عنوان مقاله [English]
The nature of the global imperial system and the military approach to geopolitics encouraged the twentieth century rival powers of the world to get control of the Heartland to ensure their security in the geopolitical and geostrategic regions of the world. In this period, the imposition of instability in southwest Asia was due to the fear of the influence of competing powers and the use of the region to reinforce their dominance in the world.
Southwest Asia as a subset of the international system is a multifaceted example of the modern world order and the basic question is: how will the development and structuring of the south-west Asia region affect the establishment of the global economic system and the coherence and stability of the global geopolitical system?
The present paper has theoretical, applied and developmental dimensions, and is based on descriptive-analytic research. Data collection was done by library and documentary method, and analysis of the findings was done qualitatively and inferential.
Results and discussion
According to Wallerstein, the trajectory of the global empire was the ultimate deficiency of its power to maintain a vast empire from a single political center, while the global economic trend is more dynamic because it creates competitive relationships among a large number of governments. Wallerstein and Taylor see the end of the global empire as the economic deployment as an alternative to political power at the top of the global system, and Cohen's systemic perspective places the system as the dominant component of the hegemonic power substitution.
Cohen has a special interest in the ability of regional economic to end the instability and fragility of unstable regions and fragile strips. One of the capabilities of regional Ecumenies in the era of globalization is to strengthen and accelerate the return process of the divergent border concept to the convergent notion of the frontier. Borders that are the product of the modern era determine the limits of the political realms of the states and look at the interior, but the frontiers are looking out.
Regional Ecumeny in the Westphalian context is the purpose of colonial plans to prevent the emergence of geopolitical regions, and in the post-Austrian space, they are to become the focal point of the dialectical interaction and the coherence of the components of the global system.
The process of globalization and the need to establish and continue the dialectical cooperation between the two eastern and western parts, promotes the geopolinomic location of Southwest Asia, along with its new definition of the heartland of energy.
The main problem in the Southwest Asia is the separation of the national eco-munitions and the densest areas of population concentration and economic activity from one another into the presence of mountains, plateaus and deserts. In the meantime, there are three propositions in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Alexandria, and the borders of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, which are related to the beyond the national borders.
Another area extending from Gwadar and Jiwani Pakistan to Chabahar and Jask is a strategic and crossroads that can turn into a regional political economy and global political economy.
On the other hand, with the formation of a new region (Euro- Mediterranean), the major strategic and economic responsibilities of the maritime area in these territories will be transferred from the United States to coastal Europ; and the movement of South-West Asia and Mediterranean Europe The formation of a joint geostrategic area could be of greatest help to the health of the globalization process.
With the diversification of investments throughout the world's corridors, Southwest Asia is becoming the centerpiece of global integration of global geopolitical sub-systems, and it displays its geotechnical heartland feature in the design of the new Silk Road.
Connecting the rail network of the Mediterranean region with the Mediterranean Sea through the ports of Syria and Lebanon will have many economic benefits to the stability of economy and regional and global security. On the other hand, the ground distance between the two Persian Gulf and Mediterranean seas is considered to be an area between the two eastern and western hemisphere. The connection of the two seas with the construction of the international waterway facilitates the promotion of the role of the new intercontinental geostrategic role in ensuring the global system coherence.
In terms of energy, the UNIDO (1994) proposal is most consistent with the need to enhance the global role of the region. In this plan, the construction of the world's largest gas liquefaction terminal in Chabahar and the construction of an intercontinental energy pipeline have been proposed in the framework of the idea of global energy security that transports South Asia and Central Asia through Southwest Asia, from both South and North Connect the Mediterranean.
Instead of hegemony, emphasis of the system is on the dialectical interaction of the sub-systems as the major difference between the global economic system and the global imperial system. In this framework, the urgency of emphasizing the unity of the origins of human civilization is evident in the balance between dialectics between the parts of the world Island, and from this perspective, the World Hartland Supplementary Ural-Digital Region is considered to be the most important geostrategic area of the world. In this way, the great difference of the world economic system with the global imperial system manifests itself at the end of the global heartland instability and promotes the role of Southwest Asia in global change from a secondary role to a primary role. Most of the world's gas resources are connected to the consumer markets through the southern route, and its transit route to Israel can be overcome with partial repair of the proposed route.
28. Aghabakhshi, A., and Afsharirad, M., 2010, Dictionary of Politics, Chapar Publisher, Tehran. (In Persian)
29. Aazami, H., 2006, Geopolitical Weight and Regional Power (Case Study: Sout West of Asia), Tehran, Geopolitics Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 3 and 4, PP. 119 -154. (In Persian)
30. Ja'fari, A., 2003, Gitashenasi -Ye- Novin -E- Keshvarha, Gitashenasi Geigraphical and Cartographic Institute, Tehran.(In Persian)
31. Hafeznia, M 2007, A New Cancept of the Heartland, Tehran, Geopolitics Quarterly Foreign, Vol. 3, No. 8, PP. 1- 6. (In Persian)
32. Hafeznia, M., 2011, Principles and Concepts of Geopolitic,Third Edition, Papeli Publisher, Mashhad. (In Persian)
33. Rabbani, R., and Vahida, F., 2005, Urban Sociology, The Samt Publications, Tehran. (In Persian)
34. Razavian, M. T.,1979, Middle East (Book1,Geographic Information), Shahid Beheshti University Press, Tehran. (In Persian)
35. Rahbar, A. A., and Akhond Mehrizi, M., 2008, The Culchural Potentials of Convergence in Sout West of Asia, Tehran, Rahbordyas Journal, No. 12, PP. 142-160. (In Persian)
36. Sarie'olghalam, M., 2016, International System and Modern Geopolitics In Middle East, Tehran, Iranian Political Science Assocoation,Vol. 12, No. 1, PP. 101-140. (In Persian)
37. Salimi, H., 2009, An Analysis of the Applicability of Region to Sout West Asia,Tehran, Geopolitics Quarterly Foreign, Vol. 5, No. 2, PP. 116-137. (In Persian)
38. Seifzadah, H., 2010, Regional Convergence in Foreign Relations of Iran, Tehran, International Quarterly Foreign Relations, Vol. 2, No. 5, PP. 11-39. (In Persian)
39. Simbar, R., 2009, Iran and Regionalism in Sout West Asia, Tehran, Theoritical Politics Journal, Vol. 4, No. 5, PP. 113-128. (In Persian)
40. Shakibayi, A., and Bata, F., 2009, Economic Regional Convergence in South West Asia, Tehran, Iranian Journal of Trade Stadies, No. 53, PP. 23-47. (In Persian)
41. Shahabi, S., and Abbasi, F., 2017, Economic Globalization and Diplomatic Regimes Constanting in Arabic Middle East, International Quarterly Foreign Relations, Tehran, Vol. 9, No. 1, PP. 177-202. (In Persian)
42. Sheikhol'eslami,V., and Akhondfaraj, A., 2001, The World Geography, Talif. Sch, Tehran. (In Persian)
43. Ezzati, E., 2007, The New Theories of Political Geography, Ghoomes Publisher, Tehran. (In Persian)
44. Ghasemi, F., 2006, Principles of International Relations, The Mizan Publications, Tehran. (In Persian)
45. Ghasemi, F., 2012, Globalization and Models of Regional Security in the Global System, Geopolitics Quarterly,Vol. 8, No. 3, PP. 60-90. (In Persian)
46. Kemp, G., and Harkavy, R., 1997, Strategic Geography and the Changing Middle East, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
47. Cohen, S. B., 2002, Geopolitics of the World System; Hanham. Md: Rowman and Littlefild, C 2003.
48. Griffiths, M., 2005, Encyclopedia of International Relations and Global Politica, Routledge.
49. Moshirzadeh, H., 2007, Development in International Relations Theories, The Samt Publications, Tehran. (In Persian)
50. Mossalanejad, A., 2014, Institutionalism and Globalisation,Tehran University Press, Tehran. (In Persian)
51. Maghdasi -E- Bayari, M., 1982, Ahsan -Ol- Taghasim Fi Ma'refat -Ol- Aghalim, Editor: Monzavi. A, Iranian Translators and Interpreters Association, Tehran. (In Persian)
52. Muir, R., 1975, Political Geography: A New Introduction, Macmillan Education, London
53. Mir-Heydar, D., 2006, The Foundation of Political Geography, The Samt Publications, Tehran. (In Persian)
54. Hettne, B, et al, 1999, New Regionalism and the Future of Security and Development, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
55. Cohen, S. B., 1963, Geostrategical and Geopolitical Regions - Geography and Politics in a World Divided -Random House.
56. Mackinder, H., 1904, The Geographical Pivot of History, The Geographical Jurnal, 23, No. 4, PP. 421- 437.
57. Mackinder, H., 1919, Democratic Ideals and Realty, Henry Holt and Company, NewYork.
58. Mackinder, H., 1943, The Round World and the Peace, Foreign Affairs, No. 21, PP. 595-605.
59. OPEC Statistical Buletin, 1994.
60. Taylor, P., 1986, The World-Systems Project, In R. J. Jonston and P.J.Taylor (Eds), A World in Crisis (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).
61. Taylor, P., 1989, Political Geography, 2d Ed. Harlow, England; Longman Scientific and Thechnical; NewYork: Wiley.
62. Wallerstein, I., 1974, Coparative Studies in Society and History, Cambridge University Press.
63. Wallerstein, I., 1979, The Capitalist World-Economy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.