in the 2020 Parliamentary elections. The paper is an attempt to evaluate the election result of 2020 and understand the new power dynamics in Iran. It reviews the performance and policies of President Rouhani as he reaches the last year of his second term and also analyzes the emerging political scenario in the country with challenges to the new Parliament. Additionally, to make a holistic analysis, the paper briefly covers the strong points of Rouhani administration and the plausible policy changes expected from the new parliament. The methodology of the paper is qualitative content analysis.