Political Geography
bagher ghalibaf; mahmood vasegh; Hadi Ajili; shahabeddin shafi
Abstract
Game theory is a well-known theory in political studies, international relations and interdisciplinary research, which is widely used in the analysis of phenomena in different dimensions and at the national, regional and global geographic levels. Although the concept of "competition" plays a key role ...
Read More
Game theory is a well-known theory in political studies, international relations and interdisciplinary research, which is widely used in the analysis of phenomena in different dimensions and at the national, regional and global geographic levels. Although the concept of "competition" plays a key role in the drawing and formation of game theory, in spite of that, the scientific literature of geopolitical knowledge has not benefited from it to investigate the phenomena. For this purpose, the geopolitical explanation of game theory in geopolitical systems and the introduction of this concept to geopolitical analysis and explanation is the topic of the upcoming article. This article tries to answer the question of how to explain the structure and function of game theory in geographical environments with the approach of geopolitical systems. In response to this question and with an explanatory descriptive method based on Saunders' research methodology model, the hypothesis of the article is that "the theory of games in competitions, conflicts, cooperation and convergences and other patterns of geopolitical relations and in complex geopolitical systems with at least one objective geographical source deals with, has the role of modeling and drawing operational solutions, and by receiving data and values from geopolitics, it brings the complex geopolitical system to a new balance and order". The findings of the research show that game theory is the subject of social, political and international relations studies, and in particular, due to the centrality of "power and competition" in this theory, it is considered a topic of discussion in geopolitical science. Since the function of game theory is considered in geopolitical systems, the authors' interpretation of the concept of system is "complex geopolitical system" with the components of complexity theory.
Javad Hamidi Ravari; Farhad Hamze; Ali Bijani
Abstract
nowadays , efforts to improve national security are among the concerns of governments and basic bases of their foreign policy .in this context , the actors in the region are trying to expand their geopolitical realm in recent years this approach has been based on aggressive realist theory and support ...
Read More
nowadays , efforts to improve national security are among the concerns of governments and basic bases of their foreign policy .in this context , the actors in the region are trying to expand their geopolitical realm in recent years this approach has been based on aggressive realist theory and support of militias and people groups in different countries in recent years .in the meantime , the countries of turkey , saudi arabia , qatar and iran have used special tactics and different groups in order to increase penetration and power in these equations . ~~~ in this context , in recent years , lebanon 's hezbollah , which is one of the allies of islamic republic of iran , has been able to achieve victory and its balance can expand its geopolitical position .in this regard , the present study has been conducted with descriptive - analytical and applied approach to the power of ای region in improving the geopolitics of iran .the population of the study consists of all military and geopolitical experts , whose sample size was estimated to be 40 .in order to analyze the data , test - retest , pearson correlation and pearson " s correlation were used .the main question of this research is : what is the relationship between the power of the islamic republic of allah and the promotion of geopolitics of iran ?the results showed that there is a direct relationship between the power of the حزب and the withdrawal of american troops from the middle east and the decline of the influence of the saudi , israeli , uae and qatar intrusions and the increase in the power of the hezbollah party in the syrian crisis and the political equations in the middle east region .
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf; Majid Gholami
Abstract
Regimes are a well-known theory in political studies and international relations that is widely used in the analysis of transnational and global phenomena. Although the concept of "power" plays a key role in the process of forming the concept of regimes, so far the scientific literature of the geopolitical ...
Read More
Regimes are a well-known theory in political studies and international relations that is widely used in the analysis of transnational and global phenomena. Although the concept of "power" plays a key role in the process of forming the concept of regimes, so far the scientific literature of the geopolitical field to study these phenomena has not been used, unfortunately. Accordingly, the geopolitical explanation of the concept and role of "regimes" in geopolitical structures and the introduction of this concept analysis in the field of geopolitics is the subject of this article. The main question is how to explain the structure and function of the concept of regimes with a geopolitical approach? In response to this question, using a descriptive-analytical method and using library sources, the hypothesis of the article is that “regime is a complex structure of objective and subjective agents that directly or indirectly is responsible for the political organization of the geopolitical structure. It controls the function of the structure and generates power by the spatial distribution of power among the components of this structure. In fact, regimes are the regulators of the functioning of geopolitical structures and system governance”. Findings show that mental regimes are the subject of social studies, political studies, and international relations, and in particular, are not the subject of discussion in the field of geopolitics, but they are the subject of our discussion in the field of geopolitics when they are objectified in the form of institutions and organizations and affect geographical environments.
Ehsan Mozdkhah; somaye hamidi
Abstract
In recent years, Geopolitics has undergone changes and transformations with the expansion of the fourth industrial revolution and the growth of technological trends such as artificial intelligence as a sensitive international issue. Basically, getting defamiliarization with the scientific bases of foreign ...
Read More
In recent years, Geopolitics has undergone changes and transformations with the expansion of the fourth industrial revolution and the growth of technological trends such as artificial intelligence as a sensitive international issue. Basically, getting defamiliarization with the scientific bases of foreign policy and international relations in classical readings and narratives of the problem of division and the problem of fluidity in this field with an emphasis on trends such as artificial intelligence and big data has led to change the geopolitics to extra-geopolitics. These developments and new arrangements are a platform for changing international competitions. Assuming the geopolitical competition of governments in the form of artificial intelligence and using descriptive-analytical methods, this article seeks to answer this question, how Geopolitics has been transformed by artificial intelligence and big data. The findings of the research show that artificial intelligence has led to the redesign of geopolitics in the age of big data and algorithmic competitions.
Hassan Noorali; Zahra Pishgahifard
Abstract
A large part of the development process of geopolitics has been owed to the theories that have been put forward by world-minded scientists in the last two centuries. Geopolitical theories with the nature of predicting the future of world system have generally been proposed with the centrality of different ...
Read More
A large part of the development process of geopolitics has been owed to the theories that have been put forward by world-minded scientists in the last two centuries. Geopolitical theories with the nature of predicting the future of world system have generally been proposed with the centrality of different geographical positions in the field of global power competition. The main goal of this research is to analyze the role of the United States in the geopolitical theories of the three classical, modern and postmodern eras with reference to reliable international sources based on two ranges of American and non-American theorists. Data has been collected in the form of documents and libraries and information has been analyzed in descriptive-analytical method. This article, by examining 30 theories of geopolitical theorists, has been argued that each of these thinkers, according to the strategy and interests of their country, somehow shows the role of the United States in the world order as a threat or opportunity in the global geopolitical system. Therefore, from the beginning of geopolitical theorizing in the late 19th century until 2020, the hegemonic footprint of the United States is always visible. The research question: what is the role of the United States, as a birthplace of geopolitical theories, in the geopolitical theorizing of the three classical, modern, and postmodern periods? And the hypothesis of the research is that most of the geopolitical theories in the intellectual space of the mentioned three periods have paid attention to the hegemonic position of this power in the world order; Also, the domineering approach of American thinkers and practical advice to the statesmen of this country, from Alfred Mahan's theory in 1890 to Francis Sempa's theory in 2020, has continued.
Esmeil Alamdar; Elahe Koolaee
Abstract
The countries of Iran and Russia have been two important hubs on the two sides of the Caspian Sea, located in the regions of Hartland and the Rimland. The geopolitical and geostrategic importance of these countries to other countries in the region has led to a dynamic role in the political equations ...
Read More
The countries of Iran and Russia have been two important hubs on the two sides of the Caspian Sea, located in the regions of Hartland and the Rimland. The geopolitical and geostrategic importance of these countries to other countries in the region has led to a dynamic role in the political equations of Central Asia and the Caucasus. Since today power and geopolitical weight in international relations has become more and more important, Russia is regarded as a global power and Iran as a regional power, the two countries have always apply this factor of power in their policies. The realism theory of Hans Morgenthau, which emphasizes the balance of power and the role of power factor, is a proof of this claim. Geopolitics is the study of the interaction of geography, power and politics, and the actions they bring together. The most common boundary between geopolitical knowledge and international relations can be found in the theory of realism. Morgentha, as one of the theorists of international relations, believed that international politics was governed by universal and objective laws based on national and national interests, and not on the psychological drivers of decision-makers. Based on this theory, statesmen think and act within the framework of their own interests defined as power. The research methodology is descriptive-analytic. First, the required information was collected using library method and by referring to authoritative sources, books and articles. Then, a geopolitical analysis of the relations between Russia and Iran after the Islamic Revolution was discussed on the basis of Morgenth's theory. This research tries to answer the research question; is the doctrine of Russia's powers of power and hegemony changed before the collapse and seeking global peace and security? Or is it seeking national interests and the expansion of vital space through close relations with Iran in regional and global affairs? During the post-revolution period, relations between Iran and Russia in general and in the past decades, in particular, have not reached a strategic level because of the wrong believes of the Russian scholars and government towards Iran and, conversely, the wrong believes civil society and people of Iran towards Russia. Relations between the two countries have developed in the post-Islamic revolution in various fields. Iran and Russia pursue national goals and unique geopolitical codes in their foreign policy, and regulate all their regional and global movements based on this geopolitical compass. Russia is trying to maintain and extend its national interests with Iranian support in the region of Southwest Asia and Central Asia and the Caucasus. On the other hand, Iran has, more than ever, been cooperating with the Russians over the past decade due to establishing a common point with Russia in pursuit of its ideological and national security strategies. From the point of view of analyzes based on the realist approach in international relations, the close proximity of political relations between the two countries can be interpreted in the need for a balance of power or a common threat from the United States. On the other hand, the Islamic Republic of Iran is trying to maintain its regional strength against Saudi Arabia and Turkey in the southwest of Asia. The convergence of common goals in regional issues between Iran and Russia has made the two countries more closely aligned with each other. Although Russia has had a double cooperation with Iran to fight ISIS and to prevent the influence of this Takfiri terrorist group on its borders and geostrategic territories (which are considered as geopolitical interests), its main goal to expand its hegemony globally and rival NATO and leave it out of the geostrategic bottleneck in the world make Russia to work together with Iran in various ways. From the analysis of various aspects of Iran-Russia foreign relations can conclude that the Russian federative republic is a tactical ally and can be regarded as an ugly attitude in the field of foreign relations. Russia pursues its own interests, regardless of Iran's interests.
Mohsen Azizzadehtasouj; zahra Ahmady; Mohammad Reza Hafeznia; Seyyed Mohammad Kazem Sajad Pour
Abstract
Geopolitics, throughout its history, has been associated with concepts such as war, competition and power; according to the traditional geopolitics, governments in the past were seeking territory; land management and gaining power. So the traditional geopolitics expressed the views of the powerful states ...
Read More
Geopolitics, throughout its history, has been associated with concepts such as war, competition and power; according to the traditional geopolitics, governments in the past were seeking territory; land management and gaining power. So the traditional geopolitics expressed the views of the powerful states about the world. However, the developments in different fields gave rise to new topics in the field of geopolitical study. The dominant thought on the structures and international system in contemporary times with the emergence and manifestation of new material and spiritual priorities such as: humanity's need to live in an atmosphere of peace, the importance of taking steps towards development and human dignity has prevailed over the prevention of armed conflicts and the reduction of violence caused by war. The scientific study and investigation of the method of establishing objectification methods for such a purpose is one of the basic foundations of the concept of geopolitics today. This article tries to explain the geopolitical process of peace. This research is descriptive-analytical in terms of nature and method. The findings of the research show the formation of new regional identities, the regional security, social development, the structures and functions of international institutions, the dominance of the global peace and justice discourse, the global fight against terrorism, humanitarian interventions, the observance of human rights and international law, the expansion of international dialogues, de-escalation and confidence-building between countries, regions and the world are increasing in such a way that in a humanistic approach, the reduction of human suffering is considered as one of the most important benefits of geopolitics of peace in the geographical space.
Zaha Hajizadeh Ghochan Atigh; Siroos Ahmadi Nohadani; Abdolreza Farajirad; Hojat Mahkouii
Abstract
The need to interact with the global economy and realize development in the new world facilitates and accelerates national development. From 2021 to 2013, China launched a world-wide operation in the Silk Road Reconstruction Program, creating a win-win and ambitious environment in political, economic ...
Read More
The need to interact with the global economy and realize development in the new world facilitates and accelerates national development. From 2021 to 2013, China launched a world-wide operation in the Silk Road Reconstruction Program, creating a win-win and ambitious environment in political, economic and security dimensions, with the Belt-Road Initiative. As one of the main pillars of power in the new structure of the international system, China is defining and consolidating its regional and global position. By implementing this plan, China seeks to achieve the following: increase the efficiency of internal borders, improve trade Between economic corridors, deepening trade agreements, improving access to the European market, increasing exports of products, expanding banking, financial and insurance cooperation, capital development in the field of tourism, etc.This article intends to use a descriptive-analytical method to explain and analyze the geopolitical plan of the Belt-Road Initiative between Iran and China and the great powers and to explain the effects and consequences of this plan on Iran. The information was obtained by referring to library resources, internet, interviews with experts and was explained and analyzed by content analysis method. Iran, as one of the important points in the Silk Road route and due to its special geopolitical position, has significant effects on the belt-road initiative and is affected by it. By joining the Belt-Road Initiative, Iran can turn its geographical location into a geopolitical opportunity
Mohammad Akhbari; Mohamad Basiri Sadr
Abstract
Currently greatest environmental threats are global warming and climate change. Climate change will lead to shortages of water and food, disease, unemployment, migration, poverty, tensions on resources and global instability. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effects of climate change in Iran ...
Read More
Currently greatest environmental threats are global warming and climate change. Climate change will lead to shortages of water and food, disease, unemployment, migration, poverty, tensions on resources and global instability. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effects of climate change in Iran and its impact on sustainable development and geopolitics. This research is a descriptive analytic study and used survey method. The questionnaire was designed based on the indicators of the effects of climate change, sustainable development, and geopolitics and was distributed among experts in meteorological, environmental and passive defense organizations. Sixty questionnaires were received. Measuring the reliability and validity using Software (pls) and proper patterning, the research hypothesis was proved. Findings showed taht there is a significant and reverse relation between the effects of climate change and sustainable development. Also, the reduction of sustainable development has a negative and significant effect on the geopolitical power of the Iran. Moreover, the reduction of sustainable development has a mediating role in the impact of climate change on geopolitics. In this study, Friedman's comparative test, prioritization of influential parameters of climate change in geopolitics was discussed. Amongst the factors, poverty and social anomalies, drought and immigration have the most negative impact on the country's geopolitics. The suggestions emphasized the necessity of implementing effective methods, watershed management and optimal exploitation of water resources, increasing productivity through new irrigation practices, changes in crop operations and cultivars, replacing crops that require less water and soil tillage, using clean energies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to be consistent with the effects of climate change.
Seyyed Shams din Sadeghi; Zeynab Sharifi; samira moradi; Hamid Reza Heshmati Jadid
Abstract
AbstractIntroduction: On of the topics in the discussied theories and schools of international relations and geopolitics is discussion of the sources of conflictand the prolongation of disputes between Stats. Because tensions and conflicts between stats and goernments have always occurred at different ...
Read More
AbstractIntroduction: On of the topics in the discussied theories and schools of international relations and geopolitics is discussion of the sources of conflictand the prolongation of disputes between Stats. Because tensions and conflicts between stats and goernments have always occurred at different levels and dimensions, and we will see it in the future, expert and theorists of different schools of internationalrelation and geopolitics have tried in different ways to establish the roots amd factors, identify and explain international conflicts. Given that one of the theories among geopolitical theories is the model Peter Hoggets putitka accordingly, the present study, with its descriptive – analytical rejection, sought to examine the fundamental question of whether the geographical sources of tension can inter nationals between iran and Iraq be adapted to the twelve factors of the putitka? Methodology:the data collection tool in this research is library and also referring to specialized quarterly journals. discussion:according to the research findings, of the twelve factors that hogget cites as stressful geographical resources, seven of them are clearly seen in the realations between iran and Iraq. Result:According to the model presented by Hagget in this article, geopolitical factors have played a role in creating tension between iran and Iraq and eventually led to a war between them.
Hamid Dorj; Hashmatullah Falahat pishe
Abstract
Extended abstract
Introduction
The United States has to withdraw the powers in Eurasian geopolitical region, such as Russia, China, and Iran; and increase its influence in this region to draw up a new Eurasian geopolitical map. The interests of this country can be evaluated in addition to maintaining ...
Read More
Extended abstract
Introduction
The United States has to withdraw the powers in Eurasian geopolitical region, such as Russia, China, and Iran; and increase its influence in this region to draw up a new Eurasian geopolitical map. The interests of this country can be evaluated in addition to maintaining strategic patterns from the perspective of dominating energy reserves, securing oil pipelines, countering the influence of Russia, China and Iran. Russia, on the other hand, as a serious critic of US policies will seek to gain regional supremacy in Eurasia, following the relative establishment of political stability. it will certainly be a challenge for US policies in the region. China has cultural, economic and security links with some of the Eurasian countries, establishing itself as a great power by relying on worldwide economic power. These confrontations and disagreements with Washington's unilateral policies in the Eurasia geopolitical region with the presence of the Islamic Republic of Iran have become a strategic triangle for the establishment of a barrier policy.
Review of Literature
The term of geopolitics, as a controversial and ambiguous word, was first introduced by the Swedish scientist "Radolf Kilen" in the 1899 and in the concept of "knowledge of the analysis of geography and politics relationship" came to contemporary political geography field. Geopolitics is the study of international relations and contrasts concerning the geographies. In other words, the influence of geographical factors such as the location, distance, and distribution of natural and human resources on international relations is a geopolitical issue (Braden & Shelley, 2000: 5).
Methodology
Due to the nature of the subject, library and documentary methods have been used for data collection and qualitative analysis has been used for data analysis in which the classification, evaluation, comparison and analysis of the data are done to test the research hypothesis. The nature of this research is descriptive-analytical.
Findings and Discussion
Eurasia as the Earth's Heartland is a key pillar of world domination. Indeed, specific indicators of the strategic regions of the world should be sought in this region. This is as important fact as Mackinder says: "Any power that can dominate Eurasia can control the world" (Nazemroaya & Halliday, 2012: 67 68). The United States has placed the acquisition and consolidation of world hegemony in the forefront of its determination, actions, and foreign policy responses, and at this time seeks to maintain its position by preventing the emergence of a global challenge power and even the formation of an anti-hegemonic alliance. Therefore, it seeks to prevent the creation of anti-hegemon alliances with a different mix of Iran, Russia, China, and India by infiltrating Russia's backyard, controlling China, and communicating with their neighbours. In the new conditions of the international system in which any power is met with resistance, the Eurasian region has the most potential to form an anti-hegemon axis for encountering America. Countries such as Russia, China, and Iran that are recently recognized as primarily regional powers, and some political scholars believe they have the potential to form an anti-hegemon axis in the Eurasian region. Brzezinski warned that the emergence of a Eurasian hostile coalition could challenge American supremacy. The aggressive nature of US strategy is clearly evident in Brzezinski's remarks. He identified the potential Eurasian coalition as a potential anti-hegemonic coalition or North Atlantic anti-coalition formed by the help of Iran, Russia, and China coalition, with China at its center (Brzezinski, 1998: 32). In 1999, Beijing and Moscow were well aware of what was happening as well as future events. They were also well aware of US foreign policy. China and Russia signed a good neighbourly alliance and friendly collaboration on July 24, 2001. this happened less than two months after 9/11 events. A reciprocal defense alliance was established against NATO and the US, and a military network was established around China, pushing them beyond their territorial and bilateral defense integrity (Nazemroaya, 2012: 6- 7). As well as strengthening its military structure and capability in the domestic arena based on the principle of self-reliance, Iran has also had a presence in regional coalition and mechanisms which undoubtedly, the most important of them is Iran's presence in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization as one of the most important and comprehensive regional security mechanisms in Central Eurasia. (Karami and Kozegar Kalaji, 1393: 141).
Washington's strategy for Central Asia after 2014 is to build communications channels along infrastructure such as the Northern Distribution Network and the New Silk Road with the aim of laying the foundations for a long-term structural relationship in Central Asia for the period following its military withdrawal (Javadyarjmand & salaverzizade, 1396:281). By establishing and leading new international organizations, China and Russia are also trying to challenge US-led Western Organizations and institutions. Iran's formal accession to Tracey (Europe, Caucasus, Asia) is a major step in breaking isolationist policies against Iran as well as strengthening Iran's transit status and increasing trade volume in Iran's southern route ( Karami & Kouzegarkaleji, 1393:139). China is well aware that it is highly vulnerable to a US leadership military strike on oil resources. That is why China is expanding its naval bases, so it insists and presses repeatedly to build onshore energy corridors and oil terminals directly from Central Asia and the Russian Federation to China. China's cooperation with Iran, Russia and the Central Asian republics helps to create an inter-Asian energy path and the continued flow of energy to China may be blocked if the oversight of the high seas by the US-led navy. The debate that has been going on for years over the development of a natural gas pipeline from Iran to Pakistan, India, and China is itself part of China's strategic policy (Conway & Nauman, 2011: 3).
Conclusion
Maintaining the hegemonic role of the United States in the unipolar world has been America's most important strategic goal from post-Cold War to contemporary era. The creation of military bases and various investments in large oil and gas projects in various parts of the world, including the Eurasian region, are examples of this effort to shape the new American order. This policy was carried out rapidly by the US and NATO in the early years of the 21st century without any serious opposition from the other powers. Although Brzezinski claims that until the next generation, America's standing as the world's sole power cannot be challenged by any rival power, Russia, China, and Iran, as the three most powerful and beneficiary countries in the region, has been dissatisfied with the action from Washington and NATO and the relative progress they have made over the past two decades; and they are trying to counter US and NATO policies and in turn strengthening their influence and capability in this geopolitical area. Preventing US pressure to isolate Iran, Russia, and China, gain greater maneuverability internationally in partnership with independent or dissatisfied governments, preventing NATO's influence and empowerment, investing in environmental and tourism issues, and participating in international gas and oil pipeline projects are among the most important collaborative efforts of the three countries against US hegemonic policies in Eurasia.
Meysam Gholami; Seyyed Mehdi Seyyedzadeh Sani
Abstract
Extended Abstract
Introduction
The International Criminal Court was set up on July 1, 2002, as the first permanent international tribunal to establish individual responsibility for all perpetrators of international crimes and to end Immunity of heads of state from prosecution. According to the ...
Read More
Extended Abstract
Introduction
The International Criminal Court was set up on July 1, 2002, as the first permanent international tribunal to establish individual responsibility for all perpetrators of international crimes and to end Immunity of heads of state from prosecution. According to the Statute and the purposes of the Tribunal, its jurisdiction must be exercised universally and without discrimination in respect of the offenses committed by its member States and nationals, as well as in cases referred to the Security Council.
However, in spite of committing international crimes around the world, we find that the Tribunal focuses only on the crimes committed in the African continent Because of the ten out of twelve cases under consideration in the Tribunal, are in the African continent. The same issue has attracted a lot of criticism, especially from the heads of African governments, so that even some International Criminal Tribunals refer to it as the African International Criminal Court and the African governments believe that the power of the Court is Geopolitical issues and approaches that have existed for a long time have been confined to the African continent and incapable of investigating other crimes committed on other continents. Thus, the African governments have serious doubts about the Court's independence and impartiality, have raised political concerns about the Court's work and refuse to cooperate with the Court while threatening to withdraw from the Court.
In this article, in response to the question of the extent to which the African government has criticized the Tribunal, it is necessary to first examine how the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is exercised and to answer the following questions: What is the role of the Tribunal in the majority of the aforementioned African State cases? What are the geopolitical reasons for the Court's focus on the African continent? What has the Tribunal done to commit crimes on other continents?
Review of Literature
It has been nearly two decades since the establishment of the International Criminal Court. During this period many books and articles have been written in this field. However, there has been no comprehensive study of the performance of the Tribunal in the special continent, and in particular in the African continent, has not been extensively studied by researchers, and only a few authors have briefly examined the African continent's case and the reactions of African heads of state to the performance of the Tribunal.
What distinguishes the present work from all other works is that is not limited to examining the response of African governments to the functioning of the Tribunal, but it attempts to assess the Tribunal's violation of the Statute, in a more comprehensive view of the geopolitical reasons for the Court's focus on the African continent. The question of whether the Court's performance is politically motivated or not, as well as evaluating the Court's actions on other continents, will be examined. Therefore, the innovation and novelty aspects of research are considered.
3. Method
The present research, which is among the theoretical fundamental researches due to its legal and political nature, is discussed from a geopolitical point of view. Accordingly, this study can be considered as an interdisciplinary study of international criminal and geopolitical law. The sources used in this research are, by its theoretical nature, documentary and library sources.
4. Findings and Discussion
The Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted on July 17, 1998 to deal with the criminalization of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression. The establishment of this permanent institution promised to reduce the incidence of these crimes. However, in accordance with the provisions of the Statute, including the Court's supplementary jurisdiction, the court became the "last resort".
One of the main reasons for the supplementary jurisdiction of the Court is the concern of governments about the power of the Tribunal to violate national sovereignty and its involvement in matters concerning the criminal jurisdiction of national courts. Because the issue of prosecution of international crimes is closely linked to the sovereignty of states. Therefore, the statutes of the statute are designed to respect the national sovereignty of states and to add more states to the statute of the court. To date, there are 122 members of the Tribunal; 33 are African, 18 are Asia-Pacific, 18 are Eastern European, 28 are Latin American and Caribbean, and 25 are Western European and other countries.
However, the Court's review of its performance indicates that the Court has failed to meet its universal purpose. Because the Court's consideration of situation and cases indicates that the Court is focused on the African continent, and African governments believe that the Court's power has long been limited to the African continent due to geopolitical issues and approaches. It has not been able to investigate other crimes committed on other continents.
Conclusion
Based on the result of this study, the criticism of why the Tribunal does not deal with crimes committed elsewhere in the world is based on the Court's performance. However, the investigative phase is only one step in the Court and prior to that; there is a preliminary assessment of the situation. At present, several situations are in the process of evaluation, most of which concern non-African countries.
However, in view of the Court's jurisdiction in the Statute, the African Government's criticism of the Court's lack of geopolitical focus on the African continent does not apply. Because of the ten Situation African states, five in Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic one and two and Mali by the African governments themselves, two by Libya and Sudan by the Security Council, and only three by the Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya and Burundi have been investigated by the prosecutor. In addition, the following can be cited as rejecting the African government's criticism of the Court's focus on the African continent.
The first is due to the geopolitical and deplorable state of Africa itself compared to other continents. The second reason relates to the functioning of the Security Council, which is often accompanied by political and discriminatory considerations. The Security Council has so far only referred the situation in the African continent (Sudan and Libya) to the Tribunal. The third reason relates to the Statute of the Tribunal because the Tribunal is unable to deal with all crimes within its jurisdiction due to financial and administrative constraints.
Rebaz Ghorbaninejad
Abstract
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Terms and concepts of tension, challenge, dispute, conflict and crisis are commonly used in the literature of political geography and geopolitics and international relations. And they are often used to express types of hostile relations between two countries or rival ...
Read More
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Terms and concepts of tension, challenge, dispute, conflict and crisis are commonly used in the literature of political geography and geopolitics and international relations. And they are often used to express types of hostile relations between two countries or rival powers. Geography and geopolitics of every region play a major role in the establishment of peaceful and friendly relations among nations, or tension and conflict over that region. In other words, the root of many conflicts and tensions in countries relations is in the geographical and geopolitical features. At present, there is no single general theory about tension and conflict accepted by scientists or experts in other fields of political sciences or experts from whom political scientists have inspired. There is no way to determine the source of conflict or war, because not only they are numerous, but also they have been gradually increased.
The research hypothesis is that most of the theories presented by professionals and scholars relating to the sources of tension and conflict between countries have uni-factor or multifactor essence and none of them have succeeded in providing a comprehensive theoretical model. Accordingly, this paper by using descriptive-analytic approaches and using library resources attempts to assess and evaluate theories related to the origins of conflict and tension between countries and by the means of criticism and analysis of theories provides a new theory in the field of factors causing conflict in countries relations.
Review of Literature
The term tension refers to a set of attitudes and tendencies such as distrust and suspicion which people and policy makers have toward others. Tension does not cause conflict by itself, but it enables different parties to show behavior based on conflict if each of them tries to achieve incompatible objectives (Holsti,1991). Conflict is different from tension. Tension usually refers to a hidden hostility, fear, suspicion, and perhaps refers to a desire of dominance or revenge. However, tension does not exceed the level of attitudes and perceptions and does not include mutual deterrent efforts. Although tension often precedes conflict and it is always involved in it, it is not always synonymous with conflict and it is not always consistent with cooperation. However, causes of tension are likely to be related to the causes of conflict. Furthermore, if tension is sufficiently intensified, depending on the extent of its influence on the decision making process, it may be converted independently to contributing factors or outbreak of conflict.
Many of the underlying causes of tension and conflict between countries are considered in the realm of geographical and geopolitical factors and values. In other words, although occurring conflicts between countries may be affected by political or ideological factors, the vast majority of tensions and conflicts between countries have geographical origin and geographical values are the roots in the perceived national interests of the parties. Even if ideological and political factors are well analyzed, it becomes clear that such factors are also directly or indirectly have geopolitical nature.
Method
This article is based on descriptive-analytic technique and the data collection procedure is generally based on library research. In library research, the emphasis has been put on the examination of documents, reference to the relevant domestic and foreign books, periodicals and newspapers, articles, magazines and internet websites. After data collection and classification, the data analysis has been mainly carried out using descriptions based on logic and reasoning.
Results and Discussion
Model presented by Hypothetica from Peter Hagget is an attempt to study geographical factors causing tension in relations between countries. This model involves a hypothetical country called The Hypothetica which has a set of specific conditions causing disputes with its neighbors. The hypothetical country is landlocked and has potential twelve points causing tension in relations with its neighbors (Hogget, 1983, 2001). Hagget presented this model for the first time in 1972 in the first edition of his book Geography: A Modern Synthesis. This model has been mentioned without any change in subsequent editions of the book in 1975, 1995 and 1983. Also, in a new book by Hagget called Geography: A Global Synthesis which was published in 2001, this issue has been mentioned (Hogget, 1972, 1975, 1983, 1995, 2001). In his model, Hagget has mentioned geographical and geopolitical factors causing tension between countries, and compared to other theories, has put more emphasis on spatial and regional variables. However, Hagget’s model lacks the variables related to environmental, ecological and geo-economic resources that cause tension. Hence, we cannot consider it as a comprehensive model.
Since geopolitics is the study of the mutual relationships of geography, power, and politics and accounts for consequences resulting from their interaction (Hafeznia, 2006), a model that can explain all sources of tension between counties should include all variables related to three parameters of geography, power and politics. The main drawback of all models is that they consider only one aspect of geopolitics and they have failed to account for all dimensions. According to this view and authors of this article, a model that can explain geopolitical causes of tension and conflict in relations must simultaneously include cultural and geo-cultural, geo-strategic, political, territorial and boundary disputes, geo-economic, hydro-political, environmental and cyberspace related variables.
Each of these groups has several objective and subjective variables which dependently or independently pave the way for tension and conflict between countries. In this classification we have tried to include all geopolitical factors that cause tension and conflict in relations between countries and every factor causing tension and conflict is listed. Thus, we can conclude that this model, to some extent, has the capability to account for all geopolitical sources of tension and conflict in relations between countries.
Conclusion
By looking at theories proposed by experts in the fields of geography, geopolitics, political sciences and international relations in relation to factors that cause tension and conflict in relations between countries, we come to the conclusion that none of these theories have been able to account for all of geopolitical sources which cause tension and have only explained part of these factors. In other words, they have a uni-factor or multi-factor perspective towards the problem and, therefore, they cannot be considered as a comprehensive theory and model in this context. Meanwhile, Peter Hogget (1972) and John Collins (1998) have tried to take a comprehensive and multi-dimensional look at the issues of tension and conflict between countries, and in their theories, they have pointed out different variables such as strategic, cultural, economic, environmental and hydro-political factors. However, they have also failed to provide a model that account for all geopolitical sources that cause tension in relation between countries. According to this view, a model that can explain the causes of tension and conflict in relations between countries should simultaneously take into account cultural, geo-cultural, geo-strategic, and territorial and boundary disputes, geo-economic, hydro-political, environmental variables and factors related to the functioning of cyberspace. Each of these groups has several objective and subjective variables which dependently or independently pave the way for tension and conflict between countries.
Ehsan Lashgari
Abstract
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Geopolitics is one of the geographic sciences branches which can be discussed at various methodological schools. By the middle of the 20th century, dominant geopolitical theories and frameworks were often based on the objective aspects of geography and its impact ...
Read More
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Geopolitics is one of the geographic sciences branches which can be discussed at various methodological schools. By the middle of the 20th century, dominant geopolitical theories and frameworks were often based on the objective aspects of geography and its impact on political relations between countries and blocks of power. However, observing the weakness of geopolitical predictions and the lack of response to many contradictions, thinkers moved to new theoretical frameworks in geopolitics. This shift has caused the spread of interpretive methodology to geopolitical studies. However, the excessive use of the idealistic methodology could cause the lack of attention to the issues and challenges in places and regions. However, today, more than past, applied studies in geographic sciences are carried out in positivism method. Therefore, applied geopolitical studies are still more feasible in the positivism school because when the propositions are referred to the objective world, the causation and prediction in dimension of methodology become operational. Now, the question that arises is which applied geopolitics will be closer to the approach of positivism school (inductive or deductive approaches) for better optimization?
2. Theoretical Framework
Geopolitics is based on the role of geography in the international relation which analyzes the domination of actors and governments in this context. From a geopolitical view, governments and political actors compete to gain opportunities in geographical space. They try to expand their influence on important spaces.
Deductive approach discusses the necessities for scientific recognition and the definition of "coherent systems" that exist in geopolitical studies. The logic behind deductive approach consists of definite arguments while the logic of inductive approach is based on probable inferences. In this methodology, the condition for the applicability of geopolitics is based on inferential and rational methods for studying geopolitical developments in different places and regions. Based on this methodological framework, there are fixed collections based on which it is possible to explain and predict the geopolitical changes while, some indexes such as the kind of political system are also influential in geopolitical studies that eliminate inductive generalizations. Obviously, in accordance with the conditions of international relations, the combination of these two features leads the dimensions of geopolitical studies towards a rational proof-making methodology. From the deductive perspective, inferential rationality has potential to identify and distinguish historically the spatial policies in geopolitical studies.
3. Methodology
This article intends to explain the optimal functions of deductive methodology in descriptive-analytical approach. In the first stage, it tries to explain the deductive methodology and geopolitical concept. Then, the epistemological ability of deductive methodology has been analyzed in comparison with interpretive and inductive methods in Geopolitical studies particularly after the cold war.
4. Results and Discussion
The Findings reveal that the content of geopolitics has some conceptual principles that exclusively require a deductive methodology. The most important principles are as follows:
A: Deductive explanation, and differentiation in the geopolitical value of places and regions
According to the views of many geopolitical thinkers, identifying the important regions and places in the world has been one of the studying goals. It has been done based on a rational positivist approach. Intrinsically, the distinction between the geopolitical significance of places and geographical areas is inherent in the geopolitical structure of the world. In the first step, the importance of geographical places should be highlighted in the deductive approach to predict the political behavior of governments and actors. Basically, in the transnational scale, the spatial threats are not considered as the impartial stimuli and these are often explained by deductive logic.
B- Deductive explanation and connotation in geopolitical studies
The deductive approach could help to predict the geopolitical developments in the world. With this method the scholars of international relations and geopolitics do not explain the historical events merely. Because such statements directly refer to the external conditions and express the real and objective characteristics.
C- The end of the Cold War and the increasing value of the deductive approach in geopolitical studies
After the Cold War and with the end of the ideological competition, the ideological value of the regions did not merely cause competition, security, and strategy, but they were the resources available in the geopolitical structure of the world that credited them. From this perspective, the competition model has a completely geopolitical, objective, and predictable content. Therefore, although a super authority is not dominant over the global system, there are self-regulating mechanisms that can be explained in geopolitical systems and the behavior of governments and affecting actors in the transnational area can be explained based on the deductive rationality.
5. Conclusions
Most of the applied geographic studies have recognized the causes of these phenomena in geographic space as objective phenomena. Geopolitics also studies the objective concepts in space that produce political action between countries in transnational scale. Of course, unlike the national scale, there is no centralized political power and sovereignty for governing the space in the transnational scale. Thus, the deductive methodology should be applied to study geopolitics, because anticipating and monitoring the behavior of states and actors based on the quantitative techniques in the transnational scale are not possible. Politics has a qualitative and variable nature and it is necessary to use a deductive approach.
Mahmoud Vasegh; Seyyed Abbas Ahmadi; Mohammadreza Hafeznia; Seyyed Mohammad Isanedjad
Abstract
Extended abstract
1. Introduction
Nowadays, the term geopolitics is widely used in various fields of study, and is used to analyze and explain political and geographical events at different levels. Unfortunately, despite the widespread use of this term, due to the dominance of the functionalist approach ...
Read More
Extended abstract
1. Introduction
Nowadays, the term geopolitics is widely used in various fields of study, and is used to analyze and explain political and geographical events at different levels. Unfortunately, despite the widespread use of this term, due to the dominance of the functionalist approach in geopolitical studies, theoretical and conceptual dimension of geopolitics has been neglected and has not been considered so much by the experts. Therefore, some questions like what geopolitics is and what its notion is remain unanswered. The purpose of this article is to provide answers to the above questions through paying attention to the theoretical and epistemological dimensions of geopolitics, and due to the lack of theoretical research in this field, this article intends to provide a meaningful explanation of the nature and meaning of this term.
2 .Theoretical Framework
When we talk about science, of course, we must be in the realm of philosophy. In other words, what is stated, if be meticulous and exploratory, needs to be in the realm of philosophy of science. From the perspective of the philosophy of science, the new science has two logico and empirico attributes. Indeed, two pillars of the new science are logic-rationality and observation-experience. The problem is the inception of science. Science in the solution of the problems grows through the creation of hypotheses. The absence of problems equals the lack of science.
Every epistemic is knowledge of something, but epistemology is a cognition of self-knowledge. Epistemology is a cognition which, by deliberation of knowledge, discusses about the possibilities, types, ways, realms and the validity of it. The most important topic of epistemology is the discussion of the value and validity of knowledge and truth or falsity of propositions.
The term geopolitics was first introduced in 1899 by Johan Rudolf Kjellén. Historically, since Aristotle, the influence of geographic factors on politics has been considered. In the medieval, thinkers such as Montesquieu and in the Islamic civilization, Ibn Khaldūn and others have discussed about this issue. In general, it can be told that geopolitics studies international relations and conflicts from a geographical perspective.
3 .Method
This paper, because of its philosophical nature, is a fundamental-theoretical research, and in terms of purpose, it is a part of the problem-solving study (solving the philosophical - mental problems). According to its theoretical nature, the sources used in this paper are document and library resources. This paper has been developed within the framework of studies on the philosophy of science with a realistic approach and in the form of logical and epistemological descriptions and analyzes. The methodological accost to developing this research is critical rationalism. It is clear that this paper is written in the form of scientific-research articles.
4. Discussion
Geopolitik (Swedish equivalent of Geopolitics) is a solid compound noun. Unlike most compound words in European languages, it was not a bygone word, and it is not much older. Johan Rudolf Kjellén invented the term in 1899 under the influence of Friedrich Ratzel's doctrines. This word consists of two sections Geo (γη or γαια) and Politik (πολιτικα). Both sections are original Greek words and come from Latin to new European languages. However, how is this word from an epistemological perspective? As mentioned, this term is compound in nature, and consists of two distinct parts of Geo and Polytic. These two sections are different in nature. The first section, Geo, is a concrete, general, and essential phenomenon, but the second section, Politik, is not an essential phenomenon, rather it is an abstract and a dummy phenomenon (i.e., made by humans). According to this argument, the ratio of knowledge and value dominates between these two sections, and they relate to the subject of concrete and abstract theorems. Thus, in such a framework, the relationship between these two sections can be explained in this compound word.
5. Conclusion
But how we can analyzed geopolitics epistemological nature? The geopolitics concept is the product of three categories: Geographic Resources, At least two agents and the existence of a relationship of interaction, opposition, competition and domination between agents. All three cases are objective facts; however the concept of geopolitics is subjective and created in the mind.
In the context of Geopolitics’ conceptualization from the epistemological point of view, it must be said that this concept is created in the mind and with the help of reason by making a comparison between the three realities of Geographic source, at least two actors and the relation of interaction, opposition, competition and domination among them. Naturally, these three objective facets are concrete phenomena and make the geopolitics’ conceptual structure a rational abstract phenomenon.
The result of concrete and abstract combinations is nothing but an abstract combination. Due to the dual nature of the geopolitics’ components, (i.e., the concrete Geo and abstract politik), the combination of two parts of geopolitics itself will be an abstract phenomenon.
Sayyedeh Samireh Hosseini; Mohsen Janparvar; Escander Moradi
Abstract
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
The human rights is one of the most important and influential issues in international relations. The idea of human rights protecting has been considered as the fight against oppression and injustice from a long time ago. Human rights concepts can include fundamental ...
Read More
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
The human rights is one of the most important and influential issues in international relations. The idea of human rights protecting has been considered as the fight against oppression and injustice from a long time ago. Human rights concepts can include fundamental concepts such as "the right to life, the prohibition of torture, the prohibition of slavery, the prohibition of racial discrimination, freedom of expression, opinion, religion, the employment right, etc.”, each of these concepts has different interpretations in different cultures and cannot be interpreted by one state for all individuals in different societies. The right to life is the most important and the most prominent right of mankind which is supported by the different states through humanitarian intervention. In addition to the human rights debate, there are other factors influence this intervention and maybe it can be said that human rights is only the cover for this effort. Geopolitical components are among these factors. These components have encouraged countries to appear in specific spaces covered as humanitarian intervention.
2. Theoretical Framework
Geopolitical factors imply the set of factors and geographic components that somehow affect the policy. These factors increase or decrease from space to space and over time due to developments. Values and geographic factors have a dual nature in terms of structure or function. That is, a geographic factor for a human or human group may be considered positive, while the same factor is considered negative for another group or individual. The structural and functional identity of the factors is not constant and stable, meaning that a factor in the context of time may be transformed or, has different values in the view of different human groups. The humanitarian intervention in its classical sense means a state uses armed force against another state to protect the lives and liberties of the late nation who are not willing or able to do so. Humanitarian intervention, in terms of protected individuals, includes other types; That is, any use of force by a state against another is also discussed as humanitarian intervention in order to protect the lives and freedom of its citizens within that country or third-country nationals against inhumane treatment.
3. Methodology
The main method of this research is descriptive-analytic. The information was gathered in the Internet and field- library method. A questionnaire was used in the field method. The questionnaire was given to the elites and academic experts in the field of geopolitics. In this regard, the formula with a confidence level of 99% has been used to determine the sample size in a limited population. Then, 20 questionnaires were collected and evaluated. Meanwhile, a variety of validation tests were used to test the validity and reliability of the questions. The reliability of the questionnaire was examined through Cronbach's test. It showed that Cronbach's alpha is closer to 1 for different dimensions and is more than 0.7%. Accordingly, it could be said that the questionnaire has the necessary reliability. SPSS software was used to analyze geopolitical theories and humanitarian intervention using a questionnaire. In this conclusion, the indices that have received above medium-average (three) have been accepted as a geopolitical component affecting humanitarian intervention, indices have less than that average despite affecting humanitarian intervention have not been considered as a geopolitical component and put away.
4. Findings and Discussion
In the present study, it has been attempted to extract the geopolitical factors influencing humanitarian interventions from theories and views related to geopolitics and humanitarian intervention. These studies showed that 47 factors were extracted in four sections including geographical factors, economic factors, political factors, and demographic factors as the factors affecting humanitarian interventions. 28 indicators of these geopolitical factors affect the humanitarian intervention in geographical areas.
Geopolitical factors are among the most important factors influencing humanitarian interventions. Awareness and recognizing these factors will make it easier for statesmen to intervene and make decisions. Furthermore, the impact of these factors varies depending on the views of each state so that they can have positive or negative effects for the intervener.
Fatemeh Mirahmdariadi; Yashar Zaki
Abstract
Extended abstract
1. Introduction
Post-modernism is amongst those paradigms that has recently penetrated into many fields with its theoretical innovations and critical streams. As an academic field of study, political geography has been undoubtedly influenced by this movement. Within the field of political ...
Read More
Extended abstract
1. Introduction
Post-modernism is amongst those paradigms that has recently penetrated into many fields with its theoretical innovations and critical streams. As an academic field of study, political geography has been undoubtedly influenced by this movement. Within the field of political geography, ostmodernism has mostly affected geopolitics, shaking most of its basic assumptions which has, accordingly, made a fundamental re-conceptualization essential. By reviewing the intellectual and philosophical foundation of postmodern geopolitics, the present article attempts to determine what topics are included in the study of postmodern geopolitics.
2. Methodology
This study is of theoretical-fundamental type with a descriptive-analytic research methodology. Given the nature of selected subject matter, required information was collected through library and internet research, meaning that the data were extracted from books and articles and then classified for more qualitative analysis.
3. Results and Discussion
In order to understand the nature of postmodern geopolitics, one should first know its intellectual and philosophical foundation. Postmodern topics within the field of political geography and geopolitics have been influenced by general postmodern discussions in social sciences as well as human geography itself. “Post-modernism”, in general, refers to some criticisms related to the project of modernism and also a break from it; and stands as a rebellion against the modern rationality and modernist epistemology. It is difficult to write about postmodernism or postmodern turn; because it is almost impossible to find an uncontroversial definition for the word ‘postmodern’. Nonetheless, there are two general perceptions of postmodernism. First, the perception of postmodernism in a linguistic-cultural-philosophical context based on which postmodernism, more than anything, is the rejection of grand narratives and epistemologies of modernity. This understanding of postmodernism, which has gradually been intermingled with post-structuralist, post-colonialist, and feminist views, is determined by deconstructive, textual-lingual, and discourse approaches and is often considered as skeptic to metanarratives. The second perception of postmodernism deals with changes of the world itself and provides necessary cognitive tools for exploring these changes. Such changes as globalization of many economic processes, technology revolution, spatial dissemination of certain consumption models, fragmentation of cultures, emergence of myriad political and cultural issues, victory of flexible accumulation regime in capitalism, and debilitation of governments’ sovereignty are considered as the closure of one era and emergence of a new ‘postmodern’ society and culture. Postmodernity, in this understanding, is deemed to be a new stage in the development of capitalism and a production of the change of global capitalism. Thus, postmodernism examines the changes created under the influence of global capitalism change.
4. Conclusion
There is no general consensus regarding the “postmodern geopolitics”. However, two general routes can be recognized in postmodern geopolitics; first, skepticism towards metanarratives; and second, studying the consequences of undermining the modern geopolitical imagination. In the former approach to postmodern geopolitics, resulting from perception of postmodern in a cultural-linguistic-philosophical context, geopolitics is deconstructed. Accordingly, classical geopolitical theories are considered as metanarratives and discourses within them the reality are produced and phenomena have become meaningful. These theories as a kind of language game, shaped by theorists in the light of a specific discourse in a specific period of time, are skepticized and deconstructed. Therefore, postmodern geopolitics haunts the reality beyond discourses and metanarratives and is interpreted as the negation of essentialism, foundationalism and certainty in geopolitics. This approach has been intermingled with and absorbed into post-structuralist, post-colonialist and feminist views. The second understanding of postmodern geopolitics deals with studying the consequences of undermining the modern geopolitical imagination and recent phase of capitalism development. In that regard, in their geopolitical analyses, political geographers address such issues as: space of streams and deterritorialization due to time-space compression and its consequences for geopolitical analyses, governance crisis, importance of time factor and such topics as infopolitics and chronopolitics, importance of scale factor and internal continuity of spatial scales instead of focusing on the unique and singular scale, collapse of expectations of enlightenment and its consequences for such issues as meaning and objective of nation-state, established territorialization and technical-scientific advance within a fixed international order, and postmodern spaces.
Mostafa Rashidi; Abass Alipour; Ruhollah Hosseinvand Shokri; Mostafa Saeedzadeh
Abstract
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
The political divisions of a country is the political and managerial forms of the national space. Actually, the national administrative divisions determine the position of each part of the terrestrial plane in the spatial structure of the country. Therefore, the administrative ...
Read More
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
The political divisions of a country is the political and managerial forms of the national space. Actually, the national administrative divisions determine the position of each part of the terrestrial plane in the spatial structure of the country. Therefore, the administrative divisions should be adjusted and set according to the principles and frameworks of the geographic objectivity for optimal efficiency which is leading to provide a strategic geographic model based on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. This focus on the geographical logic in drawing the political boundaries of the interior is based on the view of organizing and aligning the territory at the national, regional and local level. In this regard, one of the important issues that has never been addressed in Iran's development plans is the issue of regionalization and political divisions of space as a framework for territorial planning. Failure to pay attention to this fundamental geographical and political reality is resulted from the weakness of the theoretical foundation as well as the operational structure of development plans in the country. Therefore, the upright and realistic administrative divisions require the generation of theoretical and scientific frameworks based on concepts and geopolitical scales at the local, national, and even transnational level in order to achieve an effective operational and practical structure in the planning of sustainable development subject to the national space. On the other hand, the lack of special attention to the political organization of special planning and administrative divisions also have brought smaller importance of about territorial affairs, and consequently the weakness of the administrative divisions. So that the present paper tends to address the geopolitical pathology of administrative divisions in Iran based upon the geographic logic and realities with the approach of organizing and aligning the land. The basic question of this research is: What are the weaknesses of the administrative divisions in terms of geography and land use? How is its geopolitical consequences and obstacles in the country?
2. Theoretical Framework
The main method of study in geography is combinational. It means that geographers for the recognition and zoning of the area (two major fields of geographic studies) are obliged to study and identify all the features and phenomena in place. Through this study, geographers are enabled to simultaneously recognize the "synoptic" of the all features of the place, and also determine typical feature of the dominant phenomena. Therefore, the recognition of the structural components, elements, and factors that are effective in the environment is a prerequisite and precondition for any thoughtful movement of human beings to carry out a management on the environment. Geography is the science and art of the constructive engagement with the environment and geographical space along with a sagacious management, in order to meet both human requirements and the sustainability of environment leading to achieve a sustainable interaction with geographical space. The result would be the development of humanity along with the environmental sustainability. The relationship between spatial planning and geography can show different implication. Accordingly, geography can be used to explain the type of settlement, population distribution, and activity in the land issues, while the Spatial Planning would be to consider the relationship between these elements. In geography and Spatial Planning, there are three basic elements to be studied: human, space, and activity. In any case, the undeniable subject is the high and sever relationship between "geography" and "Spatial Planning". In other words, it could be stated that geography the most scientifically-based Spatial Planning, and the "Spatial Planning" is the most geographical form of planning.
In political geography or geopolitics, in order to observe geographical logic, it is necessary to pay attention to the planning of land in different stages. Political geography or geopolitics, which studies from boundary and zoning to political behaviors and practices in geographic spaces, requires fulfilment of the geography rules and Spatial Planning concepts. One of the requirements of geopolitics is to consider the realties of the geographic boundaries and zoning, the political divisions, and in general, the political organization of the space, that leads this branch of geographic sciences to the rules and principles of fulfillment of Spatial Planning.
In order to realize the desirable organization of space and to design and operationalize the logical divisions of the country's space on national and local scales, the performance should be on the basis of geopolitical knowledge of space and Spatial Planning. This means the integration of geopolitics and the Spatial Planning as two areas of geographic sciences in order to achieve a political organization of the space which is suitable and favorable for administrative divisions. The focus of this paper is, therefore, on the geopolitical pathology of administrative divisions in Iran, which have been payed no attention to integrate the geopolitics and Spatial Planning issues into the administrative divisions.
3. Methodology
Since this article tends to provide an analysis of the relationship between Spatial Planning and administrative divisions as well as address the pathology of national divisions in terms of Spatial Planning, it is considered as a developmental research which gives its practical value for relevant organizations, and it is an applied research as well. This research is also scribed in a descriptive analytical manner. Data are also collected in a library and documentary manner, and also with reference to reputable online databases such as the Provincial Council and the Ministry of the Interior Affairs.
4. Findings and Discussion
One of the considerable issues regarding country's territorial planning in Iran is the lack of attention to the principles and realities of geography in the country's political divisions. Lack of paying attention to this important issue has led to the formation of a political division not according to the geographical realities and principals. This inconsistency was shaped by the land planning in the modern epoch of the arrival of Pahlavi, and in particular from 1937 onwards. Consequently, in the findings section of the research the authors consider the inconsistency of the current Iranian divisions with regard to the geographical divisions (both natural and human), as well as the lack of attention to the structural factors in the political organization of space and national divisions, including shape, extent, and unbalanced establishment of provincial centers to conclude that the weaknesses and problems in this area directly affects the development, security, and spatial distribution of the country in a negative way.
