Iran, Russia, and China Layout against US in Eurasia Geopolitical Arena

پژوهش ‎های جغرافیای سیاسی

Article 2, Volume 4, Issue 1 - Serial Number 13, October 2019, Pages 23-62   

Document Type: مقالات علمی -پژوهشی

DOI: 10.22067/pg.v4i1.78974

Authors

Hamid Dorj¹; Hashmatullah Falahat pishe^{* 2}

¹University of Isfahan

²Allameh Tabataba'i University

Abstract

Extended abstract

Introduction

The United States has to withdraw the powers in Eurasian geopolitical region, such as Russia, China, and Iran; and increase its influence in this region to draw up a new Eurasian geopolitical map. The interests of this country can be evaluated in addition to maintaining strategic patterns from the perspective of dominating energy reserves, securing oil pipelines, countering the influence of Russia, China and Iran. Russia, on the other hand, as a serious critic of US policies will seek to gain regional supremacy in Eurasia, following the relative establishment of political stability. it will certainly be a challenge for US policies in the region. China has cultural, economic and security links with some of the Eurasian countries, establishing itself as a great power by relying on worldwide economic power. These confrontations and disagreements with Washington's unilateral policies in the Eurasia geopolitical region with the presence of the Islamic Republic of Iran have become a strategic triangle for the establishment of a barrier policy.

Review of Literature

The term of geopolitics, as a controversial and ambiguous word, was first introduced by the Swedish scientist "Radolf Kilen" in the 1899 and in the concept of "knowledge of the analysis of geography and politics relationship" came to contemporary political geography field. Geopolitics is the study of international relations and contrasts concerning the geographies. In other words, the influence of geographical factors such as the location, distance, and distribution of natural and human resources on international relations is a geopolitical issue (Braden & Shelley, 2000: 5).

Methodology

Due to the nature of the subject, library and documentary methods have been used for data collection and qualitative analysis has been used for data analysis in which the classification, evaluation, comparison and analysis of the data are done to test the research hypothesis. The nature of this research is descriptive-analytical.

Findings and Discussion

Eurasia as the Earth's Heartland is a key pillar of world domination. Indeed, specific indicators of the strategic regions of the world should be sought in this region. This is as important fact as Mackinder says: "Any power that can dominate Eurasia can control the world" (Nazemroaya & Halliday, 2012: 67 68). The United States has placed the acquisition and consolidation of world hegemony in the forefront of its determination, actions, and foreign policy responses, and at this time seeks to maintain its position by preventing the emergence of a global challenge power and even the formation of an anti-hegemonic alliance. Therefore, it seeks to prevent the creation of anti-hegemon alliances with a different mix of Iran, Russia, China, and India by infiltrating Russia's backyard, controlling China, and communicating with their neighbours. In the new conditions of the international system in which any power is met with resistance, the Eurasian region has the most potential to form an anti-hegemon axis for encountering America. Countries such as Russia, China, and Iran that are recently recognized as primarily regional powers, and some political scholars believe they have the potential to form an anti-hegemon axis in the Eurasian region. Brzezinski warned that the emergence of a Eurasian hostile coalition could challenge American supremacy. The aggressive nature of US strategy is clearly evident in Brzezinski's remarks. He identified the potential Eurasian coalition as a potential anti-hegemonic coalition or North Atlantic anti-coalition formed by the help of Iran, Russia, and China coalition, with China at its center (Brzezinski, 1998: 32). In 1999, Beijing and Moscow were well aware of what was happening as well as future events. They were also well aware of US foreign policy. China and Russia signed a good neighbourly alliance and friendly collaboration on July 24, 2001. this happened less than two months after 9/11 events. A reciprocal defense alliance was established against NATO and the US, and a military network was established around China, pushing them beyond their territorial and bilateral defense integrity (Nazemroaya, 2012: 6- 7). As well as strengthening its military structure and capability in the domestic arena based on the principle of self-reliance, Iran has also had a presence in regional coalition and mechanisms which undoubtedly, the most important of them is Iran's presence in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization as one of the most important and comprehensive regional security mechanisms in Central Eurasia. (Karami and Kozegar Kalaji, 1393: 141).
Washington's strategy for Central Asia after 2014 is to build communications channels along infrastructure such as the Northern Distribution Network and the New Silk Road with the aim of laying the foundations for a long-term structural relationship in Central Asia for the period following its military withdrawal (Javadyarjmand & salaverzizade, 1396:281). By establishing and leading new international organizations, China and Russia are also trying to challenge US-led Western Organizations and institutions. Iran's formal accession to Tracey (Europe, Caucasus, Asia) is a major step in breaking isolationist policies against Iran as well as strengthening Iran's transit status and increasing trade volume in Iran's southern route ( Karami & Kouzegarkaleji, 1393:139). China is well aware that it is highly vulnerable to a US leadership military strike on oil resources. That is why China is expanding its naval bases, so it insists and presses repeatedly to build onshore energy corridors and oil terminals directly from Central Asia and the Russian Federation to China. China's cooperation with Iran, Russia and the Central Asian republics helps to create an inter-Asian energy path and the continued flow of energy to China may be blocked if the oversight of the high seas by the US-led navy. The debate that has been going on for years over the development of a natural gas pipeline from Iran to Pakistan, India, and China is itself part of China's strategic policy (Conway & Nauman, 2011: 3).

Conclusion

Maintaining the hegemonic role of the United States in the unipolar world has been America's most important strategic goal from post-Cold War to contemporary era. The creation of military bases and various investments in large oil and gas projects in various parts of the world, including the Eurasian region, are examples of this effort to shape the new American order. This policy was carried out rapidly by the US and NATO in the early years of the 21st century without any serious opposition from the other powers. Although Brzezinski claims that until the next generation, America's standing as the world's sole power cannot be challenged by any rival power, Russia, China, and Iran, as the three most powerful and beneficiary countries in the region, has been dissatisfied with the action from Washington and NATO and the relative progress they have made over the past two decades; and they  are trying to counter US and NATO policies and in turn strengthening their influence and capability in this geopolitical area. Preventing US pressure to isolate Iran, Russia, and China, gain greater maneuverability internationally in partnership with independent or dissatisfied governments, preventing NATO's influence and empowerment, investing in environmental and tourism issues, and participating in international gas and oil pipeline projects are among the most important collaborative efforts of the three countries against US hegemonic policies in Eurasia.

Keywords

Eurasia; America; Iran; Russia; China; Geopolitics

References

1. Adami, A. & Aeinvand, H. (2018). How Russia and China Oppose the US in Eurasia. Central Asian and Caucasian Studies, 24 (102), 1-33. [In Persian].

2. Aeinvand, H. (2018). Explaining China's and Russia's Anti-Hegemonic Policies against the United States. International Journal of National Research, (3)32, 67-94. [In Persian].

3. Ahmadipour, Z., & Lashgari, E. (2012). Theoretical and Experimental Recognition of the Concept of a Strategic Zone in Eurasian Supercontinent. Central Eurasia Studies, 4 (9), 1-20. [In Persian].

4. Barducci, R. (2016). Understanding Russian Political Ideology and Vision: A Call for Eurasia, From Lisbon to Vladivostok. Washington, USA: The Middle East Media Research Institute.

5. Batchelor, T. (February 5, 2017). The map that shows how many NATO troops are deployed along Russia’s border/, Available at: https:// www. independent. co. uk/ news/ world/ europe/ russia-nato- border- forces-map- where-are-they-positioned- a7562391.html.

6. Blank, S. J. (2007). U.S. Interest in Central Asia and Their Challenges, StrategicStudiesInstitute, Available at: http:// www. Strategic Studies Institute. army.mil/.

7. Braden, K., & Shelley, F. (2000). Engaging Geopolitics, London,

8. Brzezinski, Z. (1995). Out of Control: Global Turmoil on the Eve of the 21st Century, London, England: NYC: Touchstone, 1- 256.

9. Brzezinski, Z. (1998). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives, London, England: Nyc: Basic Books, pp. 1- 240

10. Brzezinski, Z. (2000). The Geostrategic Triad: Living with China, Europe, and Russia (Significant Issues Series). Washington, Dc: Center for Strategic and International Studies Press, December 18, 1- 88.

11. Carlson, Brian and others (2018), Strategic Trends 2018. Washington, USA: ETH Zurich Center for Security Studies (CSS), 1- 44.

12. Chang, M. H. (2018). Return Of The Dragon: China's Wounded Nationalism. London, England: Routledge, 1- 272.

13. Chapman , D., & khanna, N. (2008). The Persian Gulf, global oil resources, and international security. Contemporary Economic Policy, 24(4), 507-519.

14. Chen, Y. (September 4, 2018). Caspian Region in the Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB): A Chinese Perspective. caspian policy center, Available at: http://www.caspianpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Caspian-Region-in-the-Silk-Road-Economic-Belt-SREB_-A-Chinese-Perspective-CPC.pdf.

15. Conway, R., & Nauman, Q. (2011). Pakistan to speed up Iran pipeline opposed by U.S. reuters, Retrieved from: https://www.reuters.com/article/pakistan-iran-pipeline/pakistan-to-speed-up-iran-pipeline-opposed-by-u-s-idUSL3E7K834020110908.

16. Cordesman, A. H. (July 17, 2018). Trump on Russia: His Strategy Documents vs. His Meeting with Putin. Center for Strategic and International Studies, July 17, Available at: https:// www. csis. org/ analysis/ trump- russia- his- strategy-documents - vs- his- meeting-putin/.

17. Dadandish, P. (2007). Geopolitical Discourse in Central Asia: Areas of Iranian-Russian Interaction. Geopolitics journal, 3(1), pp. 75-96. [In Persian].

18. Demirtas, S. (2010). NATO shield could cause World War III, Turkish party leader says. Global Research, November 24, Available at: https:// www. globalresearch. ca/ towards- a-new- Iron- curtain- the- us- nato- missile- shield-encircles -eurasia/22365.

19. Eltiaminia, R., & Bagheridolatabadi, A., & Nikfar, J. (2016). The Yemen Crisis: Investigating the Basis and Purpose of Saudi-American Foreign Intervention. Strategic Policy Research journal, 5(48), pp. 171-198

20. England: Pearson Education Limited, 1-168.

21. England: Praeger, 1-272

22. Falahatpishe, H., & Dorj, H. (2020). Russia and the Efforts to Neutralize the Impact of American Missile Defense Shields in Eastern Europe. Central Eurasia Studies, 12(1), 157-175.

23. Farjirad, A., & Shabani, M. (2013). Russian Politics in Central Asia and the Caucasus and its Challenges after the Cold War. Geographical Journal of the Land, 10 (39), 1-18. [In Persian].

24. Fouskas, V., & Gokay, B.(2005). The New American Imperialism: Bush War on Terror and Blood for Oil (Praeger Security International). London,

25. Gertz, B. (2005). China builds up strategic sea lanes. Washington Times, USA, January 18.

26. Girgin, D. (2016). Analyzing of the Geopolitical Energy confrontation in the caucuses: Role of Iran, after sanction were Lifted. International Journal of Humanities and social science, 6 (2).

27. Hahn, G. M. (2018). Ukraine Over the Edge: Russia, the West and the”New Cold War. London, England: NYC: McFarland, 1- 368.

28. Huntington, S. P. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations?. The Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22-49.

29. Javadyarjmand, M., & Salavarzizadeh, S. (2018). The US Political and Military Strategy in Central Asia after 9/11; Objectives and Challenges. Central Eurasia Studies, 10 (2), 271-288.

30. Karaganov, S. (2018). The new ColdWar and the emerging Greater Eurasia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 9(2), 85- 93.

31. Karami, J., & Kuzegar Kalaji, V. (2014). Anti-Hegemonic Patterns of Iran, Russia, and China in Central Asia. Journal of Central Asia and the Caucasus, 20 (85), 127-159. [In Persian].

32. Katzenstein, P. J., & Weygandt, N. (2017). Mapping Eurasia in an Open World: How the Insularity of Russia’s Geopolitical and Civilizational Approaches Limits Its Foreign Policies. Perspectives on Politics, 15(2), 26-62.

33. Kiani, K. (2011). US stiffen opposition to Pak-Iran gas pipeline project. Dawn, September 15, Available at: https://www.dawn.com/news/659280. [In Persian].

34. Kramnik, I.(2009). “Who should fear Russia’s new military doctrine?” October 23, sputniknews, Available at: Available at: https:// sputniknews. com/ analysis/ 20091023156567212/.[In Persian].

35. Lauro, P., & Tewall, F. (2002). Geopolitical Keys, Translated by Dr. Hassan Sadoghounini. Shahid Beheshti University Press, Tehran.

36. Lukin, A. (2016). The Emerging International Ideocracy and Russia’s Quest for Normal Politics. Strategic Analysis, 40 (4) , 255-270.

37. Macedo, J.(2011). What is Driving the US, Russia and China in Central Asia’s New Great Game. University of Dundee, Available at: http:// www. dundee. ac.uk/cepmlp/gateway/files.php?file=cepmlp_car14_61_7075 92600.pdf.

38. Meyer, H., & Temkin, A. (2012). Russia Seeks Naval Bases in Cold War Allies Cuba, Vietnam. Bloomberg, July 27, 2012, Available at: https:// www. bloomberg. com/ news/ articles/ 2012-07-27/ russia-seeks-naval-supply-bases-in-cold-war-allies-cuba-vietnam.

39. Mousavi, S., & Bahadorkhani, M., & Mousavi, S. (2013). The Impact of Energy Pipelines on the Geopolitics of Central Asia and the Caucasus", Journal of Central Asia and the Caucasus, 18(80), 147-169. [In Persian].

40. Naghdinejad, H., & Souri, A. (2008). "Russian-American Competition in Eurasia", Central Asian and Caucasian Studies, 14(62), 155-171. [In Persian].

41. Nazemroaya, Darius, M. (2012). The Eurasian Triple Entente: Touch Iran in a War, You Will Hear Russia and China. Strategic Culture Foundation, January 22, Available at: https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2012/01/22/eurasian-triple-entente-touch-iran-war-hear-russia-china/.

42. Nazemroaya, M. D., & Halliday, D. J. (2012). The Globalization of NATO, London, England: Clarity Press, INC, September 15, 1- 412.

43. O’Byrne, D.(2018). Iran sanctions herald energy trouble for Caucasus nations. Eurasianet, Retrieved from: https://eurasianet.org/iran-sanctions-herald-energy-trouble-for-caucasus-nations.

44. Olcott, Martha, B. (2004). Russia- Chinese Relations in a Changing Asia. Washington DC, USA: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

45. Phil, H. (2018). Trump’s new militarism – “United States prepares wars against Russia and China. Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières, March 26, Available at: http://www.europe-solidaire.org/spip.php?article43811.

46. Putin, V. (2007). Speech and the Following Discussion at the Munich Conference on Security Policy. Germany, Byron Munich: Munich Conference on Security Policy, February 10.

47. Rafi, H., & Bakhtiari Jami, M. (2013). US Strategy to Contribute to China's Economic and Political-Security Influence in Central Asia. Central Asian and Caucasian Studies, 19 (83), 82-106. [In Persian].

48. Rahmani, M., & Miri, E. (2016). The Influence of China-Russia Norms on US Hegemony. Central Asia and Caucasus Journal, 21 (92), 65-95. [In Persian].

49. Rouhi, M. (2019). US–Iran tensions and the oil factor. Survival Quarterly Magazine, 60(5), 33-40. [In Persian].

50. Russia from Turns East to Great Eurasia. Islamic Republic News Agency, December 28, 2017, Web site: https://www.irna.ir/news/82778518/.[ In Persian].

51. Schake, K. (November 15, 2018). The US is right to worry about cooperation between its adversaries. Iiss, Available at: https:// www. iiss. org/ blogs/ analysis/ 2018/ 11/ us-worry-cooperation-adversaries/.

52. Taylor, P. J. (1993). Political Geography: World-Economy, Nation-State, and Locality, London, England: Longman Scientific and Technical, Third Edition, 1-360.

53. Tuathail, G., & Dalby, S. (1998). GEOPOLITICS, London, England: Rutledge.

54. Vosoughi, S., & Rezaei, M.(2016). An Iranian View of Understanding Barriers and Failures in Tehran-Baku Relations. Global Politics Journal, 4 (4), 153-186.

55. White House (March 22, 2018), President Donald J. Trump is standing up for American innovation. Whitehouse, Retrieved from: https:// www. whitehouse. gov/ briefings- statements/ president- donald- j- trump- standing- american-innovation/.

56. Writers, S.(2008).“China's new naval base triggers US concerns”, May 12, Available, spacewar, at:http:// www. spacewar. com/ reports/ Chinas _new_ naval_ base_triggers_US_concerns_999.html.

57. Xiaokun, L. (2010). US report claims China shoots down its own satellite. China Daily, July 19, Available at: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2010-07/19/content_10121179.htm.

58. Yazdani, E., & Tuyserkani, M. (2012). An Analysis of the Geopolitical Competition of Powers in the (Energy Strategic Oval). Geographical Research Journal, 26 (103), 149-186. [In Persian].

59. Younus, U. (May 8, 2018). What Trump's Iran Decision Means for India. the diplomat, Available at: https:// thediplomat. com/ 2018/ 05/ what- trumps- iran-decision- means-for-india/.