سامانه پشتیبانی خدمات اطلاعات

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات161
تعداد شماره‌ها6,532
تعداد مقالات70,500
تعداد مشاهده مقاله124,085,939
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله97,189,490
جعفری, علی اکبر, جانباز, دیان. (1397). امنیت هستی‌شناسانه: ابزاری برای مداخلۀ ژئوپلیتیک غرب در خزر (با تأکید بر مسئلۀ انرژی). , 11(1), 39-58. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2018.113444.449554
علی اکبر جعفری; دیان جانباز. "امنیت هستی‌شناسانه: ابزاری برای مداخلۀ ژئوپلیتیک غرب در خزر (با تأکید بر مسئلۀ انرژی)". , 11, 1, 1397, 39-58. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2018.113444.449554
جعفری, علی اکبر, جانباز, دیان. (1397). 'امنیت هستی‌شناسانه: ابزاری برای مداخلۀ ژئوپلیتیک غرب در خزر (با تأکید بر مسئلۀ انرژی)', , 11(1), pp. 39-58. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2018.113444.449554
جعفری, علی اکبر, جانباز, دیان. امنیت هستی‌شناسانه: ابزاری برای مداخلۀ ژئوپلیتیک غرب در خزر (با تأکید بر مسئلۀ انرژی). , 1397; 11(1): 39-58. doi: 10.22059/jcep.2018.113444.449554

امنیت هستی‌شناسانه: ابزاری برای مداخلۀ ژئوپلیتیک غرب در خزر (با تأکید بر مسئلۀ انرژی)

مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی
مقاله 4، دوره 11، شماره 1، فروردین 1397، صفحه 39-58    اصل مقاله (528.52 K)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jcep.2018.113444.449554
نویسندگان
علی اکبر جعفری* 1؛ دیان جانباز2
1دانشیار روابط بین‌الملل گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه مازندران
2دکتری روابط بین‌الملل، دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
دریای خزر که روزی منطقه‌ای خفته در عرصۀ جغرافیای سیاسی و محل بازی بزرگ بود؛ پس از فروپاشی اتحاد شوروی بازی بزرگ جدیدی در آن رخ نمایانده است و به قدری اهمیت یافته که در دستور کار قدرت‌های بزرگ قرار گرفته و کانون توجه در سیاست بین‌الملل است. در واقع منطقۀ‌ ژئوپلیتیک دریای خزر بعد از فروپاشی اتحاد شوروی به‌صورت منطقه‌ای فعال و دارای کارکرد خاص ظهور کرده است. به‌گونه‌ای که سیاست‌ها و تلاش‌های قدرت‌های بزرگ فرامنطقه‌ای برای تأمین منافع و تقویت موقعیت ژئواستراتژیک خود، راه را برای انتقال ایمن نفت‌وگاز از منابع دریای خزر هموار ساخته است. در این میان، وضعیت جغرافیایی منطقه، شرایط اقتصادی و سیاسی کشورهای حوزۀ دریای خزر، نوع ارتباط بین دولت‌های منطقه با قدرت‌های فرامنطقه‌ای، وجود کانون‌های بالقوۀ بحران در منطقه و همچنین روند تحولات امنیتی و سیاسی جهان از عامل‌های مؤثر بر تولید و عرضۀ نفت‌وگاز منطقۀ خزر به بازارهای مصرف هستند. مؤلفه‌هایی که سبب به‌کارگرفتن راهبرد‌های جدید از سوی بازیگران فرامنطقه‌ای برای رویارویی با روسیه و جمهوری اسلامی ایران در منطقه شده‌اند و منطقۀ خزر را به مرکز درگیری بین‌المللی و به‌عنوان یکی از مناطق پرالتهاب تبدیل کرده‌اند. فرضیۀ نوشتار آن است که امنیت‌ هستی‌شناسانه در خزر به بهانه‌‌ای برای نفوذ راهبردی غرب از راه مداخله برای تأمین امنیت انرژی تبدیل شده است. از این‌رو، این پژوهش با روش توصیفی-‌تحلیلی و با استناد به آمار و اسناد این فرضیه را مورد آزمون قرار می­دهد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
اتحادیۀ اروپا؛ آمریکا؛ امنیت انرژی؛ امنیت هستی‌شناسانه؛ حامل‌های انرژی؛ دریای خزر
عنوان مقاله [English]
Ontological Security: An Instrument for Western Geostrategic Intervention in the Caspian Sea (Emphasizing the Energy Issue)
نویسندگان [English]
Ali Akbar Jafari1؛ Dayyan Jaanbaaz2
1Associate Professor of International Relations, University of Mazandaran
2PhD in International Relations, University of Tehran
چکیده [English]
The Caspian Sea, which is the largest lake in the world, with no natural waterway to the world's open seas, with a length of 1200 km and an average width of 300 km in the east of the Caucasus, has been the source of civilization and tribes since 75,000 thousand years ago. In the years before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Caspian Sea was known as a common sea between Iran and the Soviet Union, and this de facto border was recognized until the collapse. Iran, with the exception of its own issues, did not play a role in the issues of the region. The Caspian Basin was the sphere of Soviet influence, and the Soviet Union dominated the northern, northeastern and western parts of the region as part of its territory. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, a couple of countries were established in the Caspian region, while these states along with the great powers faced new challenges. The post-1991 Caspian Sea geopolitical region also emerged as an active and functional area. The most important issues that have changed the political geography and boundaries of the Caspian region are including: the Caspian Sea legal regime, ethnic conflicts in the countries of the region, regional energy resources as well as environmental issues. What is considered more important for Western powers is a strategic influence in a region that is considered a kind of "backyard" of Russia.
As such, the West tried to continue to engage in exploration, extraction and transfer of energy from the newly independent states to their strategic influence in the region. On the same basis, over the past two decades, the construction of energy transit corridors outside Russia and the Islamic Republic of Iran and security of energy supply has become the priority of the regional policy of these countries. Indeed, the policies and efforts of great international powers to secure their interests and strengthen their geostrategic position have paved the way for the safe transfer of oil and gas from the Caspian Sea resources. Meanwhile, the geographic situation of the region, the economic and political conditions of the Caspian region, the existence of potential sources of crisis in this area, as well as the process of global security and political developments in the world, including the factors affecting the production and the Caspian hydrocarbon supply to the consumer markets are instrumental. The elements have led to the adoption of new strategies by transnational actors to confront the Russia and Islamic Republic of Iran in the region, and the Caspian area has become an international conflict center and as one of the most enticing regions. Therefore  the economic revenues of the Caspian states are largely due to the energy supply and sale of energy carriers, they provide ontological security and the basis for defining the national interests affected by identity and cultural perception, and hence the definition of identity and normative from the region and its equations, they tried to keep these republics states in their sphere of influence.
The assessment of the status of the Caspian littoral states shows that the political and economic collapse of these countries has been heavily influenced by identity patterns that have been widely practiced and enjoyed by the United States and the West. Thus, these countries are desperate for attracting foreign investment and having a share of world market. Since most of the newly independent states are ruled by undemocratic regimes, the mentality of their leaders strongly affects their interactions with other countries of the region. Meanwhile, culture, language, religion, ideology and race as an opportunistic and identity challenge have played a large role in shaping the identity of states in the Caspian region, which can be reflected in the form of ethnic and religious tensions and terrorism.
The research question is that how the ontological security provides the basis for the geostrategic influence of the West in the Caspian region? The hypothesis of the paper is that security-related psychology in the Caspian Sea has become an excuse for the strategic influence of the West through an intervention to secure energy. In order to prove the hypothesis, the research method is descriptive-analytical and based on reliable statistics and documents.
As a result, it must be said that the energy sources in the region and the resulting developments have a major impact on the direction of these security components and the delineation of the boundaries between the internal powers in this region. Firstly, the social and ethnic tensions and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism threaten to exploit the hydrocarbon resources of the Caspian Sea. For instance, ethnic tensions on the northern route can be pointed out, which have created conflicting interests and security concerns for transnational countries, and secondly, the actions taken by large foreign powers to manage the component Security (such as counterterrorism, Islamism, and intervention to resolve territorial disputes based on ethnicity and race) justify the transfer of Caspian energy resources at a lower cost than the energy market. In this regard, the goals of the US and the West in the Caspian Sea, which apparently include the promotion of democracy and free markets, regional peace and cooperation to create business opportunities, but in practice such efforts have focused on energy issues. Hence, it can be said that the existence of energy resources in the Caspian Sea is a hedgehog of two tails because it can also be a source of income or a basis for cooperation with neighboring countries, and on the other hand, by not defining the legal regime of this sea, the strategy of the West in the region brought potential risks to coastal countries (Iran and Russia). With this process, it is not surprising that the continuing disagreement over the Caspian Sea borders does not encourage the involved countries to prepare themselves for military self-defense.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Energy Carrier, Energy Security, European Union, Ontological Security, The Caspian Sea, United States
مراجع
  1. Adeebfar, Tamine (2001), Geopolitical Dimensions of the Main Export Pipeline in the Caspian Region: The Bako-Tibbilis-Ceyhan Pipeline and the Events of 11 September 2001, Tehran: Institute for International Energy Studies.
  2. Aghaee, Davood, Bahaeddin Maryami and Ali Khalili Roknabadi (2015), “NATO’s New Strategies in the Context of the Lisbon 2010 Statement against the Russian Federation”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 21-36 [in Persian].
  3. Ahmadi, Hossein and Darab Jalil Piran (2010), “Caspian Sea Security Regime after the Collapse of the Soviet Union until 2009; Obstacles and Challenges”, Political and International Studies Department of Islamic Azad University, Shahreza Branch, No. 3, pp. 109-142 [in Persian].
  4. Ahmadi Pour, Zahra, Mohammad Reza Hafeznia and Zahra Hosseini Sadat Mahalleh (2016), “The Examination of the Pattern of Competition of the Powers in the Caspian Sea”, Geographical Research, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 85-104 [in Persian].
  5. Alizadeh, Ali (2001), “Security Perspectives on the Caspian Basin”, Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, No. 35, pp. 175-194 [in Persian].
  6. Alliker, Olga and Thomas Sienna (2003), Controversial Faults in Central Asia and South Caucasus, Translated by Mahmoud Reza Golshan Pajouh, Abbas Cardan and Hossein Saeed Kolahi, Tehran: Cultural Institute of International Studies and Research of Abrar Moaser [in Persian].
  7. Allison, Roy (2003), Security in Central Asia: a New Framework for International, Translated by Mohammad Reza Dabiiri, Tehran: Department of Press and Publications of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs [in Persian].
  8. Al-Rodhan, Nayef R. F. (2006), “Security in the Caspian Sea Region: Challenges and Opportunities in a Globalized World”, GCSP Policy Brief, Vol. 53, No. 9, pp. 1-4.
  9. Amir Ahmadian, Bahram (2009), “Investigating the Causes and Consequences of U.S. Presence in the Caucasus”, Geopolitics, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 66-97 [in Persian].
  10. Asgarkhani, Abu Mohammad, Khorram Baghaee and Alireza Samoudi (2011), “The Review of Russian-EU Relations and its Outlook”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 4, No. 7, pp. 125-150 [in Persian].
  11. Babajide, Nathaniel (2016), “Energy Security and Economic Performance of the Caspian Region: How Vulnerable is the Region to the Falling Oil Price?”, 1St IAEE Eurasian Conference, August 28-31, Baku: Azerbaijan, Center for Energy, Petroleum and Mineral Law and Policy (CEPMLP), University of Dundee, United Kingdom, pp.1-16, Available at: http://www.iaee.org/baku2016/submissions/OnlineProceedings/Baku%20Conference%20Proceeding%20Paper_Nathaniel%20Babajide.pdf, (Accessed on: 12/7/2017).
  12. Bahman, Shoaib (2009), “Russia and the European Union; the Confrontation between Realism and Liberalism”, Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, No. 67, pp. 69-96 [in Persian].
  13. Balmasov, Sergei (2011), “The United States and the Caspian Sea Countries are Chummy: but against Whom?”, New Eastern Outlook, March 22, Available at: http://www.journal_neo.com, (Accessed on: 5/7/2016).
  14. Boroujerdi, Alaeddin, Salman Ansarizadeh and Mehrdad Karami (2011), “Geo-Economy of Caspian Sea and its Impact on Energy Security in the European Union”, Strategy Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 60, pp. 7-27 [in Persian].
  15. British Petroleum (BP) (2015), “Statistical Review of World Energy 2015”, Available at: http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview, (Accessed on: 17/1/2016).
  16. Chaboki, Ummolbanin (2009), “The Challenges of Relations between Iran and the Republic of Azerbaijan”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 63-84 [in Persian].
  17. Cresniov, Alexei (2017), “The Role of the US in the Modernization of the Country: the Case of Moldova and Georgia”, International Scientific Conference Batumi, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 27-46.
  18. Erickson, Erick (1951), Childhood and Society, New York: Norton.
  19. Etaat, javad and Hamidreza Nosrati (2009), “Iran and Caspian Energy Transmission Pipelines”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 1-22 [in Persian].
  20. Firoozian, Mohammad (2009), “Security Challenges in the Caucasus”, Strategy Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 51, pp. 41-58 [in Persian].
  21. Giddens, Anthony (1971), Modernity and Self Identity: Self and Society in the Modern Age, Cambridge: Polity.
  22. Grison, Nathan R. (2013), “NATO’s Energy Security Policy Put to the Caspian Test”, Connections: the Quarterly Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 83-94.
  23. Haji Yousefi, Amir Mohammad (2005), The Foreign Policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Context of Regional Developments 2001-1991, Tehran: Political and International Studies Office [in Persian].
  24. Jong, J. J. (2008), “The Third EU Energy Market Package: are we Singing The Right Song?”, Clingendael International Energy Programme (CIEP),Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 1-14.
  25. Karimov, Reshad, Eugene Chausovsky and Kamal Makili-Aliyev (2011), The Caspian Bain: Geopolitical and the Future Balance of Power, Baku: SAM Center for Strategic Studies.
  26. Koolaee, Elaheh and Mahnaz Goodarzi (2013), Caspian Sea; Challenges and Perspectives, Tehran: Mizan [in Persian].
  27. Kumar, Pankaj (2009), “The Unrealized Dream of Caspian Oil”, International Politics, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 1-18.
  28. Laruelle, Marlene and Sebastien Peyrouse (2009), “The Militarization of the Caspian Sea: “Great Games” and “Small Games” over the Caspian Fleets”, China Eurasia Forum Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 1-22.
  29. Main, Steven J. (2005), The Bear, The Peacock, The Eagle, The Sturgeon and the Black, Black Oil: Contemporary Regional Power in the Caspian Sea, London: Defense Academy of the United Kingdom.
  30. Maleki, Abbas (2005), “Caspian Sea and Environmental Needs: Coordination to Deal With Problems”, in: Articles of the 10th International Conference on Central Asia (Ten Years Evolution, Past Experiences, Future Perspectives), Tehran: Department of Press and Publications of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs [in Persian].
  31. Medcalf, Jennifer (2013), NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization): Past, Present, Future, Translated by Asghar Ghahremanpour Bonab, Tehran: Khorsandi [in Persian].
  32. Mez, Lutz (2013), “The Historical Weight of Geopolitics and Geo-Economics in the Caspian Region”, in: Behrooz Abdolvand, “Caspian Energy and Environment Bulletin (CEEB)”, Berlin Center for Caspian Region Studies, No. 1, pp. 33-56.
  33. Mirheydar, Doreh and Sefatollah Taheri Shemirani (2001), “The Geopolitics of Caspian Sea”, Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, Vol. 11, No. 45, pp. 55-96 [in Persian].
  34. Mitzen, Jennifer (2006)(a), “Anchoring Europe’s Civilizing Identity: Habits, Capabilities and Ontological Security”, Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 78-94.
  35. Mitzen, Jennifer (2006)(b), “Ontological Security in World Politics: State Identity and the Security Dilemma”, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 341-370.
  36. Moradi, Manouchehr (2007), “The New Look at the Security Challenges in the South Caucasus”, Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, No. 57, pp. 183-90 [in Persian].
  37. Oktav, Ozden Zeynep (2005), “American Politics toward Caspian Sea and Baku-Tiblisi-Jiyhan”, Perception, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 1-5.
  38. Pabst, Adrian (2009), “Central Eurasia in the Emerging Global Balance of Power”, American Foreign Policy Interest, No. 31, pp. 166-76.
  39. Pishgahifard, Z. and Others (2010), “Geopolitical Constructs Understanding and Survey with Constructivism Geography Approach Case Study: IRI and its Confronting Challenges in Central Asia”, Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 459-467.
  40. Ramezani, Seyed Rahmat and Alireza Mehrabi (2010), “Geopolitics of the Caspian Sea and the Divergence of Coastal Countries”, Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, No. 72, pp. 19-50 [in Persian].
  41. Rasooli Sani Abadi, Elham (2010), “Maintaining the Ontological Security and Incompatibility of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Nuclear Politics”, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 51, pp. 38-56 [in Persian].
  42. Rostami, Farzad and Muslim Gholami Hassanabadi (2015), “Ontological Security and Continued Iran-Western Nuclear Conflict”, Global Politics, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 135-166 [in Persian].
  43. Rühle, Michael (2012), “NATO and Energy Security: from Philosophy to Implementation”, Journal of Transatlantic Studies, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 1-14.
  44. Russell, Martin (2015), “EU-Russia Relation Stuck together?”, European Parliamentary Research Service, March 15, Available at: www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/.../EPRS_ATA(2015)551343_EN.pdf, (Accessed on: 10/1/2017).
  45. Sadeghi, Seyed Shamseddin (2012), “Russia’s Energy Policy Strategy in Eurasia: Opportunities and Obstacles”, Foreign Relation, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 219-246 [in Persian].
  46. Shadrina, Katya (2006), “The Geopolitics in the Caspian Region: Regional Cooperation or Conflict?”, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Conference Report,Stanford University, pp. 1-14.
  47. Soleimani Pourlak, Fatemeh and Morteza Shoja (2011), “Effective Factors in the Process of Militarization of the Caspian Sea”, Defense Strategy, Vol. 9, No. 33, pp. 189-218 [in Persian].
  48. Steele, Barnet (2002), “Ontological Security and the Power of Self Identity”, Review of International Studies, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 517-538.
  49. Tamana, Faramarz (2010), “The Evolution of Concept of the Actor and the Security Issue in International Relations”, in: The Evolution of Concepts in International Relations, Homeira Moshirzadeh and Nabiollah Ebrahimi, Tehran: Research Institute for Strategic Studies [in Persian].
  50. Tishehyar, Mandana (2010), “Review of NATO Policies in Eurasia Region on the Base of Constructivism Theory”, Central Eurasia Studies, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 43-62 [in Persian].
  51. U.S Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2014), “Caspian Sea Region: Overview of Oil and Natural Gas in the Caspian Sea Region”, Aug. 26, Available at: http://www.eia.doe.gov, (Accessed on: 11/5/2016).
  52. U.S Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2016), “Country Analysis Brief: Russia”, Oct. 25, Available at: https://www.eia.gov/beta/international/analysis_includes/countries_long/Russia/russia.pdf, (Accessed on: 17/1/2017).
  53. Vassilieva, Olga (2003), “Conflict Management in the Caucasus Via Development of Regional Identity”, in: Jan Koehler and Christoph Zurcher, Potentials of Disorder, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  54. Wuis, Anton (2016), “NATO and Energy Security”, TEIMUN, May 5, Available at: teimun.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/NAC_TEIMUN_EnergySecurity.pdf, (Accessed on: 12/2/2017).
  55. Zemlianichenco, Alexander (2011), “Putin’s Bid for Kremlin Sealed”, Moscow Times, Nov. 8, Available at: https://themoscowtimes.com/news/putins-bid-for-kremlin-sealed-11053, (Accessed on: 23/5/2018).
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 742
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 625


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب