An analysis of the dominant geopolitical narratives in the Southwest Asia region; A new approach to the study of geopolitical territorializations

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Assistant Professor of Political Geography, Birjand University

Abstract

The geopolitical developments and dynamics of Southwest Asia are affected by various discourses and counter-discourses; But what is most noticeable in this is the competition of three dominant discourses, namely the discourse of Shiite Islam of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the anti-Shiite discourse of the Sunni Arabs, and the discourse of fighting Western terrorism. What this article seeks to show is to point out the key point that all three above discourses have a dominant identity, and based on this dominant identity, they try to define the identity of the "other" as the enemy. The anti-Shia discourse of the Sunni Arabs based on this thinking has positioned themselves as "Shia" and "Iran" and the Shia Islam discourse of the Islamic Republic as "secularism" and "America". But another Western discourse has positioned itself as "fighting terrorism" and "fighting Islamic fundamentalism". The key point of the discussion is related to this issue. In fact, the Western discourse, based on its theory of intelligent power and considering the components of soft war, does not believe in any friends or enemies for itself, in all times and places; Rather, it undertakes this task based on its pragmatic or pragmatic foreign policy, depending on the type of geopolitical strategies and goals; However, both the geopolitical discourses of Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran have established themselves as a fixed identity as well as a single country, and accordingly, in all circumstances and times, they act on their geopolitical narrative based on the same other. But in the grand geopolitical narrative of the West, no name of a specific country is mentioned as an enemy, and they always try to make other countries understand with the same subtlety that they are not necessarily their permanent enemy from the point of view of America, and only if they do not threaten the activism of the West and America, there is no danger. It will not be noticed by them.

Keywords