Government

Geopolitical factors have always significantly influenced the politics and behavior of governments due to the continuity and stability of their effects. In Turkmenistan, due to the geopolitical characteristics of this country, examining and paying attention to these factors and their effects play an important role in terms of understanding and predicting the policies and behavior of Turkmenistan’s government. Also, these characteristics seem to become more important because of this country’s neighborhood and many commonalities with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The main question of this article is about the effects of Turkmenistan's geopolitics on the politics and the behavior of its government. Based on this study, it will be argued that Turkmenistan's geopolitics has, directly and indirectly, affected the politics and behavior of Turkmenistan’s government by creating threats and issues such as instability and insecurity. It has also caused authoritarianism and centralism in the government.

The position and relationship between the government and the civil society has always occupied the minds of political thinkers, especially in the modern period. In general, governments assume different roles depending on the application of different approaches. From the point of view of the relationship and the type of influence of the government on the society, there have always been two competing views, which are rooted in the thoughts of two prominent political philosophers: John Locke and Karl Marx. In John Locke's view, the government is a mediating entity, limited and conditional, based on the principle of consent and with the aim of creating peace and public welfare based on the social contract and the right of public rebellion in times of inefficiency and disobedience to the law, and ultimately independent of civil society. And in the view of Karl Marx, the concept of government is based on three different opinions. The government as a means of suppressing the working class, the government as an arbiter or mediator, and finally the government as a function of the changing economic infrastructure, and ultimately relying on classes of society.

One of the most important issues in the economy is the role of government in the process of eco-nomic growth and development. Production is a complex and social activity that requires all its con-texts and resources to achieve proper production for society. Therefore, the issue of importance is the manner and quality of government intervention in matters related to the economy and the wel-fare of the people, not the extent of this intervention. In Iran, there is always disagreement among thinkers on which institution is responsible for development. For some, the government has a duty to take the lead in development and to push it forward, but for others, the government is not a good institution to promote development. These groups play a minimal role for the government. This study, by comprehensively examining these two different approaches, examines the views and ideas of three prominent scientists and experts in the field of political economy and focuses on the role of government in development. Azimi introduced development in a more general way and believed that complete development is not possible without the development of all structures. According to him, in the developed world, structural guidance (structuring in the presence of technical domi-nance) is unnecessary and short-term guidance is necessary. The importance of the government in the development process is so great in the idea that the main and most important institution of de-velopment is the "government based on democracy"; And he puts the judiciary and the media in the next ranks. Reiis Dana considers the state to be class in nature and does not examine the state sepa-rately from the global relations of capitalism. This lack of attention has always caused development in a fragmented, unbalanced and unsuccessful country. According to Reiis Dana, development in Iran is due to the development of capitalism, because capitalist development in the world is growing unevenly. Nili believes that government intervention in development, in addition to inefficiency, deprives people of their freedoms. Therefore, Nili looks at the issue from another angle and defends government restrictions on the economy and development by prioritizing freedom over social jus-tice.

Since the beginning of human settlement, the most important factor in facing various natural and un-natural disasters and facilitating development in a society has been solidarity and unity. However, this can only be achieved through the performance of rulers and the formation of governments. As different societies have formed and various cultures have emerged, and as humanity has progressed toward evolution and excellence, the model of this consensus has also undergone changes. With the establishment of governments, based on the decisions of societies in their modern form, multiple fac-tors have played fundamental roles in shaping this unity, while progressive human thought undoubt-edly influencing this process. However, what prompts further reflection on this issue is how this co-hesion emerges when needed and how its fragmentation being prevented under a governance struc-ture. It is evident that a national governance structure plays a significant role in shaping different pol-icy approaches. Due to the influence of various ideas on the formation of governments and the relent-less efforts of scholars and thinkers to develop a suitable and superior governance model, the concept of "good governance" has gained attention in recent decades. Good governance, when properly aligned with a structure that suits a society’s prevailing conditions, can play a crucial role and evolve over time. Principles such as participation, accountability, transparency, the rule of law, etc., are among the fundamental aspects of governance. Each of these principles can be extensively analyzed, but in this discussion, the focus is on the formation of public consensus or, more appropriately, "so-cial convergence" within a desirable "governance structure." Undoubtedly, this structure plays a key role as a fundamental prerequisite for comprehensive and effective implementation of governance thought in fostering social convergence across various sectors of society and government.