Explaining the Components of Geopolitical Interests in Iran-Turkey Foreign Relations

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. in Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Professor of Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor of Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Extended abstract 
Introduction
Geopolitics is science of studying the interrelationships of geography, power, and politics, and the actions that result from combining them. Its main difference from political geography is the combination of power with the other two elements, which makes it more different. The common point of the two sciences of international relations and geopolitics is in this common element of power, which both have a special place in the science of political science and political geography. Since the main subject of geopolitics is the study and study of cross-border relations between political units at local, national, regional and global scales, there are many similarities and closeness with the subjects studied by the knowledge of international relations, and this has caused ambiguity about the reason for the existence of two sciences, their relationship with each other and the common and specific concepts and issues of the two sciences. Among the basic concepts of geopolitical knowledge that play an important role in shaping relations between countries, the concept of geopolitical interests has a special place in theories of political geography and international relations. The concept of geopolitical interests is the assumed spatial and geographical complementarity across borders that is structurally homogeneous and functionally meets the needs and shortcomings of a country. Geopolitical affiliation forms the basis of the national interests, goals and interests of countries.
Methodology
The research is descriptive-analytic and data gathering procedure is based on library and field finding methods. 130 questionnaires in the form of Likert scale were distributed among professors and specialists in political geography, geopolitics, political science and international relations. Finally, 107 questionnaires were completely answered and collected. The T-test was used to test the hypotheses. Finally, the Friedman ranking test was used to examine and rank more precisely the eight dimensions of the components of geopolitical interests in Iran-Turkey relations.
Results and discussion
The variables of geopolitical interests in the foreign relations of Iran and Turkey can be explained and divided into eight dimensions: political, geographical, geoeconomic, geoculture, geostrategy, cyberspace, science-technology and ecology. These components have had different effects depending on the geographical location and geopolitical conditions of the two countries. Based on the T-Test results the effectiveness of the components in the foreign relations of the two countries shows that the components of geography, geoeconomics and science-technology have the greatest impact on the bilateral relations. On the other hand, the components of ecology and geoculture have less impact than the three other components. It should be noted that all components had an average above 3, which indicates a positive impact on relations between the two countries. The Friedman test was also used to rank and determine the importance of the components of geopolitical interests of countries (political, geographical, geoeconomic, geoculture-social, geostrategy, cyberspace-media, science-technology and ecology). According to the results, geographical, geoeconomic and scientific-technological components have the highest rank and on the other hand, habitat and geoculture components have lower ranks.
Conclusions
The Islamic Republic of Iran and Turkey with different and sometimes conflicting political systems in the West Asian region, with a special geopolitical position in the global and regional system and interactions and relations with each other and with other countries, always create new issues that collectively provide a suitable background for the study of dynamic and evolving factors, political, economic, scientific, etc., with an emphasis on geographical realities to explain politics and foreign relations. As discussed, the wide level of relations between the two countries caused geopolitical interests to appear in the eight components of foreign relations. Also, since Turkey's foreign policy has been constantly zigzagging and changing since the AKP came to power, and has been based on various theories such as Kemalism, Ottomanism, attention to the doctrine of the blue homeland, etc, the pattern of foreign relations of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Turkey based on geopolitical interests can be explained and studied in four aspects: interactive, competitive, conflicting and domination. The results of reliable field and documentary data showed that the competitive aspect is more visible.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Afzali, R; Hosseini, M (2008). Study And Analyses Of Turkey Geopolitical Evolutions And Effects On Iran. Geopolitics Quarterly. 4(11).151-176. [In Persian]
  2. Akbari, N; Mashhadi, A (2019). Environmental Threats and Obligations of the Government of Turkey in Implementing the GAP Project in Relation to Environmental Impacts in Iran (Dust Storms). International Law Review An Academic Journal( Semi- Annual).36(61).311-351. [In Persian]
  3. Bazgard, M.T; Hafeznia, M.R; Mousavi Shafaee, S.M; Koulaei, E (2019). Geopolitical Factors of Conflict between the Superpowers during Post-Cold War Era. Journal of Geographical Researches, 34(4). 471-482. [In Persian]
  4. Davand, M; Davand, H (2017). Post-structuralism, power and crisis in international relation's theories (a case study of human security concept). Journal of Political International Researches.30(9). 227-254. [In Persian]
  5. Davoodi, A (2015). The Iranian Science and Technology Diplomacy in Afghanistan: Challenges and Opportunities. Strategic Research of Politics. 3(11). 103-127. [In Persian]
  6. Ebrahimi Far, T; Monavavari, A (2012). Introduction To The Review Of Power Concept In International Relations: Perspectives And Typology. Political Science Quarterly .8(18). 5-22. [In Persian]
  7. Fuller, G (1991). The Center of the Universe: The Geopolitics of Iran, West views Press.
  8. Fuller, G (1999). Qeble of Iran's Geopolitical World, translated by Abbas Mokhber, Tehran: Ministry of Foreign Affairs Publications. [In Persian]
  9. Ghasemi, S (1995). Turkey, Tehran: Office of Political and International Studies, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
  10. Golmohammadi, V (2019). The future of Iran-Turkey relations on the horizon of 2025. Tehran: Publications of the Higher Institute of National Defense and Strategic Research. [In Persian]
  11. Golmohammadi, V; Sajjadpour, M.K; Mousavi Shafaiee, M (2017).  Erdoganism and Understanding the Turkish Middle East Policy.Strategic Studies Quarterly.19(73).69-92. [In Persian]
  12. Hafeznia, M.R (2017). Principlres and concept of Geopolitics. Mashhad: Papoli Pablications. [In Persian]
  13. Hafeznia M.R; Roumina, E (2017). The Impact of Geopolitical Interests of Iran and Saudi Arabia on Regional Challenges in Southwest Asia. Journal of Geographical Researches. 10(2). 215-238. [In Persian]
  14. Hafeznia, M.R; Kaviani Rad, M (2014). Philosophy of Political Geography. Tehran: Research Institute for Strategic Studies Publications. [In Persian]
  15. Hafeznia, M.R; Rabiee, H (2012). Persian Gulf and the strategic role of the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran: Samat Publications. [In Persian]
  16. Khalili, M (2008). Islamic consultative assembly and foreign relations. research letter of political sciense.2(10). 69-95. [In Persian]
  17. Mah Pishaniyan, M (2011). Cyberspace and new forms of conflicts between United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Culture - Communication Studies.12(13).95-121. [In Persian]
  18. Mirheidar D; Hamidinia, H (2006). Methodology and Concepts in Political Geography and International Relation: A Comparative Study. Geopolitics Quarterly.2(1). 1-41. [In Persian]
  19. Nafaa, H (2011). "The Turkish Model’ in the Mirror of the Arab Spring", Translated by Ghada Diab from Arabic to English, Nathalie Tocci et al, Turkey and the Arab Spring: Implications for Turkish Foreign Policy from a Transatlantic Perspective, Washington, D.C.: The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF).
  20. Krige J; Barth, K (2006). Global Power Knowledge:Science and Technology in International Affairs. The History of Science Society.21(1). 1-22 . [In Persian]
  21. Nell, Ph; McGowan, P.J (1999). Power, Wealth and Global order. South Africa: University of Cape Town Press.
  22. Norshahi, N (2012). Compare and Monitoring the Behavior of Science and Technology System of Turky and Iran.Higher Education Letter. 5(18). 115-138. [In Persian]
  23. Poordest, Z (2018). Designing a model governing Iran-Turkey relations. PhD Thesis in International Relations. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University.
  24. Puchala, J (1971). International politics today, New York: Dodd, Mead
  25. Puheloinen A. (1999). Russia's geopolitical interests in the Baltic area. Helsinki: National Defence College.
  26. Rouhi Dehboneh, A (2018). Geopolitical Analysis of Iranian-Turkish Competitions Affected by the Middle East Developments Since 2011. Geopolitics Quarterly.14(49).113-147. [In Persian]
  27. Toffler, A (1980). The Third Wave. United States and Canada: Bantam Book.
  28. Zeinolabedin, Y; Saber, Z (2013). Analysis of the Elements of Iran’s Geopolitical Interests in the Republics of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan via Matrix Examination Model. Geopolitics Quarterly.9(30).108-135. [In Persian]
  29. Ghasemi, S (1995). Turkey, Tehran: Office of Political and International Studies, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. [In Persian]
  30. Unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/ReportFolders
  31. irna.ir/new/83916149