تغيير و تداوم در سياست بين الملل ژئوپوليتيك طبيعي و هارتلند

Changes and Continuity in the International and Geopolitical Policies in Eurasia: Natural Geopolitics and Heartland

In the process of international politics we witness the continuity of old policies in new formats which reminds us of the principles of continuity and change in the international politics. Due to this, the need to have a general outlook to explain these changes and arranging the somewhat ambiguous pictures of hasty developments is felt. Some are of the belief that the old world is being transferred to new world. For some this transformation is too fast, however the process of going from second wave of civilization which has been some form of an industrial society, has become a Framework for a third wave of the civilization in which information capital has invented new order of forms, methods, values, behaviors, and even subjects. Doubtlessly the collapse of Soviet Union could be reflected as an important part of these happenings. At the time when Russian Empire intended for the first time to occupy parts of Central Asia and Caucasus motivations such as digging for gold in the shores of Amu Darya and Syr Darya, domination of trade roads, rich natural resources and agricultural products such as cotton and reaching warm waters of Persian Gulf while competing with the other colonial power, Great Britain in Eurasia (the big game), were mentioned. Great Britain was the second player that in order to safeguard its interests in India and with similar geopolitical and geo-economical motivations, with some modifications of course, was trying to have an influence and find a place in Eurasia. Another big game including United States as a player with a little different but mainly the same motivations, is being played right now. The only big difference in this new game is in the number of the players and addition of recent factors such as oil which makes the game much more serious and brings Heartland Mac kinder theory back to life. The changes have definitely been too fast and interesting, however are these processes deep enough to pull everything to a forgetful obscurity, or all old games will continue to be played in new and more recent formats. It should be noted that no justification based on the old moves would sufficiently explain the present happenings, at the same time looking at present will not solve the problem either, however this belief is maintained that todayʹs actions and patterns are based on past experiences. We intend to investigate and explain these post cold war continuities and changes, applying divisions of geopolitical eras suggested by John Agnew. Then looking into the characteristics stated by Agnew for each geopolitical period it seems there exist some similarity between natural geopolitics and present political requirements. In this direction we look into naming of different places as a strategic tool in the hands of great powers for imposing their will on different parts of the world, a subject that once more indicates the continuity and change principal in the international politics.