بررسی نظریه‌های مورد غفلت قرار گرفته در ادبیات ژئوپلیتیک ایران

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استاد جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد جغرافیای سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

نظریه‌های ژئوپلیتیکی با ماهیت پیش‌بینی وقایع نظام آینده جهانی، عموماً با مرکزیت موقعیت‌های جغرافیایی مختلف در عرصه رقابت قدرت جهانی مطرح شده‌اند. تا کنون آثار ارزشمندی از نظریه‌های ژئوپلیتیک در ادبیات تخصصی این مبحث در ایران منتشر شده است. با این وجود نظریه‌هایی وجود دارد که تا کنون در ایران مورد بررسی و تحلیل قرار نگرفته‌اند و یا به‌صورت بسیار پراکنده و یا تیتروار در کتب و مقاله‌های گسترده ژئوپلیتیکی به آن‌ها پرداخته شده است. هدف اصلی این تحقیق بنیادی و نظری، با روش جمع آوری داده به شکل اسنادی و کتابخانه‌ای و شیوۀ تحلیل اطلاعات توصیفی تحلیلی، بررسی نظریه‌های مغفول مانده در ادبیات ژئوپلیتیک ایران به‌صورت نظام‌مند است که با رجوع به منابع معتبر بین‌المللی از میان مهمترین آثار اندیشمندان کلاسیک و معاصر این رشته به دست آمده است. این نظریه‌ها عبارت‌اند از: سیکل قدرت (دوران)، به هم پیوستگی (کیسینجر)، اضمحلال امپراتوری روسیه (کالینز)، تخته شطرنج اوراسیا (برژینسکی) آخرین نقشه (کاپلان)، مرگ هارتلند (تزنین)، پیکربندی سیستماتیک ژئوپلیتیک (دوسویی)، حلقه دریایی (کوهن)، تجدید آرایش نقش بازیگران (لانمن)، پایان ژئوپلیتیک و آغاز ژئوپلی نومی (کازی)، مجذوب‌هارتلند (ریستیک و مالینسون)، چارچوب استعاره‌ای ژئوپلیتیک شبکه‌ای (وربوفسکی) که محوریت بحث ما در این پژوهش را تشکیل می‌دهد. سیر زمانی این نظریه‌ها از 1971 تا 2020 ادامه دارد. همچنین در پایان به‌صورت فشرده، 3 نظریه ژئوپلیتیکی کم استناد دیگر شامل گروه بندی منطقه‌ای سلسله مراتبی (کرون)، مناطق کلیدی (سیلاک)، شبه جزیره عربستان، محور قدرت جهانی (شرایبر) را بررسی خواهیم کرد.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Study of Neglected Theories in Geopolitical Literature of Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Zahra Pishgahi Fard 1
  • Hassan Noorali 2
1 Professor of Political Geography, University of Tehran
2 Geography, University of Tehran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
The term "geopolitics" was first coined in 1899 by a Swedish political scientist named Rudolf Kellen. There are many definitions of geopolitics, sometimes it is considered as a science and sometimes it is presented in the form of knowledge and discourse. The Larousse Dictionary mentions geopolitics as a science. While critical geopolitics thinkers believe that geopolitics does not have a separate and pervasive meaning and identity, but is a different cultural and political discourse and way of describing, writing and representing geography and international politics. They believe that geopolitics is a type of power / knowledge that at the beginning of the twentieth century was concerned with the expansion of nations and the security of empires.The World Geography Dictionary believes that geopolitics are policies that Territorial relations and the aspirations of political institutions are taking place. Geopolitical theories with the nature of predicting the events of the future world system, have generally been proposed with the centrality of different geographical locations in the field of global power competition. Our main goal in this research is to study 15 geopolitical theories that have been neglected in the specialized literature of this field in Iran.
Methodology
The present study is of a fundamental and theoretical type that tries to expand the boundaries of general knowledge of this science in Iran by examining the neglected theories of geopolitics. The method of data collection in this research is documentary and library and the method of data analysis is descriptive-analytical.
Results and Conclusion
So far, many theories have been studied and analyzed in the specialized geopolitical literature in Iran. However, there are some theories that have not been examined for various reasons, such as the breadth of the global geopolitical literature or the novelty of the theories. Therefore, in the present study, we reviewed and analyzed 12 important theories that were neglected in the Iranian geopolitical literature, and also in the end, we briefly introduced 3 other less cited geopolitical theories. These theories start with Charles Doran's theory in 1971 and continue to Verbowski's theory in 2020. They include: 1. The power cycle (Doran): This theory explains the changing structure of the world power system and reflects the change in structure The system and the rise and fall of a country as a great power. 2. Linkage (Kissinger): This theory connects all the sensitive and troublesome parts of the world to the Soviet Union, and considers the involvement of the United States in any conflict to examine its impact on the superpower balance. 3. The Fall of the Russian Empire (Collins): He proposed a geopolitical theory based on the conditions that determined the emergence and geopolitical collapse of territorial power and correctly predicted the fall of the Soviet Union. 4. Eurasian Chessboard (Brzezinski): This theory likens the land of Eurasia to a chessboard with a major player for the first time in US history. 5. The Last Map (Kaplan): The Kaplan map is divided into rich north and poor south, where the south, especially Africa, is doomed to chaos. In fact, this map will be an immutable display of chaos. 6. Death of Heartland (Trenin): This theory states that the new Russia has lost its former quality as the center of world power (Heartland). So by the end of the heartland, the country must join the West. 7. Systematic geopolitical configuration (Dussouy) In this attractive model, Dussouy introduces 5 spaces, which include three central levels: demographic space, diplomatic-strategic space and economic space. 8. The Maritime Ring (Cohen): He believes that the growth of population, economy and political power along the coast and ports is the main reason for the geographical change (continentalism towards navigation) that creates a Maritime ring. Cohen tests this theory in the United States and says that the maritome ring is the center of gravity of American commerce. 9. Role Realignment Theory (Lahneman): This theory, which is influenced by the Charles's cycle of power, states that with the rise or fall of nations in power cycles, power gaps in maps appear due to an inherent stagnation in the planning of roles and responsibilities. For Lahneman, role-power gaps are defined using four roles: structural, declarative, operational, and attributive. 10. The end of geopolitics and the beginning of geopolinomics (Kazi): This theory is based on the work of Demco and Wood and believes that in the 21st century, power rivalry is based on geopolnomical components such as energy corridors, modern Silk Roads and ports, Thus we are witnessing the end of traditional geopolitical patterns that have been replaced by global geopolinomics. 11. Heartland Fascination (Ristick and Malinson): This theory takes an unscientific and unrealistic view of geopolitics and argues that geopolitics and heartland fascination are very dangerous to international relations because of the instrumental approach in the actors' think tank. In addition to being unscientific, this theory ignores the pacifist geopolitical dimension (geopacific) and its applied dimension based on humanistic geopolitics. 12. The framework of network geopolitical metaphors (Verbovszky): The purpose of using metaphor in this theory is to provide a framework and vocabulary for understanding some political changes. It is a metaphorical framework, the geopolitics of a network based on a new balance of power, with the play of strategic actors, strategic disruptors, digital militants and strategic citizens. Three other lesser-cited geopolitical theories include: 1. Hierarchical regional grouping (Chrone): This theory presented ten regional groupings and believed that the Pacific would become the arena of future confrontation for the Soviet Union, the United States, and China. 2. Key regions (Silak): Silak 25 centuries ago believed that any country that dominates the three key and strategic regions, namely Bahrain, Oman and Yemen, will rule the world. 3. The Arabian Peninsula, the axis of world power (Schreiber): The focus of this theory was the Arabian Peninsula, which believed that any country that dominates the peninsula would dominate the entire continent of Europe, and that any country that dominates the continent of Europe would rule the world.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Geopolitical Theories
  • Geopolitics
  • power
  • politics
  • geography
  1. احمدی، سید عباس (1396)؛ آرا و نظریه‌های علمی دکتر محمدرضا حافظ نیا، مشهد، نشر پاپلی.
  2. حافظ نیا، محمدرضا (1393)؛ اصول و مفاهیم ژئوپلیتیک، مشهد، نشر پاپلی.
  3. حافظ نیا، محمدرضا (1395)؛ مقدمه‌ای بر روش تحقیق در علوم انسانی، تهران، انتشارات سمت.
  4. رحیمی، حسن (1392)؛ نظریه‌های ژئوپلیتیکی، تهران، نشر انتخاب.
  5. رحیمی، حسن و محمدرضا حافظ نیا، عزت الله عزتی؛ جان اگنیو (1398)؛ تبیین جایگاه توصیه‌های کاربردی در نظریه‌های ژئوپلیتیکی دوره کلاسیک، فصلنامه ژئوپلیتیک، شماره 3، پیاپی 55.
  6. صمدی، هادی (1387)؛ دیدگاه سنتی در باب ساختار نظریه علمی، فصلنامه حوزه و دانشگاه روانشناسی علوم انسانی، سال 14، ش 54، بهار 1387، صفحات 115-139.
  7. طلوعی، محمود (1377)؛ فرهنگ جامع علوم سیاسی، تهران: نشر علم.
  8. عزتی، عزت الله (1397)؛ ژئوپلیتیک. تهران، نشر سمت.
  9. فولر، گراهام (1973)؛ قبله عالم، ژئوپلیتیک ایران، ترجمه عباس مخبر، تهران، نشر مرکز.
  10. مجتهد زاده، پیروز (1391)؛ جغرافیای سیاسی و سیاست جغرافیایی، تهران، نشر سمت.
  11. میرحیدر، دره (1394)؛ مبانی جغرافیای سیاسی. تهران، نشر سمت.
  12. ویسی،‌ هادی (1394)؛ مفاهیم و نظریه‌های جغرافیای سیاسی، تهران، نشر سمت.
  13. الهی، همایون، (1384)؛ خلیج فارس و مسائل آن، تهران، نشر قومس.
  14. Ahmadi, S. A. (2017). Opinions and scientific theories of Dr. Mohammad Reza Hafeznia, Mashhad, Papoli Publishing. (in Persian)
  15. Elahi, H. (2005). Persian Gulf and its issues, Tehran, Qomes Publishing. (in Persian)
  16. Hafeznia, M. R. (2014). Principles and Concepts of Geopolitics, Mashhad, Papoli Publishing. (in Persian)
  17. Hafeznia, Mohammad Reza (2015); Introduction to Research Methodology in Humanities, Tehran, Samt Publications. (in Persian)
  18. Rahimi, H. (2013). Geopolitical Theories, Tehran, Entekhab Publishing. (in Persian)
  19. Rahimi, H. & Hafeznia, M. R. & Ezzati, E. & Agnew, J. (2019). Explaining the place of practical advice in the geopolitical theories of the classical period, Geopolitical Quarterly, No. 3, consecutive 55. (in Persian)
  20. Samadi, Hadi (1387); Traditional Perspectives on the Structure of Scientific Theory, Quarterly Journal of the Seminary and University of Humanities Psychology, Volume 14, Issue 54, Spring 2008, Pages 115-139. (in Persian)
  21. Toloui, Mahmoud (1377); Comprehensive Culture of Political Science, Tehran: Elm Publishing.
  22. Ezzati, E. (2018). Geopolitics. Tehran, Samat Publishing. (in Persian)
  23. Fuller, G. (1973). Qibla Alam, Geopolitics of Iran, translated by Abbas Mokhber, Tehran, Markaz Publishing.
  24. Mir Haidar, D. (2015). Fundamentals of Political Geography. Tehran, Samt Publishing. (in Persian)
  25. Mojtahedzadeh, P. (2012). Political Geography and Geographical Politics,Tehran, Samt Publishing. (in Persian)
  26. Veisi, H. (2015). Concepts and Theories of Political Geography, Tehran, Samt Publishing. (in Persian)
  27. Agnew, J. (2003). Geopolitics Re-visioning world politics Second edition. Routledge, Second edition.
  28. Bijian, Z. (2005). China's Peaceful Rise: Speeches of Zheng Bijian 1997-2005. brookings institution press.
  29. Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard-American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books.
  30. Chauprade, A. (1999). Introduction à l’analyse géopolitique.
  31. Cohen, S. (2003). Geopolitics of the World System. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  32. Cohen, S. (2014) Geopolitics: The Geography of International Relations. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  33. Collins, R. (1999). Macrohistory, Essays in the Sociology of the Long Run, Stanford. Stanford Press.
  34. Dodds, k. (2002) Geopolitics in a changing world, pearson educational limited.
  35. Dalby, S. (1996). The Environment as Geopolitical Threat: Reading Robert Kaplan's 'Coming Anarchy'. Cultural Geographies 3(4):472-496.
  36. Demko, G., & Wood, W. (1994). Geopolitical Perspectives On The Twenty-first Century. Avalon Publishing.
  37. Doran, C. (2009). What is power cycle theory? Introducing the main concepts. Cambridge University Press.
  38. Doran, Ch. (1971). The Politics of Assimilation: Hegemony and its Aftermath. Baltimore: John Hopkins. baltimore: john hopkins.
  39. Doran, Ch. (2000). Confronting the Principles of the Power Cycle, Changing Systems Stvucture, Expectations, and Way. in Handbook of War Studies II , edited by Manus I. Midlarsky,United States of America, published by the University of Michigan press.
  40. Doran, Ch. (2012). Power Cycle Theory and the Ascendance of China: Peaceful or Stormy? SAIS Review of International Affairs, Volume 32, Number 1.
  41. Dussouy , G. (2020). Systemic geopolitics, physical geography, reductionist theories. Retrieved from:https://exploringgeopolitics.org/interview_dussouy_gerard_systemic_geopolitics_physical_geography_reductionist_theories_spatial_ontology/
  42. Dugin, A. (2019). GEOPOLITICS: THEORIES, CONCEPTS, SCHOOLS, AND DEBATES. Retrieved from https://www.geopolitica.ru/en/articgeopoliticale/geopolitics-theories-concepts-schools-and-debates
  43. Deudney, D. (2000: 77). Geopolitics as Theory:: Historical Security Materialism. Research Article.
  44. Flint, C. (2007). Introduction to Geopolitics.
  45. Hülser, S. (2013). Power Cycle Theory Reconsidered, Is China going to destabilize the Global Order? NFG Working Paper No. 6/2013.
  46. Jones, M.; Jones, R, ; Woods, M. (2004). AN INTRODUCTION TO POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY, Space, place and politics,.
  47. Kaplan, R. (2000). The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War. Random House.
  48. Kazi, A. (2007). End of Geopolitics and the Beginnings of Geopolinomics: United States in Central and Southwest Asia. Presentation during the conference “The aspects of EU-Central Asia Relations”, April 27, 2007, Berlin, Germany. Embassy of Kyrgyz Republic and Akademikerbund, Hamburg e.V.
  49. Kissane , D. (2008). Forecasting the Storm: Power Cycle Theory and Conflict in the Major Power System. Europolis, Vol. 3.
  50. Kissane, D. (2005). 2015 and the Rise of China: Power Cycle Analysis and the Implications for Australia. Security Challenges, Vol1, No1.
  51. Kleveman, L. (2004). The New Great Game, How is our increasing dependence on oil and our search for it - jeopardizing the war on terrorism? Globalist Bookshelf.
  52. Lahneman, W. (2003). Changing Power Cycles and Foreign Policy Role-power Realignments: Asia, Europe, and North America. nternational Political Science Review / Revue internationale de science politique.
  53. Mallinson, W., & Ristic , Z. (2016). The Threat of Geopolitics to International Relations, Obsession with the Heartland. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  54. MCCOLL, R. (2005). Encyclopedia of World Geography. Published by Facts On File.
  55. Merriam-Webster, T. (2019). New Trade Paperback. Retrieved from www.merriam-webster.
  56. Ó Tuathail , G., & Dalby, S. (1998). RETHINKING GEOPOLITICS.
  57. Tuathail, G. (1996). Critical Geopolitics. Routledge.
  58. O’Tuathail, , G., Dalby, S., & Routledge, P. (1998). The Geopolitics Reader. Routledge, 3.
  59. Pepe, M., & Krolik, K. (2017). Using Power Cycle Theory and Role Realignment Theory to Recognize the International Roles of China and the United States. International Journal of Business and Social Science.
  60. Singh, S., & Singh, B. (2019). Geopolitics of ports: Factoring Iran in India’s counterbalancing strategy for “Sino-Pak Axis”. Research Article.
  61. Sonnenfeldt, H. (1978). Linkage’ in U.S. Foreign Policy. the Newyork times.
  62. Tacconi, M. (2010). The New Great Game. Translated by Francesca Simmons.
  63. Taylor, P. (1993). Political Geography. Longman, Third Edition.
  64. Teylor, P. J., & Flint, C. (2018). Political Geography,World-Economy, Nation-State and Locality.
  65. Trenin, D. (2001). The End of Eurasia: Russia on the Border Between Geopolitics and Globalization. Carnegie Moscow Center.
  66. Venier, P. (2010). Main Theoretical Currents in Geopolitical Thought in the Twentieth Century. Les contributions anciennes et nouvelles à une approche théorique en géopolitique,.
  67. Verbovszky, J. (2020). Networked Geopolitics. Americanacademy. Retrieved from https://www.americanacademy.de/networked-geopolitics/
  68. Walberg, E. (2011). Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games. Clarity Press.
  69. Yoon, Y.-K. (2003). Introduction: Power Cycle Theory and the Practice of International Relations. international political science review, 5-12.

 

 

دوره 53، شماره 4
دی 1400
صفحه 1353-1374
  • تاریخ دریافت: 25 مهر 1398
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 26 فروردین 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 25 فروردین 1400
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار: 26 فروردین 1400