Theoretical Explanation of the Foundations Forming Geopolitical Competition

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Political Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran

2 Porfessor of Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor of Political Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

4 PhD in political Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
In system level on the world scale almost three quarters of all the wars of the world occurred between the states and countries that had serious competition against each other. It is essential to consider the concept of competition in regional and global geopolitics due to its centrality for the interests among the states.  Therefore, as the formation of geopolitics was accompanied by power and competition, it seems necessary to analyze the dimensions of the competition and its configuration foundations. This present research seeks to explain theoretical fundamentals of the basic concept of the competition in geopolitics.  
 
Methodology
This research with an interpretation-analytical approach is to explain theoretical foundations of the basic concept of competition in political geography and geopolitics. In other words, the objective of this study is to clear the conceptual factors effective on the formation of the geopolitical competition.  
The research hypothesis represents that although the competition among the states can take a variety of forms over time and in different geographical locations, some issues including territory problems, change in geopolitical structure, military preparations, and general treaties and strategies can provide proper conditions to form the competitions and stabilize the geopolitical rivalries.  
 
Results and discussion
Competitions among the countries take various forms during time and in different geographical regions. A competition may be very short that results in a few military events among the two rivals.  Some competitions may last during a generation that causes many repetitive rivalries and military contacts between the involving countries. The geopolitical competitions may have different perspectives. In one perspective, a competition is initiated between two or more states on the problems like territory issues. In response, the states promote their obligations and participate in military preparations. The states to show their decisiveness may take part in other disputes and competitions. They, finally, scheme a macro strategy to face the enemy or rival state. All the attempts are integrated in steps that may, finally, cause conflict between two or more powers or a vicarious conflict. 
On the other hand, a competition can itself generate a new rivalry forming competition relations among several spaces. In this case, the competitions that are in relation with other conflicts can create a conflict between one state and many other states. In other words, increase in space and competition relations can augment the possibility of conflict. This can indicate obligations of rivals or tendency of a country for conflict on each problem. Other foundation of the competition and its cycle is macro-strategy, because the macro strategy is appeared as a result of the signs of increasing competitions. Indeed, the macro-strategy is a scheme a state may devise to ensure its security in competition space. 
Another dimension of generation and development of the competition is usually resulted from changes in regional and global geopolitical structure. For example, after a war among great regional of global powers or defeat of a rival, some great geopolitical competitions may be ended, because a rival may not be able to compete in the new altered competition space. Accordingly, appearance of new powers provides new opportunities for competitions. In addition, a change in distribution of power can transform traditional treaties and make a rival state as an ally. As distribution and hierarchy of power formed the structure global geopolitics and generate short-term and long-term competitions, increase in power creates new geopolitical interests to ensure security and survival of a country. Therefore, the rival states make competition actions to preserve their security and ensure their approach for gaining their regional and global geopolitical interests. Thus, ensuring survival and achieving geopolitical goals through military preparations including maneuver, treaties, and macro-strategies for dominance over border and territory issues can give rise to short term and long term competitions. These competitions can also endanger survival of a country. However, since the powers cannot confine themselves in national borders to ensure their interests and achieve development, they enter trans-national space to seek their goals. This can lead to especial forms of geopolitical competition and conflicts. 
 
Conclusion
The voracious needs to provide goods, power, and geopolitical position make the states to seek competition actions. Different scales of competitions provide the governments with space resources, either objective or subjective. On the other hand, in geopolitical rivalry common material and subjective interests are replaced by conflict interests, because the common interests lead to cooperation, coalescence, and geopolitics of peace and the conflict interests lead to competition, dispute, and war. Therefore, it seems impossible for the states to be confined in national boundaries for achieving development, because all the national, regional, and global powers go beyond trans-boundary spaces to seek their goals. This can generate a new kind of geopolitical competition and conflict. 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1- O’Tuathail, G., Dolby, S. and Routledge, P., 2001, geopolitical thought in the twentieth century, Translated by Mohammad Reza Hafeznia and Hashem Nasiri, Institute for Political and International Studies, Tehran.
اتوتایل، ژئروید، دالبی، سیمون و پاول راتلج،1380، اندیشه‌های ژئوپلیتیک در قرن بیستم، ترجمة محمدرضا حافظ‌نیا و هاشم نصیری، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بین‌المللی، تهران.
2- Hafeznia, M.R, 2006, the principles and concepts of geopolitics, Pupoli publisher, Mashhad.
حافظ‌نیا، محمدرضا، 1385، اصولومفاهیمژئوپلیتیک، انتشارات پاپلی، مشهد.
3- Rabii, H., and Janparvar, M., 2011, representing the analytical model to resolve land disputes and conflicts, Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol. 4.No.4 ,pp.55-78.
ربیعی، حسین و محسن جان‌پرور، 1390، بازنمایی مدل تحلیلی برای حل‌وفصلاختلاف‌ها و منازعات سرزمینی، فصلنامة مطالعات راهبردی، سال چهارم، شمارة چهارم، صص 55-78.
4- Asgari, M., and Saeed kolahi, H., 2012, a defensive alliance in the modern world, Journal of Strategic Information, Vol. 10, No.13
عسگری، محمود و سعیدکلاهی، حسن، 1391، ائتلاف‌های دفاعی در دنیای نوین، مجلة اطلاعات راهبردی، سال دهم، شمارة 13
5- Shakuie, H., 2009, New ideas in the philosophy of geography. Vol II, philosophies and schools of environmental geography, geographical Publications, Tehran.
شکویی، حسین، 1388، اندیشه‌های نو در فلسفة جغرافیا. جلد دوم، فلسفه‌های محیطی و مکتب‌های جغرافیایی، انتشارات گیتاشناسی، تهران.
6- Qavam, A., 2008, The principles of foreign policy and international politics, Samt Publication, Tehran.
قوام، سید عبدالعلی، 1387، اصول سیاست خارجی و سیاست بین‌الملل، انتشارات سمت، تهران.
7- Kessels, A., 2001, Ideology and international relations in the modern world, the translation of Mahmoud Abdullah Zadeh, the Cultural Research Bureau, Tehran.
کسلز، آلن، 1380، ایدئولوژی و روابط بین‌الملل در دنیای مدرن، ترجمة محمود عبدالله‌زاده، دفتر پژوهش‌های فرهنگی، تهران.
8- Karimipour, Y., 1992, Ggeopolitical analysis critical areas. Sistan and Baluchestan, Thesis, Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran.
کریمی‌پور، یدالله، 1371، تحلیل ژئوپلیتیک نواحیبحرانی، سیستانو بلوچستان، رسالة دکتری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران.
9- Lacoste, Y., 1368, geopolitical issues of Islam, sea, Africa, the translation of Abbas awareness, Islamic Culture Publications Office, Tehran.
لاکوست، ایو، 1368، مسائل ژئوپلیتیک اسلام، دریا، آفریقا، ترجمة عباس آگاهی، دفتر نشر فرهنگ اسلامی، تهران.
10- Leroux, P., and Pape, F., 2002, The geopolitical keys, Translated by Hassan Sadoughi Vaniny, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran.
لورو، پاسکال و فرانسوا توال، 1381، کلیدهای ژئوپلیتیک، ترجمة حسن صدوقی ونینی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران.
11- Mundell, R., 2000, Changing the face of national security, Center for Strategic Studies, Mashhad.
ماندل، رابرت، 1379، چهرة متغیر امنیت ملی، پژوهشکدة مطالعات راهبردی، مشهد.
12- Mojtahedzadeh, P., 2001, The geopolitical and geopolitics, Samt Publication, Tehran.
مجتهدزاده، پیروز، 1381، جغرافیای سیاسی و سیاست جغرافیایی، انتشارات سمت، تهران.
13- Morgenthau, H. J., 1995, politics among nations, translations Humira Moshirzade, Institute for Political and International Studies, Mashhad.
مورگنتا، هانس. جی، 1374، سیاست میان ملت‌ها، ترجمة حمیرا مشیرزاده، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بین‌المللی، مشهد.
14- Valigholizadeh, A., 2015, pattern recognition geopolitical crises (with emphasis on Nagorno-Karabakh conflict), Institute for Strategic Studies, Tehran.
ولی قلی‌زاده، علی، 1394، الگوی شناخت بحران های ژئوپلیتیکی (با تأکید بر بحران قره‌باغ)، پژوهشکدة مطالعات راهبردی، تهران.
 
منابع انگلیسی
15.Arreguin-Toft, I., 2001, How the weak win wars: a theory of asymmetric conflict, International Security, Vol. 26. No.1, pp. 297-298.
16. Booth, K. and Nicholas J. W.,2008, The Security Dilemma; Fear, Cooperation & Trust in World Politics, Macmillan Palgrave, New York.
17. Brummett, P.,1999, The Ottoman Empire, Venice, and the question of enduring rivalries, In: Thompson WR (ed) Great Power Rivalries. The University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.
18. Caccels, A,2006, Ideology and International Relations in the Modern world, Routledge, London.
19. Cohen, S. B, 2009, Geopolitics: The Geography of International Relations, Published by Rowman & Littlefield, New York and London.
20. Colaresi M., Rasler, K. and Thompson, W., 2007, Strategic Rivalries in World Politics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
21. Copley, G. R., 2000, Re-Visiting the Discipline of Grand Strategy. Defense and Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy, Vol. 5, No.2.
22. Dalby, T and Routledge, S., 1994, The Geopolitics Reader, London, Routledge.
23. Diehl, P.,1998, Introduction: an overview and some theoretical guidelines. In: The Dynamics of Enduring Rivalries, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL and Chicago, IL.
24. Diehl, P., Goertz, G. and Saeedi, D., 2005, Theoretical specifications of enduring rivalries: applica­tions to the India–Pakistan case. In: Paul TV (ed) The India–Pakistan Rivalry: An Enduring Rivalry, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
25. Diehl, P. and Goertz, G., 2000, War and Peace in International Rivalry, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI
26. Dreyer, D.R., 2014, Unifying conceptualizations of interstate rivalry: a min- max approach, Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journals Permissions.nav, DOI: 10.1177/0010836713519980 cac.sagepub.com
27. Fidelity. 2015,Stock Market Outlook, a sample outlook report by a brokerage house. https://www.fidelity.com.
28. Flint, C.,2011, Introduction to Geopolitics, Routledge, New York and London.
29. Fokuyama, F.,1991, Changed Days for Ruritania’s Dictator, The Guardian, 8 April.
30. Freeden, R., 2004, Ideology: A very short introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
31. Goertz, G. and Diehl, P.F.,1993, Enduring rivalries: theoretical constructs and empirical patterns, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 37, No.2, pp. 147-171.
32. Goertz, G. and Diehl, P.F., 2000, (Enduring) rivalries, In: Midlarsky MI (ed) Handbook of War Studies II. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
33. Goertz, G., Bradford, J. and Paul, D., 2005, Maintenance Processes in International Rivalries, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 49, No.5, pp. 742-769.
34. Ingram, E.,1999, Great Britain and Russia. In: Thompson WR (ed) Great Power Rivalries, The University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.
35. Levy, J.S.,1999, The rise and decline of the Anglo-Dutch rivalry, 1609–1689, In: Thompson WR (ed) Great Power Rivalries. The University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.
36. Loo, B., 2003, Geography and Strategic Stability, Journal of Strategic Studies, 26, I. March.
37. Mackinder, H.J.,1919, Democratic Ideals and Reality, Constable, London.
38. Maoz, Z. and Mor, B.D., 2002, The Strategic Evolution of Enduring International Rivalries, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
39. Maoz, Z. and Mor, B.D., 1998, Learning, preference change, and the Evolution of strategic rival­ries, In: The Dynamics of Enduring Rivalries, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.
40. Mitchell, S.M. and Thies, C.G., 2011, Issue rivalries. Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 28, No. 3,
41. Murphy, Alexander., 2015, Nationalism, sovereignty, social constructs, humanights, http://www.exploringgeopolitics.org/interview_murphy_alexander_nationalism_sovereignty_social_constructs_human_rights_geopolitical_concepts_ideas_imagination/.
42. O Tuathail, G., 1998, Introduction, in The Geopolitics Reader, ed, Gearoid O Tuathail, Simon Dalby, and Paul Routledge, Routledge, London.
43. Odom, W., 1993, America,s Military Revolution, American University Press,Washangton, DC.
44. Parker, G.,1988, Geopolitics: Past, Present and Future, Pinter, London.
45. Paul, T.V., 2005, Causes of the India–Pakistan enduring rivalry, In: Paul TV (ed) The India–Pakistan Rivalry: An Enduring Rivalry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
46. Pesqueux, Y., 2002, Idology and organization, Author Manuscript, Developing Philosophy of Management- Crossing Frontiers, United Kingdom, Oxford.
47. Posen, B., 1984, The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany between the World Wars, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, New York.
48. Prescott, J.R.V., 1990, Political frontiers and boundaries, Routledge, London.
49. Rosecrance, R. and A. A. Stein, Eds.,1993, The Domestic Bases of Grand Strategy, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, New York.
50.Spence, D. H., 2012, Tied to Conflict: The Causes and Consequences of Rivalry Linkage, PhD diss., University of Tennessee.
51. Thies, C., 2001, A social psychological approach to enduring rivalries, Political Psychology, Vol.22, No.4, pp. 693-725.
52. Thompson, W., 1995, Principal Rivalries. Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 39, No.2, pp.???.
53.Thompson, W., 2001, Identifying rivals and rivalries in world politics, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 45, No.4, pp. 557-586.
54.Valeriano, B., 2012, Becoming rivals: the process of rivalry development, In: Vasquez, J.A. (ed) What Do We Know About War? (2nd ed). Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD.
55. Vasquez, J.A.,1993, The War Puzzle, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
56. Vasquez, J.A., 1996, Distinguishing rivals that go to war from those that do not: a quantitative comparative case study of the two paths to war. International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 40, No.4. pp 531-558
57. Vasquez, J., Karen, P., and Yijia, W., 2004, Multiparty Disputes and the Probability of War, 1816-1992. Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 21, No.2
58. Walsh, E., 1944, Geopolitics and International Morals, In Compass of the World, ed. H. W. Weigert and V. Stefansson, 12–39, Macmillan, New York.
58. Waltz, K., 1979. Theory of International Politics, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Human Geography Research
Volume 50, Issue 1
April 2018
Pages 199-216

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 04 November 2016
  • Revise Date: 11 June 2017
  • Accept Date: 12 June 2017

Share

How to cite

Statistics