Since development of relationships between the subjects of the international system (between states, between states and international organizations, between international organizations, etc.) is necessary and certain evaluation criteria (indicator/indicators) should be determined. Researchers, who examine the relations between various states, often describe them as "developing relations" if there is no acute(sharp) crisis in the chronological framework. However, in cases where serious crisis does not occur, such relationships can develop or weaken due to various factors. In this respect, it is imperative to determine indicators (evaluation indicators of international relations) to evaluate the periods of development and decline of relations with scientific methods between states, including participants (subjects) of the international relations system. 

Some researchers, such as Russian researchers M.A. Timopheyeva, M.G. Vlasova, N.V. Derugin, N. Bistrov, R. Vexman and others have mentioned the importance of an indicators intelligence and prognosis of international relations. In his study on the application of mathematical methods in the study of international relations, I. Mikheyev analyzed methods of indicators. M.G. Vlasova defined the concept of an indicator as follows: "Indicators are events that are observed as an indicator of the movement of a particular process or scenario". However, Indicators spoke more about security and defense than indicators of interstate relations. 

Research allows the following concrete definition for the concept of indicator in interstate relations: "Indicators that allow to evaluate the movement of relations between the subjects in the system of international economic relations within a specific time frame".

It is possible to have up to an average of hundred indicators used to evaluate the movement of interstate relations. However, grouping these indicators is one of the important conditions for conducting a systematic analysis. In this sense, it is possible to divide the indicators used to determine the direction of action of interstate relations into three groups: Political indicators, Economic indicators and Social indicators.

For the first time, it has been tried to determine the main political indicators in the science of international relations and apply them in the example of relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The direction of development and decline of relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Islamic Republic of Iran in the political arena is determined by using the following indicators:

1) The number of reciprocal visits at the level of heads of state and government within the chronological framework;

2) The number of meetings held by the senior representatives of the two countries in foreign countries and within the framework of the meetings of international organizations;

3) Number and rate of mutual expeditions of managers of institutions responsible for foreign policy and number of ideas disscussed;

4) Overlapping of authorities in the decision making process in international organizations and supporting the proposed projects;

5) The number, scope, and place of the documents signed between the two countries in the state administration system.

6) Level of inter-parliamentary relations and approval frequency (amplitude) of bilateral agreements signed.

7) Paying special attention to the other country in the government's activity programs.

Analysis shows that it is possible to successfully apply the indicator method as a way of learning interstate relations in modern conditions. Only in this case, the theses put forward to develop, maintain, or decline interstate relations can be considered scientifically objective.

A few points need to be clarified here. First of all, there should be indicators to determine the nature of the movement of interstate relations (development and decline). Second, these indicators should be applied to interstate relations in a concrete time frame. Third, evaluations for the indicators received can show the character of the movement, the progress, and decline only if the researcher has the opportunity to compare the same demonstrators with data set in another time frame.