گسترش قلمرو ناتو در مناطق بالتیک، دریای سیاه، و اروپای شرقی و پیامدهای آن برای جمهوری اسلامی ایران

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشیار جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

3 دکترای جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

سازمان پیمان آتلانتیک شمالی (ناتو) اکنون شانزدهمین همسایة مرزهای آبی و خاکی جمهوری اسلامی ایران است. این سازمان با تأکید بر راهبرد تأمین امنیت منطقة جغرافیایی یوروآتلانتیک با حضور پویا در خارج از منطقه به قلمروسازی در مناطق مختلف جهان از جمله در مناطق پیرامونی جمهوری اسلامی ایران پرداخته است. حضور فراجغرافیایی ناتو در مرزهای شمالی جمهوری اسلامی ایران با تأکید بر مناطق بالتیک، دریای سیاه، و اروپای شرقی موضوع اصلی پژوهش حاضر است. نویسندگان تلاش دارند به این پرسش اصلی پاسخ دهند که ناتو چگونه در حال قلمروسازی در مناطق ژئوپلیتیکی شمال دور جمهوری اسلامی ایران است؟ با روش توصیفی‏- تحلیلی و با استفاده از روش گردآوری اطلاعات کتابخانه‏ای، اینترنتی، و رسانه‏ای، فرضیة اصلی مقاله عبارت است از اینکه «ناتو تلاش دارد برای حفظ و گسترش حاکمیت ارزش‏های لیبرال‏- دموکراسی و بازار آزاد به‏عنوان موتور محرک نظام جهانی معاصر با بهره‏بردن از راهبردهای گسترش مرزهای سیاسی رسمی، گسترش مرزهای سیاسی غیررسمی، مأموریت‏های بشردوستانه، همکاری‏های دفاعی و امنیتی و گسترش دفاتر سازمانی و اداری، قلمرو خود را با حضور در مناطق ژئوپلیتیکی شمال دور جمهوری اسلامی ایران گسترش دهد». یافته‏های پژوهش حاضر نشان می‏دهد افزایش همکاری‏های ناتو با همسایگان جمهوری اسلامی ایران در منطقه‏های ژئوپلیتیکی شمالِ دور امنیت ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران را با پیامدهای مختلف یک، نظامی و امنیتی، دو، سیاسی، سه، اقتصادی و تجاری، و چهار، فرهنگی و اجتماعی مواجه می‏کند. بنابراین، ضروری است مسئولان ذی‏ربط در جمهوری اسلامی ایران توجه به فعالیت‏های این سازمان در مناطق ژئوپلیتیکی شمال دور کشور را مورد توجه جدی قرار دهند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Expansion of NATO territory in the Baltic, Black Sea and Eastern Europe and its consequences for the Islamic Republic of Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • M. Vasegh 1
  • MohamadBagher Ghalibaf 2
  • MAJID GHOLAMI 3
1 Head of the Department of Political Geography, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran
2 tehran university
3 Political Geography Department, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran
چکیده [English]

چکیده انگلیسی مبسوط دوم
Extended Abstract:
Introduction
After the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1949, while aiming to keep the Russians second-guessing, the Americans deeply involved and the Germans neutral, NATO has so far shifted its security priorities twice. The first shift in priority came in 1999 when Warsaw Pact’s priority shifted to identifying new threats and cooperation and association with former enemies, and the second time in 2010 resulting in its concurrent accompaniment by the priorities of collective defense, crisis management, and common security. The recent shift led to the establishment of the third generation of NATO, which leads the organization more than before to attend outside its traditional region. By providing the most comprehensive interpretation of its existence, NATO is present in all parts of the world and engages in various military, security, political, social, cultural, environmental, scientific, and even sports activities with various political units. This trans-geographical presence of NATO, which is accompanied by the creation of formal organizational structures, has led the organization to be directly and indirectly present at all borders of Islamic Republic of Iran; a presence that has irreparable effects on national security and the regional role of Islamic Republic of Iran; not only in the short term but in the future as well.
Accordingly, the subject matter of this article is to examine the quality in which the boundaries of this organization are expanding in the geopolitical regions in the far north of Islamic Republic of Iran; where the authors are trying to proceed using the concept of geopolitical territoriality. The main question of the research is “How is NATO expanding their territory in the Baltic region, Black Sea, and Eastern Europe?” Areas in which post-soviet union power vacuum, enormous sources of energy, and racial and ethnic diversity have gained them double-fold significance. In response to the present question, the authors believe that "NATO is trying to preserve and extend the sovereignty of liberal values of democracy and the free market as the driving force of contemporary global order by utilizing the strategies of expanding official political boundaries, expanding unofficial political boundaries, humanitarian missions, defense and security cooperation and the expansion of organizational and administrative offices; further expand its territory through its presence in the Black Sea, Russia and the geopolitical regions of the Baltic Sea and Eastern Europe in the far north of Islamic Republic of Iran.” It is noteworthy to mention regarding the research background, that despite a general lack of geopolitical studies on NATO in domestic literature; a lack of research and studies focusing on its new approaches based on different regions and countries is strongly felt.
Methodology
The type of research is fundamental. The method of data collection is library resources and documentary research while the data analysis method is deductive reasoning and the data evaluation approach is based on critical rationality.
Results and Discussion
In a geopolitical clarification, NATO is expanding its territory; in other words, NATO is trying to expand its geographical value outside the region to preserve and expand the sovereignty of liberal values of democracy and the free market; as the driving force behind the contemporary global order and this means territoriality. Accordingly, the review of NATO's documents and performance and its leaders’ speeches show that they have adopted approaches to this end, which include:
A: Expansion of official political boundaries
B: Expansion of participatory political boundaries
C: Defense and security cooperation
D: Expansion of organizational and administrative offices
Conclusion
The planning and operation of NATO's territorialization
and territoriality projects as a military-security institution that pursues the protection of liberal values of democracy and the free market, which is in clear contradiction to the slogans and objectives of the Islamic Revolution of Islamic Republic of Iran; communicates the fact that these agendas are manifestly in conflict with the discourse of the Islamic Republic as well as the geopolitical territorialization of our country. It is evident that neighboring this organization, which is not only present on the northern borders of Islamic Republic of Iran, but also on the eastern, southern and western borders, has its consequences for Islamic Republic of Iran's national security. Given these interpretations, the expansion of NATO's sphere of influence in the geopolitical areas of Russia, the Baltic region, the Black Sea and Eastern Europe, although above-mentioned areas do not share a common border with our country, even so, our country’s national security faces serious challenges in different dimensions.
- Political consequences
- Trade and economic consequences
- Military and security implications
- Cultural and social consequences
Finally, the authors recommend that attention be paid to the national security of the country so that the pertinent authorities show more attention and supervision to the consequences of the organization's geopolitical territorialization and therefore the following operational proposals are presented in this regard:
- Bilateral and multilateral talks with NATO official and unofficial members located on the northern borders of Islamic Republic of Iran on the subject of “The damages of NATO’s expansive territorialization to the national security of Islamic Republic of Iran and the challenges lying ahead of the bilateral or multilateral relations”;
- Strengthening our security and intelligence presence in the countries of the northern region of Islamic Republic of Iran, in which NATO is active, with the aim of monitoring and observing the activities of this organization;
- Holding specialized and international conferences on the issue of the damages of NATO's territorialization in the northern borders of Islamic Republic of Iran and its effect on increasing in the crises of Central Asia, the Caucasus and the Caspian region, and further efforts to introduce NATO and its multiple scientific, cultural, political, economical, military, social and artistic elements in Islamic Republic of Iran's scientific and academic literature has been seriously neglected.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • NATO
  • Reterritorializing
  • Iran
  • Baltic
  • Russia
حافظ‏نیا، محمدرضا، 1392، اصول و مفاهیم ژئوپلیتیک، مشهد: پاپلی.
کولایی، الهه؛ ماندانا تیشه‏یار و محمدی، محمود، 1386، سازمان پیمان آتلانتیک شمالی؛ دگرگونی در مأموریت‏ها و کارکردها، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
کولایی، الهه و گودرزی، مهناز، 1392، دریای خزر؛ چالشها و چشم‏اندازها، تهران: نشر میزان.
رومینا، ابراهیم، 1392، «تحلیلی بر مناطق ژئوپلیتیکی در جنوب‏غرب آسیا»، همایش ملی ژئوپلیتیک جنوب‏غرب آسیا.
محسنی، محمدرضا، 1392، پان‏ترکیسم، ایران و آذربایجان، تهران: نشر سمرقند.
Allin, D., 2002, NATO's Balkan Interventions, London: Routledge.
Aybet, G., 2014, NATO Conditionality in Bosnia and Herzegovina; Defense Reform and State-Building, Problems of Post-Communism Journal, Vol. 57, No. 5.
Bechev, D., 2016, NATO summit: Focus will be on Black Sea security, 5 July, Available at http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/06/nato-summit-focus-black-sea-security-160629071029770.html.
Borawski, J., 1995, Partnership for Peace and Beyond, International Affairs. Royal Institute of International Affairs, April.
10. Børgensen, B. K., 2011, NATO and International Terrorism: Can NATO Move Beyond Controversy? Copenhagen: DIIS REPORT.
11. Chivvis, C. S., 2008, The Making of Macedonia, Survival; Global Politics and Strategy, Vol. 50, No. 2.
12. Daalder, I. and Stavridis, J., 2012, NATO’s Victory in Libya: The Right Way to Run an Intervention, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 91, No. 2.
13. Dempsey, J., 2010, The Peril that NATO can’t ignore. In www.acus.org/natosource/peril-nato-cant-ignore.
14. Flint, C., 2012, Introduction to Geopolitics. Routledge.
15. Global Research, 2011, NATO’s Eastern Anchor. 24 NATO bases in Turkey’February 14, Available at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/nato-s-eastern-anchor-24-nato-bases-in-turkey/2320.
17. Hafeznia, M. R., 2013, Geopolitical principles and concepts. Mashhad: Papolli Publications.
18. Hyde-Price, A., 2011, NATO’s Political Transformation and International Order. Copenhagen: DIIS REPORT.
19. Jones, M. et al., 2004, An Introduction to Political Geography. London: Routledge.
20. Kolaei, E. and Goodarzi, M., 2013, The Caspian Sea; Challenges and Prospects. Tehran: Mizan Publication.
21. Kolaei, E.; Tisheyar M. and Mohammadi, M., 2007, The North Atlantic Treaty Organization; Transformations in Missions and Functions, Tehran: Tehran University Press.
22. Kulesa, L. and Shetty, S., 2017, Trump, Putin and the Growing Risk of Military Escalation, Policy Brief, June, Available at https://www.europeanleadershipnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/170704-Trump-Putin-and-the-Growing-Risk-of-Military-Escalation.pdf
23. M. S., 2015, Why Turkey called a NATO Article Four consultation, 28 Jul, Available at: http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/07/economist-explains-21
24. MacAskill, E., 2014, Close military encounters between Russia and the west 'at cold war levels'The Guardian, UK, Retrieved 2014-12-28.
25. Mohseni, M. R., 2013, Pan-Turkism, Iran and Azerbaijan, Tehran: Samarkand Publication.
28. Necsutu, M., 2017, NATO To Open Liaison Office in Moldova, Available at: http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/nato-to-open-liaison-office-in-moldova-11-23-2017.
30. Rathke, J.; Szeligowski, D. and Zasztowt, K., 2016, How Can NATO Contribute to Ukraine and Georgia’s Border Security?, PISM Policy Papers, Vol. 12, No. 153, Available at: https://www.pism.pl/Publications/PISM-Policy-Paper-no-153.
31. Ringsmose, J. and Rynning, S., 2011, NATO’s new strategic concept: a comprehensive assessment. DIIS REPORT.
32. Rock, M. Y., 2014, Constructing Territory. Available at: www.eeducation.psu.edu/geog128/node/538.
33. Rogers, J. and Romanovs, U., 2015, NATO’s Eastern Flank: Rebuilding Deterrence?, RUSI Newsbrief, Vol. 35, No. 3.
34. Romina, I., 2013, An Analysis of Geopolitical Zones in Southwest Asia, First National Conference of Southwest Asian Geopolitics.
35. Rosenberg, M., 2015, In Reversal, Obama Says U.S. Soldiers Will Stay in Afghanistan to 2017. The New York Times, October 15.
36. Rozoff, R., 2012, GLOBAL MILITARY ALLIANCE: Partners across the Globe: NATO Consolidates a Worldwide Military Force, Global Research, April 27, Available at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-military-alliance-partners-across-the-globe-nato consolidates-a-worldwide-military-force/30566.
37. Schmidt, M. S. and Chan, V., 2016, NATO Will Send Ships to Aegean Sea to Deter Human Trafficking, The New York Times, FEB. 11, Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/12/world/europe/nato-aegean-migrant-crisis.html?_r=0.
38. Shane, S., 2010, NATO Balanced Baltic and Russian Anxieties, The New York Times, December 6.
39. Sten, A., 2014, The Limits of Partnership: U.S.-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century, USA, Princeton University Pres.
40. Stoltenberg, J., 2016a, NATO stands in support of Iraq. Available at: http://nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_136011.htm?selectedLocale=en.
41. Stoltenberg, J., 2016b, Foreign Ministers agree NATO must do more to project stability in its neighbourhood, 19 May, Available at: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_131197.htm?selectedLocale=en.
42. Stoltenberg, J., 2016c, Six NATO nations eager to increase Black Sea presence, 26 Oct, Available at https://www.rt.com/news/364226-nato-black-sea-stoltenberg/.
43. Stoltenberg, J., 2016d, Diplomacy offers the only viable solution to the crisis in Ukraine, 07 Dec. Aviliable At: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_138760.htm
46. Unverdi, G. B., 2015, To what extent is the gradual deterioration in NATO-Russia relations between 1991-2014 causally related to NATO's eastward expansion in Eastern-Europe?, MA thesis: Leiden University.
48. Winiczenko, H., 2017, Test Your Capabilities and Get Ready for The Future to Keep Our Nations Safe, JFTC Magazine, No. 10. Available at: http://www.jftc.nato.int/newsroom/jftc-magazine.
49. Wittmann, K., 2011, An Alliance for the 21st Century? Reviewing NATO’s New Strategic Concept. Copenhagen: DIIS REPORT.
50. Zhukov, Y. M., 2016, NATO's Mediterranean Mission, Foreign Affairs, February 21, Available at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/europe/2016-02-21/natos-mediterranean-mission.