Geopolitics Quarterly

Geopolitics Quarterly

Noopolitics; A New Paradigm in Geopolitics

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 Associate Professor of Political Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Ph.D. Student of Political Geography University of Tehran, Alborz Campus,Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
Extended Abstract     
Introduction
In geopolitics, every decision is consciously taken and the effect of various structures of organizations, ideological institutions, etc. on performance methods and even our way of thinking is carefully noticed. Fundamental bases of geopolitical studies as well as politics are geosphere and biosphere. In this regard, Arquilla & Ronfeldt (1999) offered the idea of “noopolitics” as a new strategic approach in noospheric setting. This setting refers to the development of earth and human knowledge, science as well as mental communicative network to regenerate phenomena. Noopolitics makes a deep change in geopolitics and art of governing because it can turn knowledge into power. Above all, the aim is to prevent the dominance of power over knowledge with the result of our developed mind transferring the sciences at the service of humanity and peace into an extended area. While classical geopolitics claims that some countries overtake others with the intention of overruling, noopolitics rejects it and considers the unique source of power, “the power over self”. Finally, according to noopolitics, another war cannot exist in facing absolute knowledge.
Methodology
This study enjoys fundamental method of research and involves a new discussion over power and knowledge in relation to classical geopolitics. It dominates change in patterns and the current procedure on international system based on evolved principles of geopolitics during which the subject of power and informational strength turns into knowledge and wisdom. Its verification is the main focus of this research. With regard to the theoretical nature of the subject, the research method is descriptive-analytic and data collection tool is based on library findings.
Results and Discussion
Noopolitics is the interaction between power and knowledge and between power and wisdom. In fact, it is the “policy of knowledge geopolitics” in a way that it explains behaviors, errors, and reasons and enables the tomorrow’s leaders to overcome the errors. Noopolitics claims that sovereignty at any level of human organization is the source of blessing and every power. If noopolitics is considered as the interaction between power and knowledge, the art of knowledge is the ability to rule and control over power.
In essence, noopolitics is a political-informative function which can be updated with the entrance of new players. Arquilla & Ronfeldt (1999) consider five trends to develop noopolitics. Integrated growth at international level, continuation of unity of the world civil society, added soft power, and updated importance of cooperation merits and shaping international noosphere. This inclination, of course, does not outdate old paradigm of terms related to political realism. However, power decreases “states role as determining factor of world discipline” and the political and realistic states. This trend, in more complex relations of the nations, considers noopolitics as states’ approaches that can be used by non-government institutions as state influencers, and emphasizes on the role of soft power to express thoughts, values, norms and ethics via all media. Noopolitics is the political behavior and foreign political strategy for the information age which emphasizes on shaping and sharing the ideas, norms, regulations, and ethics through soft power. In this regard, the information era witnesses the movement from realpolitics to noopolitics. While realpolitics with its realistic policy intends to transfer power to the states, noopolitics enjoys the power of government and non-government players system in its performance. Therefore, we encounter certain new notions in noopolitical paradigm which are based on sciences and information era such as noosphere, soft and intelligent power.
It can be noted that a meaningful relationship exists between soft power and noopolitics. Arquilla & Ronfeldt (1999) take states the main players of international system but still notice the relation balance between states, market, and civil society. This change is to the advantage of realistic policy. Noopolitic thoughts are a platform via which international activities develop with knowledge playing a vital role. They believe knowledge is resulted from multiple processes and through steps which briefly include information, comprehension, analysis, and dissemination of updated communicative technologies in the light of information. Noopolitics is not only the access to the data, but it also is the possession of strategic potential by means of application of information channels. It sometimes performs as a complement for reality and sometimes as a competitive paradigm for policy and strategy. As, international noosphere expands, noopolitics offers a new paradigm at a broader level. 
The interaction between knowledge and power has amended very simple principles of noopolitics. It has been recognized as an outstanding performance in a way that the states should not attempt to impose power on others. Still, they can be the final shape of power with noopolitical strategy. Therefore, power would be the final goal of international relations. Knowledge within power along with noopolitical principles would result in ideas which benefit more in peace rather than war. Military technology as well as talent should always be permitted or be turned into non-military programs because power of weapons of mass murder is more due to mass destruction. 
Information revolution empowers nations’ potentials to face others; however, it is also the most vulnerable at international atmosphere. Therefore, noopolitics hegemony would belong to those with information imperialism. At the time of battle, countries that possess the capability of sharing hot information for public security are able to organize and manage more security organizations. But this issue increases the risk of exploitation and misbehavior with semi-trusted friends and allies. All in all, policies, resolutions, as well as especial mechanisms would be worked out which meaningfully keep noopolitics apart from realistic policy to deal with a vast domain of situations including “democratic development”, leverage on ruling regimes, and making agreement on environmental problems and human rights across the world.
Conclusions
The present research has posed a fresh discussion on power and knowledge in relation with classical noopolitics. The study domain includes changes in patterns and ruling trends in international system based on innovated principles of geopolitics with the subject of power and information capabilities turning into knowledge and wisdom that is taken as one of the updated ideas. The interaction between knowledge and power would correct quite simple principles of geopolitics and introduces noopolitics as an outstanding performance. Therefore, states with noopolitical strategies could absorb the ultimate product of power to their benefits. Based on noopolitics, wars would happen only as a result of coexistence of knowledge and ignorance, to hurt the enemy and prevent clashes. There is a need to knowledge because in encountering absolute knowledge, there would be no other war.
Keywords

Subjects


  1. Aberkane, I.J (2015). A Simple Paradigm for Noopolitics: The Geopolitics of Knowledge. https://www.e-ir.info/2015/10/15/a-simple-paradigm-for-noo- politics-the-geopolitics-of-knowledge/
  2. Aberkane, I.J (2015). Noopolitics: The Power of Knowledge, The Fondation pour l’innovation politique is publishing this paper as part of its work on values, A French think tank for European integration and free economy. http://www.fondapol.org/wpcontent/uploads/2015/11/NoopolitiqueENG.pdf
  3. Afzali, R; Badiee Azandahi, M; Yazdanpanah Dero, K; Zamani, A (2022). "Space and Place: Critical Reading". Geopolitics Quarterly, Vol 18. Issue 65. PP 72-114. [In Persian]
  4. Alam, A (2006). Fundamentals of Political Science, Tehran, Ney Publishing. [In Persian]
  5. Alberts, D (2006). National Security Requirements in the Information Age. Translated by Ali Aliabadi. Tehran: M. Institute of Strategic Studies. [In Persian]
  6. Ameli, S.S.R (2010). Critical Studies of American Virtual Colonization, Tehran, M. Institute of Publications. Amir Kabir. [In Persian]
  7. Amiri, M (2006). "Soft Power and its Effects and Applications in Defense". Tehran: Report of the Political Studies Office of the Research Center of the Islamic Consultative Assembly. 1-23. [In Persian]
  8. Arquila, J; Ronfeldt, D (1999). The Emergence of Noopolitik: Toward an American Information Strategy, Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND, MR-1033-OSD. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342937339_The_Emerg- ence_of_Noopolitik_Toward_An_American_Information_Strategy.
  9. Arquila, J; Ronfeldt, D (2007). “The Promise of Noöpolitik,” First Monday, August 2007. Available at http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/ view/1971/1846. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220167555_The _Promise_of_Noopolitik
  10. Arquila, J; Ronfeldt, D (2009). “Noopolitik: A New Paradigm for Public Diplomacy”, in Nancy Snow and Philip M. Taylor (Eds.). Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. London and New York: Routledge.
  11. Arquila, J; Ronfeldt, D (2018). The Continuing Promise of the Noösphere and Noöpolitik — Twenty Years After, Electronic copy available at: https:// ssrn.com/abstract=3259425 /   https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 32 8211434_The_Continuing_Promise_of_the_Noosphere_and_Noopolitik_Twenty_Years_After.
  12. Arquila, J; Ronfeldt, D (2019). Whose Story Wins: The Noösphere, Noöpolitik, and the Future of Statecraft, SSRN Electronic Journal, January 2019.
  13. Arquila, J; Ronfeldt, D (eds) (1997). In Athena's Camp: Preparing for Conflict in the Information age, Washington: RAND National Defense Research. http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR880/index.html.
  14. Arquila, J; Ronfeldt, D; Zanini, M (2000). “Information-Age Terrorism,” Current History, Vol. 99, No. 636, April 2000, pp. 179– 185. https://www. researchgate.net/publication/299068002_Information-Age_Terrorism.
  15. Ashrafi Razi, H (2006). Political Geography of Information. Tehran: Chapar. [In Persian]
  16. Badiee Azandahi, M; Kiani, V (2014). “A Critique on Shia Geopolitics Discourse; With Emphasis on Genealogical Approach ”. Geopolitics Quarterly. Volume: 9, No 4, Winter 2014 PP 83-106. [In Persian]
  17. Bagheri Choukami, S (2010). Smart War, Obama's Approach to Iran's Nuclear Program, Quarterly Journal of Political Studies, Volume 9, Number 35, Spring.
  18. Barat, A.A (2000). The role of management information system in attracting mobilization forces. Carnation Master Thesis. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University, Department of Management. [In Persian]
  19. Black, J (1997). Maps and Politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago press.
  20. Boltz, W.G (1993). “Lao tzu Tao Teaching”, In Michael Loewe (ed.), Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide. California, Berkeley: University of California Press.
  21. Brzezinski, Z (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and ItsGeostrategic Imperatives, New York: Basic Books.
  22. Brzezinski, Z (2013). Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power (Basic Books).
  23. Carlin, J (2009). Invictus: Nelson Mandela and the game that made a nation. London: Atlantic Books.
  24. Castells, M (2001). The Internet galaxy. Reflections on the Internet business and society. New York: Oxford University Press.
  25. Castells, M (2004). (2nd ed). The power of identity (The information age: Economy, society and culture) Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  26. Christensen, C (2008). Uploading dissonance: YouTube and the US occupation of Iraq. Media, War and Conflict, 1(2), 155–175.
  27. Christian, D (2017). “The Noösphere,” The Edge Annual Question, 2017. Available at https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27068.
  28. Collins, J.M (1991). Excellent Strategy (Principles and Procedures) Translated by Kourosh Binder, Tehran, Foreign Policy Studies Office Publications. [In Persian]
  29. Crocker, C (2007). leashing the dogs of war: conflict management in a pivided world, us institute of peace press.
  30. Douglas, W (1963). The Rights of the People. Newyork: Pyramid Books.
  31. Dreyfus, H; Rebirth, P (2000). Michel Foucault Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, translated by Hossein Bashirieh, Tehran: Ney. [In Persian]
  32. Farihi, D (2006). Power, Knowledge and Legitimacy in Islam (Medieval). Tehran: Publishing. [In Persian]
  33. Ghasemi, F (2012). “A Step Toward Providing a New Theory of Regional Balance of Power”. Geopolitics Quarterly. Vol 8. Issue 25. PP 172-213. [In Persian]
  34. Ghorbi, S.M.J (2011). Soft Power and the Islamic Discourse of Power, Pegah Hozeh Weekly, Bahman, No. 319. [In Persian]
  35. Gilbert, A.S (2019). The Crisis Paradigm: Description and prescription in social and political theory. Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11060-4.
  36. Gilboa, E (2006). ‘Public Diplomacy: The missing Component in Israel's Foreign Policy’, Journal Israel Affairs, vol. 12, pp. 715-747.
  37. Gorbachev, M.S (1986). The Coming Century of Peace, New York: Richardson and Steirman, 1986.
  38. Hassani, M.A; Alishiri, B (2017). Philosophical Paradigm Analysis of Common Theories in the Adoption of Information and Communication Technology, New World Scientific Research Conference in Management, Law and Social Sciences. Shiraz university. 23 November 2017. [In Persian]
  39. Hinen, G (2008). Smart Power in the World, New York.
  40. Huntington, S.P (1991). “America’s Changing Strategic Interests,” Survival, January/February 1991.
  41. Jackson, R; Sorenson, G (2006). Introduction to International Relations. Translated by Mehdi Zakerian and others. Tehran: Mizan Publishing. [In Persian]
  42. Kelly, P (2016). Classical Geopolitics A New Analytical Model. Leland Stanford Junior University.
  43. Kintzinger, M (2003). Wissen wird Macht. Bildung im Mittelalter [Knowledge becomes Power: Education in the Middle Ages]. Darmstadt, Germany: Jan Thorbecke.
  44. Kissinger, H (1994). Diplomacy, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.
  45. Koselleck, R (2004). Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time. New York: Columbia University Press.
  46. Kuhn, T.S (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  47. Latour, B (1987). Science in action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
  48. Luhmann, N (1995). Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  49. Maton, K (2013). Knowledge and Knowers: Towards a Realist Sociology of Educa-tion. London, UK: Routledge.https://www.researchgate.net/publica- tion/249335349_Knowledge_and_Knowers_Towards_a_realist_sociology_of_education.
  50. McGrew, A (2011). “Globalization and Global Politics“, in John Baylis, Steve Smith & Patricia Owens (Eds.). The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  51. McLean, I (2002). Oxford Culture of Political Science, First Edition, Tehran: Volume. [In Persian]
  52. Meusburger, P (2013). Relations between Knowledge and Economic Development: Some Methodological Considerations. In P. Meusburger, J. Glückler, & M. El Meskioui (Eds.), Knowledge and the economy (Knowledge and Space, Vol. 5, pp. 15–42). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. Doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-6131-5_2.
  53. Meusburger, P; Gregory, D; Suarsana, L (2015). Knowledge and Space Volume 7, Geographies of Knowledge and Power, © Springer Netherlands 2015.
  54. Mirheidar, D; Hamidinia, H (2006). Methodology and Concepts in Political Geography and International Relation: A Comparative Study, Geopolitics Quarterly, Volume: 2, No 3, Spring 2006, PP 1-41. [In Persian]
  55. Mojtahedzadeh, P (2000). Geopolitical Ideas and Iranian Realities, Tehran: Publication. [In Persian]
  56. Moreau-Defarges, P (2011). La Gouvernance (4th ed). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  57. Morgenthau, H (1948). Politics among Nations, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1948.
  58. Muir, R (2000). A New Introduction to Political Geography, Translated by Haidar Haidar, First Edition, Tehran: Geographical Organization of the Armed Forces. [In Persian]
  59. Muqtader, H (1991). International and Foreign Policy: Mafheres. [In Persian]
  60. Nasel, D.D (2004). Spirituality Orientation in Relation to Spiritual intelligence: A Consideration of Traditional Christianity and New Age Individualistic Spirituality. Doctoral Dissertation in Psychology. University of South Australia.
  61. Nay, J (2008). Soft Power: Tools for Success in International Politics, translated by Mohsen Rouhani and Mehdi Zolfaghari, Tehran: Imam Sadegh (AS) University. [In Persian]
  62. Nye, J.S (2011). The Future of Power, United States, Public Affairs.
  63. Nye, J.S (1990). “Soft Power.” Foreign Policy, No. 80 (1990): 153–70.
  64. Nye, J.S (2002). The paradox of American power. Why the world’s only superpower cannot go it alone. New York: Oxford University Press.
  65. Nye, J.S (2003). The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Cannot Go It Alone. Oxford, New York [etc.]: Oxford University Press, 2003.
  66. Nye, J.S (2004). Soft power. The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs Press.
  67. Nye, J.S (2007). “Smart Power.” The Huffington Post, November 29, 2007, sec. Politics. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-nye/smart-power_b_74 725.html.
  68. Nye, J.S (2008). “Public Diplomacy and Soft Power.” In The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616:94–110. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2008.
  69. Nye, J.S (2010). “The Pros and Cons of Citizen Diplomacy.” The New York Times, October 4, 2010, sec. Opinion. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/ opinion/05iht- ednye.html?_r=2.
  70. Ó Tuathail, G; Dalby, S; Routledge, P (editors) (2006). “The Geopolitics Reader”, Routledge, 2006.
  71. Oxford, B (2007). World System: Economics, Politics and Culture, translated by Homeira Moshirzadeh, Tehran: Ministry of Foreign Affairs Publishing Center. [In Persian]
  72. Poorahmadi, H (2010). Soft Power in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Qom, Book Garden. [In Persian]
  73. Popitz, H (1992). Phänomene der Macht [Phenomena of power] (2nd enlarged ed). Tübingen, Germany: Mohr.
  74. Poursaid, F (2010). The concept of soft discourse and the strategic environment affected by it; Quarterly Journal of Defense Strategy, Year 8, Volume 28. [In Persian]
  75. Rezvani, M; Hosseini, K; Hamid, S; Azar, A; Ahmadi, P (2009). Reflections on the Principles of Paradigm and Paradigmography in Interdisciplinary Studies; Case Study: Entrepreneurship Marketing, Interdisciplinary Quarterly in Humanities, Volume 2; Number 1; Winter; Pp. 119-147. [In Persian]
  76. Rosecrance, R (1984). Rise of the Trading State, New York: Basic Books.
  77. Samson, P.R (eds.) (1999). The Biosphere and Noosphere Reader: Global Environment, Society and Change, Routledge, 1999. Available at: http://library.lol/main/DE8BC3A07D26D2CF57855B540D79B526.
  78. Scheule, R.M (2003). Noopolitic im Empire: Politisches Handeln und politische Legitimität im Informationszeitalter. https://www.researchgate. net/publication/318629571_Politische_Ethik_Noopolitik_im_Empire.
  79. Sharafuddin, H (2005). US-Iran Soft Power, Journal of Political Science; Fall 2005 No. 31. [In Persian]
  80. Smith, A (2014). Geopolitical Information. Translated by Fereydoun Shirvani. Tehran: Soroush Publications. [In Persian]
  81. Teilhard de Chardin, P (1955). The Phenomenon of Man, With an Introduction by Julian Huxley, Translated from the French [1955] by Bernard Wall, New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Available at: https://ia800206.us. archive.org/20/items/ThePhenomenonOfMan/phenomenon -of-man-pierre-teilhard-de-chardin.pdf.
  82. Toffler, A (1987). The Future Shock of Shahindokht Kharazmi's Translation. Tehran: Aseman Publications. [In Persian]
  83. Toffler, A (1991). The Third Wave Translated by Shahindokht Kharazmi. Tehran: Aseman Publications. [In Persian]
  84. Toffler, A (1993). Changing the Translation Power of Shahindokht Kharazmi. Tehran: Translator Publisher. [In Persian]
  85. Tulaei, M (2008). An Analysis of the Discourse of the New US Governing Body, Tehran: Basij Research Institute. [In Persian]
  86. Vernadsky, V (1945). “The Biosphere and the Noösphere,” American Scientist, Vol. 33, No. 1, January 1945, pp. 1-12. Available at: https://www. jstor.org/stable/pdf/27826043.pdf.
  87. Vernadsky, V (2012). “New Scientific Knowledge and the Transition from the Biosphere to the Noösphere,” Excerpts from “Scientific Thought As a Planetary Phenomenon” (1938), in 21st Century, Spring-Summer 2012, pp. 16-31. Available at: https://21sci-tech.com/Subscriptions/Spring-Summer-2012_ONLINE/TCS_Sp-Su_2012.pdf
  88. Vernadsky, V (2013). Scientific Thought as a Planetary Phenomenon, V.I. Vernadsky Foundation, 1997. Available at: http://vernadsky.name/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Scientific-thought-as-a-planetary- phenomenon-V.I2.pdf.
  89. Waltz, K.N (1979). Theory of International Politics, New York: Random House, 1979. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239028006_A_
  90. White, B (2001). “Diplomacy”, in John Baylis and Steve Smith (Eds.),The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr =&id=Y1S_DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=65.%09White,+Brian.+(2001).+%E2%80%9CDiplomacy%E2%80%9D,+in+John+Baylis+and+Steve+Smith+(Eds.),The+Globalization+of+World+Politics:+An+Introduction+to+International+Relations.+Oxford:+Oxford+University+Press.&ots=uLFU1Q5Xl-&sig=xupCdDqOUbRfMKOqjToydJ_DPIQ#v=onepage&q&f= false.
  91. Xifra, J (2009). Catalan Public Diplomacy, Soft Power, and Noopolitik: A Public Relations Approach to Catalonia’s Ggovernance. Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies, 1, 67-85. https://www.researchgate .net/publication/314872435_Catalan_public_diplomacy_soft_power_and_noopolitik_A_public_relations_approach_to_Catalonia%27s_governance.
  92. J; McKie, D (2012). From Realpolitik to Noopolitik: The Public Relations of (Stateless) Nations in an Information Age, Public Relations Review 38 (2012) 819–824. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 271638090_From_realpolitik_to_noopolitik_The_public_relations_of_stateless_nations_in_an_information_age.
  93. Yazdan Panah Droo, K (2012). Geopolitics and the Importance of the Fifth Dimension by Studying the Role of Intelligence Power and Modern Warfare Strategy in the 21st Century, Human Geography Research, Volume 44, pp. 169-180. [In Persian]
Volume 20, Issue 3
Summer 2024
Pages 229-269

  • Receive Date 07 May 2022
  • Revise Date 04 September 2022
  • Accept Date 16 September 2022