سامانه پشتیبانی خدمات اطلاعات

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات158
تعداد شماره‌ها6,225
تعداد مقالات67,685
تعداد مشاهده مقاله114,995,681
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله89,667,366
جوادی ارجمند, محمد جعفر, فلاحی, احسان. (1394). بررسی تطبیقی سیاست خارجی ایران و ترکیه در قفقاز جنوبی (با تأکید بر ارمنستان و جمهوری آذربایجان). , 8(2), 211-228. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2015.56845
محمد جعفر جوادی ارجمند; احسان فلاحی. "بررسی تطبیقی سیاست خارجی ایران و ترکیه در قفقاز جنوبی (با تأکید بر ارمنستان و جمهوری آذربایجان)". , 8, 2, 1394, 211-228. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2015.56845
جوادی ارجمند, محمد جعفر, فلاحی, احسان. (1394). 'بررسی تطبیقی سیاست خارجی ایران و ترکیه در قفقاز جنوبی (با تأکید بر ارمنستان و جمهوری آذربایجان)', , 8(2), pp. 211-228. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2015.56845
جوادی ارجمند, محمد جعفر, فلاحی, احسان. بررسی تطبیقی سیاست خارجی ایران و ترکیه در قفقاز جنوبی (با تأکید بر ارمنستان و جمهوری آذربایجان). , 1394; 8(2): 211-228. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2015.56845

بررسی تطبیقی سیاست خارجی ایران و ترکیه در قفقاز جنوبی (با تأکید بر ارمنستان و جمهوری آذربایجان)

مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی
مقاله 4، دوره 8، شماره 2، مهر 1394، صفحه 211-228    اصل مقاله (563.75 K)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jcep.2015.56845
نویسندگان
محمد جعفر جوادی ارجمند* 1؛ احسان فلاحی2
1دانشیار علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران
2دانشجوی دکتری روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه اصفهان
چکیده
خلأ قدرت در قفقاز جنوبی در دوران پساجنگ سرد، رقابت قدرت‌های منطقه‌ای و فرامنطقه‌ای را برانگیخته است. در این میان ایران و ترکیه به‌دلیل همسایگی، به این منطقه حساسیت‌های خاصی دارند. سه جمهوری تازه‌تأسیس، فرصت‌ها و چالش‌های جدیدی را پیش روی ایران و ترکیه قرار داده‌اند که برایند آن رقابت تهران و آنکارا در منطقه است. جمهوری آذربایجان و ارمنستان به‌دلیل داشتن مرز مشترک با ایران اهمیت ویژه‌ای دارند. در این نوشتار با استفاده از ژئوپلیتیک انتقادی درپی پاسخ به این پرسش‌ها هستیم که رقابت ایران و ترکیه چه ابعادی دارد؟ جهت‌گیری سیاست خارجی این دو کشور در منطقه چگونه است؟ رقابت ایران و ترکیه سه‌بعد سیاسی، اقتصادی و فرهنگی دارد. ایران به قفقازجنوبی رویکرد منطقه‌ای دارد؛ اما ترکیه با نگرشی فرامنطقه‌ای و در راستای همکاری با غرب، سیاست‌هایش را در قفقاز پیش می‌رد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
خلأ قدرت؛ رقابت منطقه‌ای؛ ژئوپلیتیک انتقادی؛ سیاست خارجی؛ قفقاز جنوبی
عنوان مقاله [English]
The Comparative Examination of Iran and Turkey’s Foreign Policy in South Caucasus with Emphasis on Azerbaijan and Armenia
نویسندگان [English]
Mohammad Ja’afar Javadi Arjomand1؛ Ehsan Fallahi2
1Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Tehran, Iran
2PhD Student of International Relations, University of Isfahan, Iran
چکیده [English]
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, vacuum of power emerged in the South Caucasus. This matter has sparked trans-regional and regional powers competition. The newly established Republics create challenges and opportunities for Iran and Turkey. The result of this situation is the competition between Tehran and Ankara in the region. This topic is highly important in regional equations because of common border between the two republics with the Iran-Turkey. Islamic Republic of Iran and Turkey lost the strategic importance of the cold war period after the 1991. However, in the post-Cold War geopolitical changes, Iran and Turkey configured as the bridge land that link the important regions of the world. However, the perception of Iran and Turkey regional policy can be more understandable with comparative method.
In this article, we have attempted to answer these questions; what is the most important aspect of competition between Iran and Turkey in the South Caucasus? And how is the orientation of Iran and Turkey foreign policy in the region? We discuss the origin of this competition in the three dimensions; political-security, economical, and cultural aspects. Iran has regional approach to the South Caucasus. But Turkey performs its policies in the South Caucasus through trans-regional approach and cooperates with the West. We try to examine the above hypothesis by descriptive- analytical method.
On the surface, the competition is going on between Ankara and Tehran. But both of these countries have aspiration in global and regional levels. Although in South Caucasus subsystem they automatically stand at the special alliance and formulate indirect competition. Thus, Turkey stands at the West axis and Iran stand at the Russia axis. This indirect competition analysis is by critical geopolitics framework. Unlike the old geopolitics approach, critical geopolitics believes that international politics has not been created exclusively by Nation-State. This attitude considers geopolitics as a discourse. Critical geopolitics unlike the dreadful geopolitics of the Past Centuries tries to reveal the reality beyond the ideology, fanaticism and capitalism. Critical geopolitics is a starting point to provide a different form of geopolitics. Caucasus issues have security nature for Iran. Along the same vein the Republic of Azerbaijan is the center of dispute between Iran and Turkey in the South Caucasus. Separatist idea and military cooperation with Israel and Turkey lead to more concerns of Iran. On the other hand, Armenia as part of the North-South axis is placed in Russian-Iranian triangle. Russia, Iran and Armenia triangle tries to prevent the Azerbaijan penetration as a west’s pressure leverage, and to reduce the Turkey influence on the region and also constrain the West's presence on the Caspian Sea.
Therefore, culture is one of the aspects of South Caucasus issues. But culture has duplex function. In one hand, it can cause integration and on the other hand the divergence. In Iran-Azerbaijan Cultural relations, difference factors are more than cooperative factors. Turkey and Armenia have low level of cultural relations because of ethnic differences and political conflicts. Statistics show that economic relations in South Caucasus are affected by political and security issues. Despite the existence of shared border between Armenia and Turkey the volume of imports and exports is much lower than Turkey’s trade with republic of Azerbaijan. It is important to point out that the economic relations of Iran and Armenia is much more than Iran-Azerbaijan relations. According to the critical approach in the international relations, foreign policy of the states has hidden this dimension. Turkey’s regional policy is closer to Iran and west program in the south Caucasus.
Ankara by the influence of America in the region not only benefited from economic advantages, it also performs its cultural policies as a function of economic power. The relations of South Caucasus countries are affected by political and security issues in all aspects.  In fulfilling the regional interests, Turkey has been more successful than Iran. Position of Iran and Turkey in the South Caucasus has not been formed on the basis of their real abilities. From the perspective of critical geopolitics, many regional orders have not been formed by the willingness of nations, as it was created by the great powers. But the possibility of changing the status quo, the formation of a relationship based on shared values and enjoyment is more equitable from the economic benefits.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
critical geopolitics, Foreign Policy, regional competition, South Caucasus, Vacuum of power
مراجع
  1. Abedin, Mahan (2004), “Iran at Sea Over Azerbaijan”,  Available at: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FI28Ak01.html, (Accessed on: 14 May. 2013).
  2. Ahmadipour, Zahra & Marjan Badiee, (2002), “Critical Geopolitic”, Human Sciences Modares, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 1-10.
  3. Alipour, H, Norieva.A  & Rezvan, Moosa (2009), “Trade Development Trend Between Islamic Republic of  Iran and  Azerbaijan Republic”, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 3, No.10, pp. 591-600.
  4. Asatryan, Granik.S (2002), “Armenia and Security Issues in the South Caucasus”, the Quarterly Journal, No. 3, September,  pp. 21-30.
  5. Atai, farhad (2009), “the Dynamics of Bilateral Relations in the South Caucasus: Iran and Its North Neighbors”, China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly,Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 115-128.
  6. Atai, Farhad (2012), “Iran and the South Caucasus Countries”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 5, No. 10, pp.119-136.
  7. Baban, Inessa & Zaur, Shiriyev (2010), “The U.S. South Caucasus Strategy and Azerbaijan”, Turkish Policy Quarterly, Vol. 2, No.2, pp. 93-103.
  8. Balcer, Adam (2011), Turkey as a Source of Inspiration for Arab Spring: Opportunities and Challenges. Available at: http://www.ume.edu.mt, (Accessed on: 30 September. 2013).
  9. Blandy, C W (2008), “Azerbaijan: Is War over Nagorno - karabakh an Rrealistic Option?” Advanced Research and Assessment Group. Available at:

http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?ots591=0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e2c24 a6a8c7060233&lng=en&id=87342, (Accessed on: 9 April. 2013).

  1. Cagaptay, Soner (2009), “The AKP's Foreign Policy: The Misnomer of Neo-Ottomanism”, Turkey Analyst, Vol. 2, No. 8, pp.1-3.
  2.  Cornell, Savent.E (1998), “Iran and the Caucasus”, Middle East Policy, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 51-67.
  3. Cornell, Svnte.E (2001), Small Nations and Great Powers, London: Curzon Press.
  4. Davutoğlu, Amet (2008), “Turkey’s Foreign Policy Vision: An Assessment of 2007”, Insight Turkey, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 77-96.
  5. Dehghan Trazjani, Mahmood (2000), Iran's Foreign Relations and Neighbors in the Second Decade of the Islamic Revolution, Tehran: Soroush.
  6. Dodds, Klaus (1996), “The 1982 Falklands War and a Critical Geopolitical Eye: Steve Bell and the If...Cartoons”, Political Geography, Vol. 15. No. 7, pp. 571-592.
  7. Falkowski, Maciej (2009), Turkey’s Game for the Caucasus, Centre for Eastern Studies, No, 29, pp. 1-6.
  8. Hafeznia, Mohamad & Afshordi, Mohamad Hoseyn (2002), “Caucasus Geopolitical Analysis; Suitable Context for the Formulation of More Appropriate Foreign Policy in the Area”, Geographical Research Quarterly, Vol. 71, No.42, pp. 19-37.
  9. Hajiyousefi, Amir mohamad (2005), The Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Light of Regional Development (1991-2001), Tehran: Institute for Political & International Studies.
  10. Hayrapetyan, Grigor & Hayrapetyan Viktoriya (2011), “Regional and International Trade of Armenia: Perspective & Potentials”, EERC Research Network Russia and CIS, No. 11, pp.1-47.
  11. ‎Herzig, Edmund (1995), Iran and the Former Soviet South, Paris: Royal Institute of International Affairs.
  12. Hunter, Shirin (2010), Iran’s Foreign Policy in the Post-Soviet Era, England: Oxford.
  13. International Crisis Group (2008), “Azerbaijan: Independent Islam and the State”, No, 191, Available at:
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/europe/191_azerbaijan_independent_islam_and_the_state.pdf, , (Accessed on: 12 May.2013).

  1. Iskandaryan, Alexander (2009), “Armenian-Turkish Rapprochement: Timing Matter”, Insight Turkey, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp.37-44.
  2. Ismayilov, Ibrahim (2010), Nagorno - Karabakh: Ethnic Conflict or Geopolitics? Exploring the Dispute Between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Lambert Academic Publishing.
  3. Jones, L and Sage, D (2010), “New Directions in Critical Geopolitics: an Introduction”, Geo Journal, Vol. 75, No. 4, pp. 315-325.
  4. Koolaee, Elaheh (2010A), Politics and Government in Central Asia, Tehran: SAMT.
  5. Koulaee, Elahe (2010B), Islamic Republic of Iran and the Geopolitics of the South Caucasus, Geopolitics Quarterly, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.75-111.
  6. Lenczowski, George (1997), “The Caspian Oil and Gas Basin: a New Source of Wealth?”, Middle East Policy, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 111-119.
  7. Marketos, Thrassy.N  (2009), ”Turkey in the Eurasian Energy Security Melting pot”, China and Eurasia forum Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp.95-113.
  8. Mirheidar, Doreh; Afzali, Rasool & Moradi, Eskandar (2011), “Geopolitics From a New Perspective: Decentralizing Power / Knowledge”, Human Geography Research Quarterly, Vol.43, No. 78, pp 1-22.
  9. Mojtahedzadeh, Pirouz; Hossainpouryan, Reza &  Karimipour, Yadollah (2008), “An Analysis of the Overlapping Areas of Geopolitical Realities in the Foreign Policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan”, The Journal of Spatial Planing, Vol. 12, No. 2,pp. 213-255.
  10. Nixey, James (2010), “The South Caucasus: Drama on Three Stages”. America and a Changed Wworld: A Question of Leadership. Available at:

http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Americas/us0510_nixey.pdf, (Accessed on: 29 April. 2013).

  1. Novikon, Gayane (2000), “Armenia and the Middle East”, Middle East review of international affairs, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 60-66.
  2. Nowak, Jorgen (1997), “Ethnical And political situation in Uzbekistan”, Translate by Ladan Mokhtari, Centeral Asia and the Caucasus Studies, Vol. 3, No. 17, pp.275-308.
  3. Olga, Oliker & Szayna Thomas S (2003), Faultlines of Conflict  in Central Asia and the South Caucasus, RAND Arroyo Center.
  4. Salahi, Malak yahya (2004), Political Thought in the Twentieth Century, Tehran: Ghomes.
  5. Sazhin, Vladimir (2011), “Iran and South Caucasus”, Available at:
http://ص"ایران و قفقاز جنوبی"، برگرفته از سایت:

www.strategicreview.org, (Accessed on: 2 March. 2014).

  1. Souleimanov, Emil (2011), “Dealing with Azerbaijan: The policies of Turkey and Iran toward the Karabakh War (1991-1994)”, Available at: http://www.gloria-center.org (Accessed on: 9 February 2015).
  2. Taghaviasl, Ata (2000), New Geopolitics of Iran: from Kazakhstan to Georgia, Tehran: Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
  3. Taheri, seyedmehdi & Hashemi Nasab, Saeed (2010), “Mysticism in Russia, Central Asia, and the Caucasus: an Iranian outlook”, Foreign Relations, Vol. 2, No. 5, pp.197-242.
  4. Valiyev, Anar.m (2012), “Azerbaijan-Iran Relations: Quo Vadis, Baku?”, PONARS Eurasia Policy Memo, NO. 244, pp.1-5.

 

آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,899
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,801


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب