عنوان مقاله [English]
Undoubtedly, the behavior of each state in the international equations, especially in the geopolitical crisis is directed by special factors that direct usually different and even opposite approaches and behaviors of states. Each geopolitical crisis shows the conflict between at least two states and a tense competition related to the national interests. In this regard, we are witnessing these conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia plus Karabakh Republic. The second group of players engaged in Karabachos crisis are regional players (i.e. Russia, Turkey and Iran) and supra-regional players (i.e. the US and Europe). Because of their nature, geopolitical crises are usually suitable settings for geopolitical rivalries. The interests of regional powers differ from the interests of supra-regional players. Regional players are mainly the states whose interests overlap with geographical territory of the crisis. The main excuse for supra-regional powers to engage in the crisis is their potential to manage the crisis. Beside major players, some international organizations and non-governmental groups (in particular, Diaspora groups) are among players in this crisis. The present research, however, focuses only on the major players. With regards to the complexity of the geopolitical crises and the dynamism of the factors caused competition among players, we are witnessing contradictory behavioral patterns in the Karabakh crisis. In this relation, the research question is “what are the main factors directing the players’ behavior in Karabakh Crisis?”
The research methodology adopted here is descriptive- analytic, and data gathering procedure is based on library findings. The first section is intended to present a theoretical perspective which will be applied on Karabakh Crisis in the second section. As mentioned above, the article will focus on major players.
Based on the research findings, in any geopolitical crisis, strategic approach is the most important parameter in the players’ behaviors. Strategic approach increases the players’ potential in order to reach their strategic interests. In strategic approach, the states play role in the crisis by knowing the environment of the crisis in regional and global levels, time situation, and the nature of the crisis. The matter is also applicable to the Karabakh crisis. Generally, the strategic approaches of different players based on situation of the crisis, players’ mentality and nature have different roles in the nature of Karabakh crisis.
Also, Geopolitical code is the only substantive reasoning to justify the intervention of the players in a geopolitical crisis. Based on this view, the role-playing of the players would be various based on the nature and number geopolitical codes. If the states’ geopolitical codes are formed in opposition with each other, the potential of war and conflict would be so high. The Research findings show that foreign policies of the states show that their geopolitical codes are formed in opposition with each other and this has complicated the crisis. Based on the research findings, geopolitical interests are among parameters affecting the players’ behaviors. Geopolitical interests mean strategic depth of the states. Geopolitical interests produce geographic identity for the states. On the one hand, the geographic identity creates inherent right for the states because the state is attributed to the identity. This allows the states to act in an international system. In fact, it is a license for states to play their role in the geopolitical crisis background. On the other hand, these crises can be seen as security gaps of geopolitical interests that threaten geographic identity of the states. Based on the research findings, Karabakh crisis which is placed at a geostrategic region, and attracts interests of different players and threatens geopolitical interests of the players, has put South Caucasus at the intersection of geopolitical interests of different players. Based on the geopolitical and national interests, each of the players has different geopolitical concerns, and psychologically the nature of geopolitical and political role- playing of the players is directly or indirectly in connection with the geopolitical concerns that are discussed in this section.
Research findings show that the nature of role-playing of the players in the Karabakh crisis is the effect of some special factors which determine the nature of behavioral patterns. In this research, these parameters are known as the principles directing the states’ behavior. Considering that these parameters are formed differently because of various interests of different players. The consequence would be forming the contradictory behavioral patterns, a phenomenon that is obvious in the Karabakh crisis. Hence, players’ behavior in the region is affected by strategic approach, geopolitical codes, geopolitical interests, geopolitical concerns and national, subjects that were discussed in this paper. In fact, although contradictions and conceptual differences of the players have made them show ambiguous and contradictory behaviors, it is essential to consider spatial and temporal conditions of the region which paved the way in this regard. In sum, save for Europe, all players in the crisis have adopted a unilateral strategic approach, an important obstacle to settle the crisis. Also, the contradictory geopolitical codes of the players directing the states’ foreign policies are among obstacles. Yet, because geopolitical interests show strategic depth of the states and mutually geopolitical crises are security gaps threatening are contradictory, Karabakh crisis not only has taken the attention of different players, but also is the main factor threatening geopolitical interests in this geo-strategic region. Additionally, any player in the crisis considers different geopolitical and national- strategic interests based on their geopolitical concerns, an issue that affects the nature of their political and geopolitical role-playing.