ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Geopolitical Factors in Strategic Defense Planning: A Theoretical Model
In many cases, resources, facilities and instruments used to project a strategy are adjusted to well-known geopolitical factors in terms of issue and proof. Some of these factors are strategic and geo-strategic situation; others are economic, political, military, social, and cultural conditions or natural and physical phases of the land such as shape and extent. There are other communicational, sea and coastal situations. The type and size of natural resources and quality and quantity of human resources, and cultural and historical elements are also important geopolitical factors. Defense strategy planners usually pay attention to the role of geopolitical factors although there is no evidence of scientific consideration and systematic effects of these factors in codification of defense strategy. In order to provide a theoretical model for defense strategies based on geopolitical factors, this paper maintains that the effective factors and the relationship between these factors and defense strategy should first be identified. Then the expression of the type, manner and the effects of proposed factors in planning defense strategy should be taking into consideration. In this article, a model for determining the scope of effectiveness of these factors along with the methods in which these factors engaged in codification of defense strategy have been provided.
https://journal.iag.ir/article_57116_09e11e357f2eba39bd1c9cb90cbdc8ed.pdf
2007-06-22
38
7
Defense strategy
geopolitics factors
the role of geopolitics factors
theoretical model
Mohammad Reza
Hafeznia
1
-Full Professor of Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Gholam Ali
Rashid
2
- Ph.D, Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran
AUTHOR
Akbar
Parhezgar
3
- Assistant Professor of Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran
AUTHOR
Mohammad Hossein
Afshordi
4
- Assistant Professor of Political Geography, Imam Hossein University, Tehran
AUTHOR
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
The Analysis of designating The Energy Strategic Ellipse Implication to The Caspian Sea Basin and Persian Gulf
Absteract The of Energy Strategic Ellipse Geoffrey Kemp, (1997), has a particular status in the field of political geography. This viewpoint indicates that recent discovery of fossil resources in the Caspian Sea, has had political-security aims when ever other experts consider it as one of the secret targets of the US in Greater Middle East Initiative, with the object of gaining possession of the new resources. The main question in this research is whether or not one can utilize this viewpoint for the time being. In other words, has the discovery of the new resources in the Caspian Sea basin been the past predictions come true in recent years? Also has the US been able to acquire its economic aims of the energy resources in this region? This article targets to represent a clear portrait of the process of vicissitude in the discovery of the new energy resources in this area, which is the origin of many political-security changes. This research has been carried out by using analytic-descriptive method, basined on the newest published statistics of the authorized centers and institutions about the amount of the energy resources in the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf, compiled in the last decade. The result of the investigation illuminates that there is considerable difference between the preliminary performed estimates and the amount of the present established resources. As a result, in accordance with this viewpoint it is wrong to replace Caspian Sea Basin with Persian Gulf Basin. Also the so-called Energy Strategic Ellipse does not imply with the realities of the region, at least in the present circumstances.
https://journal.iag.ir/article_118720_59a4762a82ce85512eb9b67e9c13283f.pdf
2007-06-22
62
39
Energy Strategic Ellipse
Persian Gulf basin
Caspian Sea Basin
Mohammad Baqer
Qalibaf
ghalibaf@yahoo.com
1
Assistant Professor of Political Geography, Tehran University
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mohammad Hadi
Pooyandeh
2
Ph.D Student of Political Geography, University of Tehran
AUTHOR
1. احمدی، بهزاد و میررضوی، فیروزه (1383)؛ راهنمای منطقه خزر و کشورهای آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز جنوبی؛ تهران: انتشارات ابرار معاصر.
1
2. احمدی، سیدعباس و پارسایی، اسماعیل(1385)؛ جایگاه ایران در نظریههای ژئوپولیتیک؛ مجموعه مقالات دومین کنگره انجمن ژئوپولیتیک ایران، تهران: انتشارات سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح.
2
3. اکبریان، رضا (1382)؛ ژئوپولیتیک ایران در زمینه اقتصاد نفت و گاز؛ مجله پژوهشهای اقتصادی، شماره 10و11.
3
4. بیژنی، مهدی (1381)؛ خزر و منافع ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران؛ تهران: نشر سایه روشن.
4
5. حافظنیا، محمدرضا (1385)؛ اصول و مفاهیم ژئوپولیتیک؛ مشهد: انتشارات پاپلی.
5
6. زون، ایگور (1385)؛ خزر توهمات و واقعیات؛ (جلد اول)، ترجمه علی شمسی فولادی، مؤسسه تحقیقات آب- مرکز مطالعات و تحقیقات دریای خزر.
6
7. عزتی، عزت اله و ویسی، هادی (1385)؛ تحلیل ژئوپولیتیک و ژئواکونومی خط لوله گاز ایران - هند، فصلنامه ژئوپولیتیک، سال دوم، شماره دوم.
7
8. فرزانگان، محمدرضا (1381)؛ جایگاه ایران در منابع انرژی دریای خزر؛ پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد دانشکده اقتصاد دانشگاه تهران.
8
9. قبادزاده، ناصر (1383)؛ دریای خزر؛ رژیم حقوقی، مواضع کشورهای ساحلی و حضور آمریکا؛ تهران: انتشارات فرهنگ گفتمان.
9
کمپ، جفری و هارکاوی، رابرت (1383)؛ جغرافیای استراتژیک خاورمیانه؛ ترجمه مهدی حسینی، تهران، انتشارات مطالعات راهبردی.
10
میرترابی، سعید (1384)؛ مسائل نفت ایران؛ نشر قومس، تهران.
11
موسوی، میر طیب (1384)؛ مسائل سیاسی اقتصادی جهانی نفت؛ تهران: نشر مردم سالاری.
12
Bahgat, gawdat, 2007; Prospects for energy cooperation in the Caspian sea; Communist and Post Communist Studies 40 (157-168).
13
Effimoff, Igor, 2000; The oil and gas resource base of the Caspian region; Journal of petroleum Science and Engineering 28 (157-159).
14
Oil & Gas Journal, Vol. 103, No. 47 (Dec. 19, 2005).
15
Oil & Gas Journal, Vol. 104.47 (December 18, 2006).
16
Oil & Gas Journal, January, 2007.
17
http://www.bp.com/Bp statistical _review of World Energy 2007.
18
http://www.bp.com/ statistical_review_full_report_workbook_2007.
19
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/oilreserves.html.
20
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Persian_Gulf/pdf.pdf.
21
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Caspian/images/caspian_balances.pdf.
22
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Caspian/Full.html.
23
http://www.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8611130563.
24
http://www.opec.org/library/Annual%20Statistical%20Bulletin/interactive/FileZ/Main.htm.
25
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
The Middle Eastern US foreign policy: the logic of Globalization or Geopolitics?
Abstract Globalization has attracted lots of attentions in the academia in the last few decades. Many people and many disciplines have sought to define its characteristics as well as its consequences. One major feature of globalization, it is argued, is that it has reduced the importance of territoriality and borders in politics. Thus, globalization as de-territorialization stands in opposite to geopolitics. However, both globalization and geopolitics have shaped states` behavior and foreign relations. This article sets to examine which of globalization or geopolitics has had major impact on the American foreign policy in the Middle East particularly after 9/11. Our main thesis is that the United States` foreign policy in the Middle East since the event in September 11, 2001, has been basically shaped by its geopolitical interests but under discuss of globalization.
https://journal.iag.ir/article_118721_f71a13dd41e1dea52bddf25b48583074.pdf
2007-06-22
88
63
globalization
Geopolitics
US foreign policy
Middle East
Amir Mohammad
Haji-Yousefi
amyousefi@yahoo.com
1
Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Department of PS and IR, Shahid Beheshti U
LEAD_AUTHOR
استراتژی امنیت ملی آمریکا در قرن 21، زمستان 1380؛ انتشارات مؤسسه فرهنگی مطالعات و تحقیقات بینالمللی معاصر؛ تهران.
1
حاجی یوسفی، امیر محمد (a1386)؛ "اقتصاد سیاسی بین الملل: ریشه ها و روندها"؛ فصلنامه رهیافتهای سیاسی و بینالمللی، تابستان.
2
حاجی یوسفی، امیر محمد (b1386)؛ "جهانیشدن از دید نظریه نوگرامشین در اقتصاد سیاسی بین الملل"؛ فصلنامه رهیافتهای سیاسی و بینالمللی، زمستان.
3
حاجی یوسفی، امیر محمد (1387)؛ "جهانیشدن و روابط بین الملل" مهدی ذاکریان (گردآورنده)؛ جهانیشدن (تهران: در دست انتشار).
4
دهمشگی، جلال، فرهنگی، بابک و راه چمنی، ابوالقاسم (1381)، کمیسیون امنیت ملی آمریکا، استراتژی امنیت ملی آمریکا در قرن 21؛ (انتشارات مؤسسه فرهنگی و مطالعات تحقیقات بینالمللی ابرار معاصر تهران).
5
متز، استیون و داگلاس جانسون (1381)؛ "عدم تقارن و استراتژی نظامی ایالات متحده؛ تعریف، زمینه و مفاهیم استراتژیک"؛ ترجمه عبدالحسین حجتزاده، ماهنامه نگاه، سال سوم، شماره 31، بهمن.
6
متقی، افشین (1383)؛ "سیاست خارجی آمریکا و تروریسم در خاورمیانه"؛ ماهنامه نگاه، سال چهارم، شماره 44، خرداد و تیر.
7
مرکز پژوهشهای کاخ سفید (1382)؛ استراتژی امنیت ملی آمریکا؛ ترجمه محمدحسن خانی و علی آدمی، ضمیمه فصلنامه مطالعات راهبردی، سال ششم، شماره دوم، تابستان.
8
مؤمنی، میرقاسم؛ "نقش آمریکا در گسترش اصلاحات در جهان عرب"؛ در کتاب خاورمیانه 5: ویژه اصلاحات در خاورمیانه (تهران: انتشارات مؤسسه فرهنگی مطالعات و تحقیقات بینالمللی برابر معاصر تهران).
9
10. Blackwill, Robert and Michael Sturmer (1997); (eds.) Allies Divided: Transatlantic Policies for the Greater Middle East, Cambridge: MIT Press.
10
11. Boggs, Carl (2003); ed.; Masters of War: Militarism and Blowback in the Era of American Empire; New York: Routledge.
11
12. Buckley, Mary and Robert Singh (2006); eds; The Bush Doctrine and the War on Terrorism; London: Routledge.
12
13. Bush, George W. (2000); Remarks at twentieth anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy; Washington D. C: 6 November.
13
14. Cerny, P.G., (2006); “The Competition State”; in Richard Stubbs and G. Underhill (eds.); Political Economy and the Changing Global Order, 3rd edn Don Mills: Oxford University Press.
14
15. Clark, Ian (1999); Globalization and International Relations Theory; Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15
16. Cofman, Tamara (2004); Arab Democracy, American Ambivalence, Will Bush's rhetoric about transforming the Middle East be matched by American deads? The Weekly Standard, Vol. 3, Issue 23.
16
17. Ehrman, John (1995); The Rise of Neoconservatism: Intellectual and Foreign Affairs; New Haven: Yale University Press.
17
18. Ehteshami, A. (2007); Globalization and Geopolitics in the Middle East; London: Routledge.
18
19. Friedman, Thomas (2000); The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization; New York: Anchor Books.
19
20. Friedman, Thomas (2002); Longitudes and Attitudes: Exploring the World After September 11; New York: Farrar.
20
21. Gordon, Philip (2003); “Bush's Middle East Vision”; Survival, Vol. 45, No.1, Spring.
21
22. Gourevitch, Peter (1986); Politics in Hard Times; Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
22
23. Harvey, David (2003); The New Imperialism; Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23
24. Hay, Colin, (2002); “Globalization as a Problem of Political Analysis: Restoring Agents to a ‘Process without a Subject’ and Politics to a Logic of Economic Compulsion”; Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 15,3.
24
25. Held, David and A. McGrew, (2007); Globalization/ Anti-Globalization; Cambridge: Politiy Press.
25
26. Ikenberry, John (2002); “Liberal Hegemony and the Future of the American Postwar Order”; in T.V. Paul and John Hall (eds), International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26
27. International Crisis Group (2004); The Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative: Imperiled at Birth ICG Middle East and North Africa, 7 June.
27
28. Kennedy, Paul (2002); “The Modern Machiavelli”; The New York Review of Books, November (www.nybooks.com).
28
29. Kiely, Ray (2005); The Clash of Globalizations: Neo-Liberalism; The Third Way and Anti-Globalization (Leiden: Brill).
29
30. Kinnval, Catarina (2002); “Analyzing the Global-Local Nexus”; in Kinnval, Catarina and K. Jonsson (eds), Globalization and Democratization in Asia, London: Routledge.
30
31. Krieger, Joel, 2005); Globalization and State Power: Who Wins When America Rules; New York: Pearson.
31
32. Layne, Christofer (2006);The Peace of Illusion: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
32
33. Magraoui, Abdesalam (2004); The Broader Middle East & North Africa Initiative: Potential and Limits; Woodrow Wilson Center, June 4.
33
34. McGrew, Anthony (2000); “Sustainable Globalization?”; in Tim Allen and Alan Thomas, eds., Poverty and Development into the 21st Century, Milton Keynes: The Open University & Oxford University Press.
34
35. Mearsheimer, John (2001); The Tragedy of Great Power Politics; New York: Norton..
35
36. Ohamae, Kenichi, (1995); The End of the Nation State; New York: Free Press.
36
37. Ottaway, Marina and Thomas Carothers (2004); “The Greater Middle East Initiative: off to a false start”; Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 29 March.
37
38. Posen, Barry and A. Ross (1996/97); “Competing Visions for U.S. Grand Strategy”, International Security, 21,3 (Winter): 5-53.
38
39. Rizopoulos, N. (1990); Sea-Changes: American Foreign Policy in a World Transformed. New York: Council on Foreign Relations.
39
40. Sassen, Saskia (1996); Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization; New York: Columbia University Press.
40
41. Scholt, Jan Art (2000); Globalization: A Critical Introduction; London: Macmillan.
41
42. Singer, P.W. (2002); " Time for the Hard Choices: The Dilemmas Facing U.S Policy Towards the Islamic World "; The Bookings Institute, September.
42
43. Stiglitz, Joseph (2002); Globalization and Its Discontents; New York: Norton.
43
44. Strange, Susan (1996); The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44
45. Stopford, John and Susan Strange (1991); Rival States, Rival Firms: Competition for World Market Shares; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45
46. The Joint Staff (1999); Joint Strategy Review; Washington DC.
46
47. Waters, Malcolm (2001); Globalization; London: Routledge.
47
48. Wade, Robert (2005); “The Invisible Hand of American Empire”; Ethics and International Affairs, 17,2.
48
49. Woods, Ngaire (2006); The Globalizers: The IMF, the World Bank, and Their Borrowers; Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
49
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Geopolitical Evolution of the last Decade of the 20th. Century and their Impacts upon the national Security of the I.R. Iran
Abstract Early in the 1990s. The world was faced with a new and unusual of incidence, known a collapse of the soviet union, that occurred not because of interference of any foreign power, but simply on the basis of ruptures in the inter political, social, military and cultural structure of the union at the same time changing the bipolarity and balance of power to lake of polarity and fluidity in international relation. Under the circumstance every one of the great powers, having in mind. Their own interest tried assume responsibility abilities of the disappeared power they filling the vacancy created by its abs sense. The desire for superiority confided. The clash of interest and the resulting anarchy created irregularities such as American invasion of Iraq on the exclude of the liberating Kuwait-occupied by Iraq the September 2001, etc. Consequently , the study of the results of the breakdown of the eastern black and the geopolitical development, of the 1990s, particularly their impact, in the middle east, remain the main point of interest in the minds of treachery, of the middle east problems. The present article having in mind the studying the effect of the development upon interests of the Iran in the area put forth the following theory: 1- After collapse of the Soviet Union the geopolitical frontiers of the us. Has reached the geopolitical frontiers of Russian. 2- The spatial expansion of America has resulted in physical siege of Iran, thus increasing its security expenditures. In the opinion of the author, in order to reduce the security cost it is advisable to consider adoption of alliance and collation policies.
https://journal.iag.ir/article_118723_61607568050ea30e27bd73c1cce11e6a.pdf
2007-06-22
113
89
Us Foregoing policy
geopolitical
Strategy alliance
National Security
International System
Regional crisis
Mohammad
Heidari
mohammad_heydari47@yahoo.com
1
Assistant Professor of Political science, Azad-e Islami University
LEAD_AUTHOR
Hamid Reza
Mohammadi
2
Assistant Professor of Political Geography, Shahid Beheshti University
AUTHOR
ابوالحسن شیرازی، حبیب الله (1379)؛ منافع ملی آمریکا در آسیای مرکزی در رقابت با روسیه؛ فصلنامه مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، شماره 29.
1
ترجمان سیاسی، شماره 140.
2
سنبلی، نبی؛ ‹‹ ایران و محیط امنیتی آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز››؛ فصلنامه مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، شماره 37.
3
ظریف، محمد جواد (1371)؛ ‹‹ میزگرد تحولات جدید ژئوپلیتیک منطقهای و امنیت ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران››؛ فصلنامه مطالعات خاورمیانه، سال پنجم، شماره 2.
4
فلاحتپیشه، حشمت الله (1380)؛ تحولات امنیتی آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز و امنیت ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران؛ تهران: انتشارات دانشکده فرماندهی و ستاد سپاه پاسداران.
5
نادرپور، بابک(1380)؛ اهداف آمریکا از لشکرکشی به افغانستان؛ تهران: مؤسسه فرهنگی مطالعات و تحقیقات بینالمللی ابرار معاصر.
6
یونسیان، مجید(1380)؛ کابوسهای قصر شیشهای: تأملی در روابط آمریکا و عربستان؛ تهران: مؤسسه فرهنگی مطالعات و تحقیقات بینالمللی ابرار معاصر.
7
E. Beukel, America Approaching the Successor States: Between Idealism and Realism.
8
Michael Denison,(2002); Central Asia’s New Romance Life With the West.
9
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Geopolitical Factors Effective on role and function of the International boundaries with emphasis on the borders I.R. Iran
Abstract Borders are spatial phenomena that define geographic boundaries of political entities or legal jurisdictions, such as governments and states. And thus under certain regulations prevent illegal transferred goods, animals or people. One of the important aspects of the international borders is the role and functions of different boundaries and more important than that is the knowledge of knowing various factors affecting them. Experts design different roles and functions for borders such as consolidation, struggle, communication, delimitation, separation, formation of political economies. It seems that based on a new approach and a general attitude one can divide the most important border functions into two groups namely defensive-security and communication-commercial .On the other hand, geopolitical factors of different nature affect the role and function of the borders, including the cases can be as pointed out: among these one can name The political system of neighboring countries one two sides of the border, economic and social status of the border residents relative position of the country the type of strategic control over the region, kind of attitude and behavior of the states towards the border, reserves and natural resources in the border region. This article has tried to analyze the effectiveness geopolitical factors on the role and function of the International boundaries in relation to the Islamic Republic of Iran.
https://journal.iag.ir/article_118725_663b54434f457d7177ecbc7164a66371.pdf
2007-06-22
145
114
International
boundaries
role and function
geopolitical factors
I.R. Iran
Sayed Hadi
Zarghani
1
Assistant Professor of Political Geography, Ferdowsi Univerrsity of Mashhad
LEAD_AUTHOR
افتخاری، اصغر (1378)؛ ظرفیت طبیعی امنیت مورد قومیت و خشونت در ایران؛ فصلنامه مطالعات راهبردی، شماره پنجم و ششم، پاییز و زمستان.
1
پرسکات(1359)؛گرایشهای تازه در جغرافیای سیاسی؛ ترجمه دره میرحیدر؛ تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
2
حافظنیا، محمدرضا (1381)؛ جغرافیای سیاسی ایران؛ تهران: انتشارات سمت.
3
حافظنیا، محمدرضا (1379)؛ مبانی مطالعات سیاسی- اجتماعی؛ جلد دوم؛ قم: سازمان حوزهها و مدارس علمیه خارج ازکشور.
4
خطابی،غلامحسین (1374)؛ مرزبانی؛ چاپ اول؛ تهران: معاونت آموزشی ناجا.
5
درایسدل، آلاسدیر و اچ بلیک، جرالد (1374)؛ جغرافیای سیاسی خاورمیانه و شمال آفریقا؛ ترجمه دره میرحیدر؛ تهران: انتشارات دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بینالمللی وزارت امور خارجه.
6
رحمتیراد، محمدحسین (1374)؛ مزربانی، گذرنامه و اتباع بیگانه؛ ج1، تهران: معاونت آموزشی ناجا.
7
زرقانی، سید هادی (1386)؛ مقدمهای بر شناخت مرزهای بینالمللی؛ تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه علوم انتظامی.
8
زرقانی، سید هادی (1380)؛ تحلیلی بر کارکرد امنیتی مرز شرقی؛ پایان نامه کارشناسیارشد رشته جغرافیای سیاسی؛ تهران: دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
9
10. زرقانی، سید هادی (1385)؛ عوامل مؤثر بر امنیت مرزی با تأکید بر مرز شرقی ایران و افغانستان؛ مجله علوم جغرافیایی؛ شماره نخست، مشهد: دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی.
10
11. علینقی، امیرحسین (1378)؛ دادههایی از عدم تعادل در جامعه ایران؛ استانهای مرزی ، فصلنامه مطالعات راهبردی، شماره پنجم و ششم، پاییز و زمستان.
11
12. عندلیب، علیرضا(1380)؛ نظریه پایه و اصول آمایش مناطق مرزی جمهوری اسلامی ایران؛ تهران: دانشکده فرماندهی و ستاد سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی.
12
13. قوام، سید عبدالعلی(1383)؛ اصول سیاست خارجی و سیاست بینالملل؛ تهران: انتشارات سمت.
13
14. قویدل، مهدی (1383)؛ نگاه اسرائیل به افغانستان پس از یازده سپتامبر؛ کتاب آسیا (ویژه افغانستان پس از طالبان)؛ تهران: انتشارات مؤسسه ابرار معاصر.
14
15. کریمیپور، یدالله(1381)؛ ایران و همسایگان منابع تنش و تهدید؛ تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تربیت معلم.
15
16. مجتهدزاده، پیروز (1381)؛ جغرافیای سیاسی و سیاست جغرافیایی؛ تهران: انتشارات سمت.
16
17. ملازهی، پیر محمد(1383)؛ ثبات در افغانستان و نقش آن در امنیت ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران؛ کتاب آسیا(ویژه افغانستان پس از طالبان)؛ تهران: انتشارات مؤسسه ابرار معاصر.
17
18. میرحیدر، دره (1381)؛ مبانی جغرافیای سیاسی؛ چاپ نهم، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
18
19. ویژهنامه همایش ملی مرزها، سازمان جغرافیایی نیروهای مسلح، 24و25 تیرماه 1382.
19
20. خبرگزاری ایرنا - خبرگزاری ایسنا - خبرگزاری فارس.
20
21. روزنامه ایران، روزنامه قدس، روزنامه خراسان.
21
22. Dwivedi, R.L (1990); fundamentals of political geography; Chaitanya Publishing hous.
22
23. Glassner, M. & Fahrer, C. (2004); Political Geography; USA: John Wiley and Sons.
23
24. Newman David and Paasi Anssi (1998); Fences and Neghbours in the Postmidarn world, Human Geography.
24
25. World Drug Report )2006(; Volume 1, United Nations Publication, Office on Drugs and Crime.
25
26. Illicit Drug Trends in Afghanistan April 2008.
26
27. UNITED NATIONS Office on Drugs and Crime Country Office.
27