تبیین نظری بسترها و زمینه ‏های روابط ژئوپلیتیک و ارائة مدل پیشنهادی

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

2 استادیار گروه جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

3 استاد گروه جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

هدف از این پژوهش الگویابی مهم‏ترین بسترها و زمینه‏های روابط ژئوپلیتیک میان واحدهای سیاسی است. روابط ژئوپلیتیک روابط میان واحدهای سیاسی در مقیاس‏های ملی، منطقه‏ای، و جهانی است. بیشتر مفاهیم در رابطه با روابط ژئوپلیتیک معمولاً فقط به ارائة تعریف بسنده کرده‏اند و مشکل یافتن الگوهایی است تا معنای کیفی به روابط ژئوپلیتیکی بدهد. بدین منظور، نخست باید مجموعه‏ای از عوامل و مؤلفه‏ها را تعریف کرد که به روابط ژئوپلیتیکی منجر می‏شود. شناسایی مهم‏ترین بسترها و زمینه‏های روابط ژئوپلیتیکی در این پژوهش بر اساس مطالعة نظریه‏ها و رویکردهایی است که نظریه‏پردازان و اندیشمندان جغرافیای سیاسی، ژئوپلیتیک، علوم سیاسی، روابط بین‏الملل، و محیط ‏زیست ارائه کرده‏اند. روش تحقیق در این پژوهش بر اساس هدف نظری و بر اساس ماهیت توصیفی‏- تحلیلی است. نتایج حاصل از پژوهش نشان می‏دهد که مهم‏ترین بسترها و زمینه‏های روابط ژئوپلیتیک میان کشورها بر اساس مطالعة نظریه‏ها و رویکرد‏ها در چهار بُعد هیدروپلیتیک، ژئوپلیتیک، ژئواکونومیک، و ژئوکالچر قرار دارد. در این میان بسترها و زمینه‏های هیدروپلیتیک شامل «رودخانه‏های بین‏المللی»، «مرزهای دریایی مشترک»، و «عامل زیست‏محیطی» بسترها و زمینه‏های ژئوپلیتیک شامل «مسائل سرزمینی»، «موقعیت جغرافیایی»، «هژمونی منطقه‏ای»، «رویکرد امنیتی»، «وزن ژئوپلیتیکی»، «پیمان‏ها و ائتلاف‏ها»، «کدهای ژئوپلیتیک»، و «همسایگی و تعداد همسایگان» است. بسترها و زمینه‏های ژئواکونومیک شامل «منابع زیرزمینی و فسیلی» و «تنگه‏های بین‏المللی»  بوده و بسترها و زمینه‏های ژئوکالچر نیز شامل «تعدد گروه‏های قومی در کشورهای همجوار»، «پیوند مذهبی با کشورهای پیرامونی»، «عامل تاریخی و تمدنی»، و «عامل ایدئولوژیک‏گرایی» است. هر کدام از این مؤلفه‏ها در چندین نظریه و رویکرد مورد تأکید قرار گرفته‏اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Theoretical Specification of Aspects of Geopolitical Relations and a Proposed Model

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mehdi Mousavi 1
  • Bahador Zarei 2
  • Zahra Pishgahifard 3
  • Marjan Badiee Azandehie 2
  • Mahmood Vasegh 2
1 univercity of tehran
2 university of tehran
3 University of Tehran
چکیده [English]

Abstract
Geopolitical relations are relationships between states and countries based on geographical contexts. In fact, the difference between geopolitical relations and political relations is the geographical background of geopolitical relations. In geopolitical relations, contexts are relationships based on geographical components and contexts. The purpose of this study is to model the most important geopolitical contexts. The research method in this study is based on theoretical purpose and descriptive-analytical nature. The most important geopolitical contexts were identified based on the study of nineteen theories and approaches presented by theorists and scholars of political geography, geopolitics, political science, international relations, and the environment. Then, the most important contexts and areas of geopolitical relations are presented in five dimensions of "interaction, opposition, competition, influence and domination" and finally a model is proposed for the contexts and fields of geopolitical relations.
Introduction
The results show that the most important geopolitical contexts and fields include geo-cultural contexts (ethnic groups in neighboring countries, religious affiliation with peripheral countries, historical and civilization factor, ideological factor), contexts and fields of Geopolitics (territorial issues, geographic location, regional hegemony, security approach, geopolitical weight, alliances, regional geopolitical structure, geopolitical codes, neighborhoods and the number of neighbors), geo-economic contexts (Underground and fossil resources, international straits),fields and contexts of hydro-politics ( International rivers, common maritime boundaries and environmental factors).
One of the most important issues in geopolitics is "geopolitical relations". A geopolitical relation is the study and analysis of the effects of geographical components on the relations between states and international relations.
Geopolitical relations are relationships between states and countries based on geographical contexts. In fact, the difference between geopolitical relations and political relations is the geographical background of geopolitical relations. In geopolitical relations, contexts are relationships based on geographical components and contexts.
In general, geopolitical relations are those that are established between states and governments and political actors based on a combination of factors of politics, power and geography. Therefore, in order to understand the specific phenomena that occur in geopolitical relations between countries, geographical factors need to be taken into account. Geography plays a pivotal role in geopolitical relations and provides the impetus for shaping the political will of the relationship as well as influencing the level of actor power (Hafez Nia, 2006, 362). On the other hand, dominant ways of behavior between states, because of various types of relationships, vary in the range of patterns including 'interaction', 'domination', 'influence' and 'competition' and 'confrontation'. Today, geopolitics, geopolitical relations and their analysis are mostly done at the transnational scale.
Therefore, the study of the pattern of geopolitical relations on three international, regional and global scales can be discussed. But what matters most is the context and of geopolitical relations. In this research, the most important contexts of geopolitical relations are studied based on the study of theories and approaches and finally the contexts for the dimensions of geopolitical relations as well as the proposed model for the fields of geopolitical relations between countries are presented.
Methodology
This research seeks to theoretically explain the contexts and fields of geopolitical relations between countries. From Newman's point of view, by referring to more general ideas and abstract principles in terms of cause and effect, theoretical explanations describe why a particular event occurs.
The purpose of this study is to model the most important geopolitical contexts. The research method in this study is based on theoretical purpose and descriptive-analytical nature.
In terms of the purpose, this research is basic. In basic research, the purpose is to discover the facts and to understand the phenomena that lead to the increasing human knowledge. In this research, identifying the components and areas that influence its geopolitical relations is known as a basic research. The components and contexts were identified based on the review of nineteen theories and approaches presented by theorists and scholars of political geography, geopolitics, political science, international relations, and the environment. Research method was descriptive-analytic and the data were collected through library resources. The data were also analyzed qualitatively. Qualitative research is introspective, political, subjective - reflective - interpretive, theory generating and human-centered. The main objective of the study is to explore the conceptual factors (backgrounds and contexts) that influence the formation of geopolitical relationships.
Results and discussion
On one hand, some theories and approaches have emphasized on one component in geopolitical formation and relationships, such as Huntington's Clash of Civilizations , Geo-economy's (Edward Lutwac's) theory, Muhammad Khatami's Civilization's Dialogue, and the theory of Louise Richardson.
Some theories and approaches included several components, such as: Mackinder's Heartland Theory, Spykman's Rimland Theory, ‎Alfred Thayer Mahan's Maritime Power, Wallerstein's World System Theory, " Theory of Power Systems (Brzezinski), Kaplan's theory of the Chaos of the Future, Peter Hagget's Theory, Thomas Homer Dixon's Theory, Regional Conflict Theory (Jeffrey Camp and David Harvey), Theory of Conflict (John Robert Prescott), and the Approach to Geopolitical Conflict (John Collins).
The study of theories and approaches shows that each of the theories emphasizes on one or more of the geopolitical, geo-economic, hydro-politics, and geo-cultural components, and no theory encompasses all four components together.
Relations between countries took different forms along the temporal dimensions and geographical characteristics of countries. The dimensions of geopolitical relations between countries vary in terms of interaction, competition, domination, influence and opposition.
Conclusion
The results show that the most important geopolitical contexts and fields include geo-cultural contexts (ethnic groups in neighboring countries, religious affiliation with peripheral countries, historical and civilization factor, ideological factor), contexts and fields of Geopolitics (territorial issues, geographic location, regional hegemony, security approach, geopolitical weight, alliances, regional geopolitical structure, geopolitical codes, neighborhoods and the number of neighbors), geo-economic contexts (Underground and fossil resources, international straits),fields and contexts of hydro-politics ( International rivers, common maritime boundaries and environmental factors).

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • geopolitical relations
  • geo culture
  • geoeconomics
  • hydropolitics
  • geopolitics

مراجع

  1. اتوتایل، ژئاروید،1380، اندیشه‏های ژئوپلیتیک در قرن بیستم، ترجمة محمدرضا حافظ‏نیا و هاشم نصیری، تهران، انتشارات دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بین‏المللی.
  2. اطاعت، جواد، 1376، ژئوپلیتیک و سیاست خارجی ایران، تهران: سفیر.
  3. اشلفی، مجید عباسی، 1390، منطق رفتار سیاسی و روند اسلام­گرایی در جامعه سیاسی عربستان، فصلنامه سیاست خارجی، س25، ش 2، صص 475 -498
  4. ایوانز، گراهام و نونام، جقری، 1381، فرهنگ روابط بین‏الملل، ترجمة حمیرا مشیرزاده و حسن شریقی، تهران:‏ نشر میزان.
  5. برادن، کتلین و شلی، فرد، 1387، ژئوپلیتیک فراگیر، ترجمة علیرضا فرشچی و حمیدرضا رهنما، تهران: انتشارات دانشکدة فرماندهی ستاد دورة عالی جنگ.
  6. بوزان، بری و ویور، الی، 1386، چارچوبی تازه برای تحلیل امنیت، ترجمة علیرضا طیب، تهران: انتشارات پژوهشکدة مطالعات راهبردی.
  7. جعفری، امیرعلی، 1390، رقابت برای کسب هژمونی و روابط تنش‏آلود ایران و عربستان، پایان‏نامة کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه تهران.
  8. جعفری ولدانی، اصغر، 1389، چالش‏ها و منازعات در خاورمیانه، تهران: پژوهشکدة مطالعات راهبردی.
  9. جونز، مارتین، 1386، مقدمه­ای بر جغرافیای سیاسی، ترجمه زهرا پیشگاهی­فرد و رسول اکبری، تهران، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
  10. حافظ‏نیا، محمدرضا، 1385، اصول و مفاهیم ژئوپلیتیک، مشهد: پاپلی.
  11. حسین‏پور پویان، حسین، 1390، تبیین روابط ژئوپلیتیک در مناطق مطالعة موردی: شبه‏قارة هند، رسالة دکتری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
  12. حسین‏پور پویان، حسین، 1392، تبیین مؤلفه‏های جغرافیایی و ژئوپلیتیکی روابط در مناطق ژئوپلیتیکی، فصل‏نامة ژئوپلیتیک، س 9، ش 2، صص 113–
  13. حلیم زمهریر، ابوالفضل‏، 1390، تضاد منافع ایران و امریکا در انرژی خلیج‏ فارس، تهران: مرکز اسناد انقلاب اسلامی.
  14. دوتروئی، جیمز و فالتزگراف، رابرت ،1383، نظریه­های متعارض در روابط بین­الملل، ترجمه وحید بزرگی و علیرضا طیب، تهران: نشر قومس.
  15. رفیع، حسین ، 1394، تاثیر نفوذ وهابیت در پاکستان بر روابط این کشور با جمهوری اسلامی ایران، فصلنامه مطالعات روابط بین الملل، زمستان، س 8، ش 32، صص 140-158.
  16. روشندل‏، جلیل، 1387، تعارضات ساختاری در منطقة خلیج فارس، تهران: مرکز مطالعات خاورمیانه.
  17. زرقانی، سیدهادی و صالح‌آبادی، ریحانه‏، 1392، مقدمه‏ای بر شناخت مرزهای بین‏المللی، مجموعه مقالات اولین همایش ملی ژئوپلیتیک جنوب غرب آسیا.
  18. قربانی‏نژاد، ریباز، 1392، الگویابی سرچشمه‏های ژئوپلیتیکی تنش در روابط کشورها (مطالعة موردی: آسیای جنوب غربی)، رسالة دکتری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
  19. قوام، سیدعبدالعلی‏، 1384، روابط بین‏الملل: نظریه و رویکردها، تهران: سمت.
  20. لشکری تفرشی، احسان، 1391، تبیین نظری مفهوم مکان‏ها و مناطق استراتژیک‏، رسالة دکتری دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
  21. مورگنتا، هانس. جی‏، 1374، سیاست‏ میان‏ملت‏ها، ترجمة حمیرا مشیرزاده، مشهد: دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بین‏المللی.
  22. نامی، محمدحسن و عباسی، علیرضا‏، 1389، ماهواره‏ها، عامل برتری کشورها در آینده، مجموعه مقالات چهارمین کنگرة ملی انجمن ژئوپلیتیک ایران، اسفند 1389، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
  23. نصرتی، شهریار، 1395، تدوین استراتژی همگرایی ایران با کشورهای پیرامونی در قرن بیست و یکم با رویکرد صلح پایدار، رسالة دکتری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات.
  24. واعظی، محمود‏، 1386، ژئوپلیتیک بحران در آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، تهران: انتشارات دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بین‏الملل وزارت امور خارجه.
  25. وایت، برایان و مایکل و لیتل، ریچارد، 1381، مسائل سیاست جهان، ترجمة سیدمحمدکمال سروریان، تهران: پژوهشکدة مطالعات راهبردی غیرانتفاعی.
  26. هاگت، پیتر‏، 1382، جغرافیا، ترکیبی نو، ترجمة شاپور گودرزی‏نژاد، تهران: سمت.
  27. Ototile, Jarwid, 2001, Geopolitical Thoughts in the Twentieth Century, translated by Mohammad Reza Hafez Nia and Hashem Nasiri, Tehran, Office of Political and International Studies.
  28. Etaat, Javad, 1997, Geopolitics and Foreign Policy of Iran, Tehran: Sefir.
  29. Ashlafi, Majid Abbasi, 2011, The Logic of Political Behavior and the Trend of Islamism in the Saudi Political Society, Foreign Policy Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 475-498
  30. Evans, Graham and Nonnam, Jageri, 2002, Culture of International Relations, translated by Homeyra Moshirzadeh and Hassan Shariqi. Tehran: Mizan Publication.
  31. Braden, Kathleen and Shelley, Fard, 2008, Inclusive Geopolitics, translated by Alireza Farshchi and Hamid Reza Rahnama. Tehran: Higher War Command Staff Publication.
  32. Bozan, Barry and Weaver, Ellie, 2007, A New Framework for Security Analysis, translated by Alireza Tayeb, Tehran: Strategic Studies Research Institute Publications.
  33. Jafari, Amir Ali, 2011, Competition for hegemony and strained Iran-Saudi relations, M.Sc., University of Tehran.
  34. Jafari Valdani, Asghar, 2010, Challenges and Conflicts in the Middle East, Tehran: Research Institute for Strategic Studies.
  35. Jones, Martin, 2007, Introduction to Political Geography, translated by Zahra Pishgahi-Fard and Rasoul Akbari, Tehran, University of Tehran Press.
  36. HafezNia, Mohammad Reza, 2006, Principles and Concepts of Geopolitics, Mashhad: Papoli.
  37. Hosseinpour Pouyan, Hossein, 2011, Explaining Geopolitical Relations in Case Study Areas: Indian Subcontinent, PhD Thesis, Tarbiat Modares University.
  38. Hosseinpour Pouyan, Hossein, 2013, Explaining the Geographical and Geopolitical Components of Geopolitical Relations, Geopolitics Quarterly, Ninth Year, No. 2.
  39. Halim Zemahir, Abolfazl, 2011, The Conflict of Interest between Iran and America in the Gulf Energy. Tehran: Islamic Revolution Documentation Center.
  40. Dotroei, James and Faltzgraf, Robert, 2004, Conflicting Theories in International Relations, translated by Vahid Bozorgi and Alireza Tayeb, Tehran: Qoms Publishing.
  41. Rafi, Hussein, 2015, The Impact of Wahhabism in Pakistan on the Relations of this Country with the Islamic Republic of Iran, Quarterly Journal of International Relations Studies, Winter, Vol. 8, No. 32, pp. 140-158.
  42. .Roshandel, Jalil, 2008, Structural Conflicts in the Persian Gulf, Tehran: Middle East Studies Center
  43. Zarghani, Seyed Hadi and Salehabadi, Reyhaneh, 2013, Introduction to Recognition of International Borders, Proceedings of the First National Conference on Geopolitics of Southwest Asia.
  44. Ghorbani Nejad, Ribbaz, 2013, Modeling Geopolitical Sources of Stress in Country Relations (Case Study: Southwest Asia), PhD Thesis, Tarbiat Modares University.
  45. Qavam, Seyyed Abdul Ali, 2005, International Relations: Theory and Approaches, Tehran: Samt publications.
  46. Lashkari Tafreshi, Ehsan, 2012, Theoretical explanation of the concept of places and strategic areas, treatise of Dr. Tarbiat Modares University.
  47. Morgenthau, Hans. Jay, 1995, Politics of Intermediaries, translated by Homeira Moshirzadeh, Mashhad: Office of Political and International Studies.
  48. Nami, Mohammad Hassan and Abbasi, Alireza, 2010, "atellites, a factor in the superiority of countries in the future, Proceedings of the Fourth National Congress of the Iranian Geopolitical Association, March 2011, Tarbiat Modares University.
  49. Nosrati, Shahriar, 2016, Development of Iran's Convergence Strategy with the Surrounding Countries in the Twenty-First Century with a Sustainable Peace Approach, PhD Thesis, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch.
  50. Vaezi, Mahmood, 2007, The Geopolitics of Crisis in Central Asia and the Caucasus, Tehran: Publications Office of the Department of Political and International Studies, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
  51. White, Brian, Michael and Little, Richard, 2002, World Politics Issues", translated by Seyed Mohammad Kamal Sarvarian, Tehran: Research Institute for Nonprofit Strategic Studies.
  52. Haggitt, Peter, 2003, Geography, New Combination, translated by Shapoor Goodarzi Nejad, Samat Publications.
  53. Agnew, Jhon, 2013, Geopolitics: Re-visioning World Politics. second ed., London: Routledge.
  54. Ashley, R., 2000, The Political Economy of War and Peace, London: Francis Pinter.
  55. Beckinsale, R.P, 1969, Rivers as political boundaries, Water, Earth and Man Magazine. London: No. 40, PP. 972-981
  56. Blacksell, M., 2006, Political Geography, Routledge.
  57. Braden, K. E. and Shelley, F., 2000, Engaging Geopolitics, England: Person Education Limited.
  58. Braumoeller, B., 2007, Statistics and Deadly Quarrels.The Ohio State University Department of Political Science. Political Science, 848.
  59. Cholley, A., 2002, Guide de l'Étudiant en Géographie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  60. Clapsa, K., 2016, Man, The State, and War, New York: Columbia University Press.
  61. Cohen, S.B., 2010, Geopolitics of the World System, Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
  62. Cohen, S.B., 2014, Geopolitics of the World System, Encyclopædia Britannica Online.
  63. Coogan, Tim Pat, 1996, The Troubles: Ireland's Ordeal1966-1996. Boulder, CO: Roberts Rinehart.
  64. Collins, J.,1998, Military Geography, Washington: Brassey.
  65. Coogan, T., 1996, The Troubles: Ireland's Ordeal1966-1996. Boulder, CO: Roberts Rinehart
  66. Deutsch, K., 1957, Political Community and the North Atlantic Area.
  67. Dodds, K., 2000, Geopolitical in a Changing World, England: Pearson Education Limited.
  68. Doncand,Anne Green,2004, Hydropolitics in the Middle East," Strategic Review 21, no. 2;england. plagrave macmill.
  69. Donna, N., 2015, Sea lane security and u.s maritime trade: cheakpoint as scare resorce, institute for national strategic studied, chapter
  70. Dugin, A., 1997, Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia. Moscow: Arctogaia.
  71. Gaddis, J. L., 1982, Startegies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security Policy, New York: Oxford University Press.
  72. Garfinkle, A., 2015, The Geopolitical Frame in the Contemporary Middle East, Published for the Foreign Policy Research Institute by Elsevier Ltd, July 14, P. 533.
  73. Garnett, J., 1987, Defense Policy Making, in John Baylis and others, Contemporary Strategy II, Holmes & Meier, New York.
  74. Girgin, Dogan, 2016, Analyzing of the Geopolitical Energy Confrontation in the Caucasus: Role of Iran, After Sanctions Were Lifted, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention.
  75. Griffiths, M.; O'Callaghan, T. and C. Roach, S. 2002, International Relations, the Key Concepts, Second Edition. London and New York: Routledge.
  76. Haye, B., 2002, Statistics Of  Deadly  Quarrdes. Durham: American Scientist, Vol. 9.
  77. Haynes, P., 2009, Al – Qaede, oil dependence and u.s forign policy; chapter three in security and global politics, London: Routledge.
  78. Huntington, Samuel, 1993, The Clash of Civilization?, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3.
  79. Kaplan, R., 1994, The coming Anarchy. Atlantic Monthly, February 1994. PP. 45-76
  80. Kemp, Geoffrey and Harkavy, Robert, 1997, Strategic Geography and the Changing. Publisher: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
  81. Levkov, S. and Makarenko, A., 2017, Geopolitical Relations in post ussr Europe as a subject of Mathematical modeling and control, London, UK.
  82. Lipest, Seymour Martin, 1991, Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics.
  83. Lszerwits, Terry, 1994, The earth summit: Are there any security Implications?. Arms.
  84. Mackinder, H.J., 2004, The Geographical Pivot of History (1904), The Geographical Journal, London, Vol. 170, No. 4.
  85. Martin Jones, Rhys Jones and Michael Woods., 2004, An Introduction to Political Geography: Space, Place and Politics, London: Routledge.
  86. Mearsheimer, Jhon , 2001, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York, London: Norton&Company.
  87. Morgan, M. P., 1997, Regional Security Complexes and Regional Orders, Regional Orders: Building Security in a New World edited by Patrick M. Morgan and David A Lake, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
  88. Navon, Kenneth Neal., 2010, Theory of international politics, The University of Michian.
  89. Neuman, L., 2006, Social Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches, London: Allyn and Bacon.
  90. Nieburg, H. L., 1996, Political Violence. The Behavioural Process. Medford, OR, U.S.A Publisher: St. Martins Press
  91. Parker, Geoffrey., 2016, The Geopolitics of Domination, Pulication by Routledge.
  92. Petsinger, Marianne, 2016, Geoeconomics Fellow in the US and Americas Programme at Chatham House.
  • , 2015, Impact of Climate Change on Migration from Vietnam to Russia as a Factor of Transformation of Geopolitical Relations, Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy.
  1. Prescott, J.R.V., 1987, The Geography of frountiers and boundaries. New Jersey, Pub: Taylor & Francis
  2. Rosamond, Ben., 2000, Theories of European Integration, London: Macmillan Press LTD.
  3. Scholvin, Soren., 2016, An Overview Of  Concepts  And  Empirical  Examples From International  Relations, Institute of Economic and Cultural Geography, University of Hanover.
  4. Soilen, Klaus Solberg, 2012, Geoeconomics, London. Publisher Bookboon. 61.
  5. Taylor, P. J. and Flint, C., 2000, Political Geography: World - economy, Nation - states and Locality, (fourth editioned.), London: Pearson Education.
  6. Taylor, P., 1993, Geopolitical World Orders. InP.Taylor, J (Ed.), Political Geography of the Twentieth Centur, London: Balhaven Press.
  7. Vandana ,Turton, and 2002, Water Wars: Privatization, Pollution, and Profit. Cambridge. MA. Publisher: South End Press. 158 pages
  8. 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.
  9. Valeriano, Brandon, 2003, The Steps To Rivilary:Power Politics  And  Rivilary  Formation, PhD Dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States.
  10. Barent, Imber , 1998, The Environment and International Relations. London: Routledge
  11. Homer-Dixon, Thomas, 1991, On the threshold: Environmental changes as causes of acute conflict. International Security, 16(2). P:76-116
  12. bp.com/statistical review 2018.
  13. britannica.com/ Encyclopedia Britannica 2018.
  14. merriam-webster2019.com

 

 

 

 

پژوهشهای جغرافیای انسانی
دوره 53، شماره 3
مهر 1400
صفحه 811-832

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 24 مهر 1398
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 15 اردیبهشت 1399
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 15 اردیبهشت 1399

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار