Crucial Geostrategic Concepts towards Achieving Strategic Harmony amongst OIC Countries

Crucial Geostrategic Concepts towards Achieving Strategic Harmony amongst OIC Countries

Dr. Wael Khalill 12/29/2013

Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher

2

Contents

Abstract ................................................................................................................. 3

OIC in the geostrategic world map ......................................................................... 4

Geostrategic problems on the ground ................................................................... 5

Accesses of geostrategic Influence ........................................................................ 6

Developing a sense of urgency & a common regional geostrategic culture ........... 7

Mitigating the regional geostrategic tension and concerns ................................... 8

Evaluating the geostrategic needs and interests for locals and powers ................. 9

Reaching the point of “geostrategic equilibrium” ................................................ 11

Geostrategic interests’ integration management and the geostrategic initiatives 13

Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 15

References ........................................................................................................... 16


3

Crucial Geostrategic Concepts towards Achieving Strategic Harmony

amongst OIC Countries

Abstract The current era is witnessing serious geopolitical changes during the Arab spring and its waves

in the Arab countries specifically. This geopolitics change is reflecting serious geostrategic

changes on the OIC (Organization of Islamic Countries) as well, which causes serious impacts

on all OIC internally and externally. Under the forum theme “Unity in diversity: Source of

power”, the paper introduces some crucial geostrategic concepts to develop common national

and regional understanding in order to avoid geostrategic confrontation, and to exploit the

strategic opportunities. The paper calls for geostrategic interests’ integration management, and

for reaching the point of geostrategic equilibrium so as to start developing, what is called by

the writer, geostrategic regional initiatives. This paper will propose crucial strategic

imperatives within the context of the complex dynamic of the Arab spring‟s transitional

period and its impact on the region in order to support the unity of the OIC countries in this

dilemma.

Geography, Geopolitics, and Geostrategy

It is essential to recognize what is meant by these three terms before tackling the concept

of geostrategy and the related issues. The three terms are well apparent in this context:

geography, geopolitics, and geostrategy.

Geography: is a well-known term that simply covers the natural geographic features such as

earth, mountains, rivers, sea, hills, soil, inhabitants, plants, weather, and all related issues in this

context.

Geopolitics: is a term that covers the state‟s internal politics, resources, government issues,

internal rules, internal directions, managing the natural resources and economic resources, and

all related sovereignty issues inside the state (Sultan, 2013, Grygiel& Jakub, 2006).


4

Geostrategy: is the direction of a state‟s foreign policy. It describes where a state concentrates its

efforts by projecting military power and directing diplomatic activity because of geographic

factors, geopolitical factors, ideological reasons, interest groups, or simply the whims of its

leaders (Grygiel& Jakub, 2006).

The changes in the geography‟s components are slow to a large extent; while the changes

in geopolitics are quicker. However, the changes in the geostrategic issues are much quicker and

might happen in weeks or months. The geopolitical changes have both a direct and an indirect

impact on geostrategic context, and might push towards geostrategic changes. On the other hand,

changes in geostrategic context have direct impact on the geopolitical issues, and pave the way

for internal changes in the state‟s components. Poor understanding to the geostrategic changes

and underestimating these changes may cause sudden or unpredicted geopolitical consequences.

The global powers monitor and scan the geopolitical events and changes, in order to adapt and

respond to these changes before affecting their interests in the concerned regions.

OIC in the geostrategic world map Most of the OICs especially those in the Middle East are located in the heart of the

geostrategic interests of the United States, Europe, Russia, and China. They are located in the

stability belt of the United States and Europe (stability belt is the zone surrounding Russia and

Eastern Europe). OICs control important navy lanes and air corridors; own lots of the oil which

is a source of global energy; and separate Russia from the warm waters. In addition to the Arab-

Israeli conflict that is influencing all the internal geopolitics of most the Middle Eastern

countries, and influencing the external geostrategic moves in the region. Accordingly, the area is

always under focus not only by all the great powers, but also by the emerging powers as well.

Emerging powers such as China and regional emerging powers such as Turkey and Iran are very

interested in the region. They scan the geopolitics and geostrategic changes regardless of their

intentions.

Globalization does not ease the geostrategic concerns because trades occur through the

sea lanes, air corridor, and land routes. On contrast, globalization pushes towards protecting

trade gains and accords. For instance, “90 percent of Japan‟s energy supply is delivered via the


5

South China Sea. Similarly, 40 percent of U.S. trade is transported via sea lanes. The stability of

these sea lanes is vital to the economies of the United States and states in Asia and Europe.

Therefore, it is imperative for the United States to monitor and, if necessary, protect and patrol

these routes, as was done.” (Grygiel & Jakub, 2006, p 184). No doubt, the United States is the

main power in the region and plays a vital role in shaping the geostrategy of the region. The

global powers have not only indirect effect on the geopolitics of the local countries, but they also

have direct effects in some cases. For example, Shah Riza was forced to abdicate in 1941 and

succeeded by his son Mohammad as a sort of punishment because of his support to the German

Reich in World War II. In Syria: USA, Saudi Arabia, and their alliance are supporting the rebels

from one side; while Russia, Iran, and China are supporting the Syrian regime on the other side.

The United States, France and Britain intervened coercively in Libya to force Ghaddafi to step

down; while United States supported the Yemeni president Ali Saleh before his stepping down.

In fact, most OICs in the Middle East are exposed to geostrategic intervention from external

powers if serious geopolitical changes occur in any local country, or if serious geostrategic

changes occur in the region. Most OICs are vulnerable and prone to the danger of interference.

No country is immune.

Geostrategic problems on the ground There are many serious geopolitical problems on the ground in OIC countries, such as the

absence of democracy, dialogue, tolerance, art of dispute, and sectarian divisions. Moreover, the

OICs suffer from multiple geopolitical problems, such as: national political problems, forced

ideology, lack of common grounds in the same country, not accepting the others‟ opinion,

exclusion and marginalization, misperceptions, evoking and calling to minds historical

confrontations. These serious geopolitical problems generate serious geostrategic issues and

crisis which lead to serious strategic goals confrontation. Such geostrategic confrontations create

easy access for international intervention in the region under the need of protection, and

achieving strategic equilibrium with opponents in the area.

The geostrategic impact is prone to the Middle East area not only recently, but since the

early days before Islam was in the region as well. For instance, early in the 19th

century, Iran

was subjected to the Russian-UK great game in the Middle East. Eventually, in 1907 Iran


6

territory was divided into three parts. In 1921, Tehran and Moscow signed a treaty of friendship.

Moscow retained the right to intervene in Iran in any event of foreign attack, and that the Soviet

would support Tehran in fighting the separatists in the country‟s north. In 1937, Afghanistan,

Iran, Iraq, and Turkey founded the Sadabad pact, which settled several border disputes and thus

erased potential sources of conflict.

After World War II, SU (Soviet Union) and Iran agreed to grant SU several oil

concessions and to recognize the autonomy of Azerbaijan. In return, Moscow withdrew its troops

from Iran in 1946. UK, whose BP oil company controlled the majority of Iranian oil reserves,

refused to give up its influence on the domestic policy of Iran. A new oil treaty was signed in

1949 with BP (Inat & Yesitlas, 2005). Although the elections in Gaza strip was supervised by the

international community in 2006; USA and EU rejected the Hamas government as an explicit

stance to refuse the political Islam, and to reject the participation of Islamic parties in

formulating the geostrategy in the region.

Accesses of geostrategic Influence The great powers have different approaches to intervene in the geopolitics and the

geostrategy of the Middle East countries. One type of access is the access of protection- against

other regional powers such as the case of some Arabian Gulf states who seek the United States

protection against expected Iranian intervention in their countries. Another access method is the

access of possessing weapons to reaching a strategic equilibrium with other opponents in the

area; that opens the doors widely for such geostrategic and geopolitical interventions. The

economical access and the technological access to help in extracting the natural resources and

developing the countries pave the way for these interferences as well. The access of the

humanitarian aids and protection creates a suitable access to such intervention in terms of

helping the ethnic groups, religious sectors, conflict victims, refugees...etc. Finally, the access of

public diplomacy through huge networks of nongovernmental organizations, whether

deliberately or not, actually, eases such interventions. There are exceptions of course.


7

In fact, the sovereignty principle is no more solid and can be penetrated easily (Babkayi,

2011) through different approaches as mentioned before. The history of the OIC countries is full

of other powers‟ interventions under many names and forms such as treaties and accords.

At the same time the history is full of many national characters that were removed or stepped

down from their political role due to external pressures. In 1952, Mohammed Musaddik was

forced to step down due to the US and the World Bank halting economic assistance. Again,

Musaddik was removed from the office by UK and US sponsored coup in 1953 (Inat & Yesitlas,

2005). As well as, the coup in Egypt in 2013 was explicitly supported by the United States and

other European Countries.

Developing a sense of urgency & a common regional geostrategic culture It is clear from the region‟s history that this area owns a vital geostrategic position to the

supreme powers in terms of sea lanes, air corridors, natural resources, young human resources,

and within the surrounding belt, which surrounds East Europe and Russia. If the concerned

countries in the region do not cooperate with each other, they will then only be the pie being split

by the geostrategic processes of the supreme powers, specifically the USA securing others‟

interests rather than theirs. At the same time, they will be split up by the negative geostrategic

confrontations that will originate from within their own internal geopolitics.

After, 1953, Mohammed Riza Shah chose to have very close relations with Washington

and London, and shifted the foreign Iranian policy dramatically and became the second most

important ally to the USA in the region, after Israel of course. On the other hand, Iran considered

the USA as a threat to Iran‟s security. Iran joined the Bagdad pact in 1955 with Iraq, turkey,

Pakistan, and the UK. Iran continued in strengthening this ally even after Iraq‟s withdrawal, and

called it the „CENTO‟ pact. Iran began to pursue an expansionist form of foreign policy- in terms

of refusing the sovereignty of Bahrain and claiming that the island belongs to Iran. Also, Shah

considered Iran an advocate and a voice to the Shiites of the world; he deployed his troops to

Oman and Yemen to intervene in their civil conflicts. Simultaneously, USA tolerated these

actions as Iran was its “„deputy sheriff‟ to the Middle East”. The Arab countries had no choice


8

but to be anxious from Iran, and categorized it as a closer hostile rather than a country pursuing a

friendly relationship (Inat & Yesitlas, 2005).

The main regional players need to feel the necessity and importance of working together

instead of urging hostility amongst each other. It is essential to develop the sense of urgency

towards the importance of having common geostrategic concepts and a common understanding

amongst themselves. Having a common, agreed-upon geostrategy is vital to successfully secure

each country‟s individual interests. Otherwise, the region will remain hovering on substantial

disputes and end up submitting the region‟s fate to the supreme powers‟ interests.

Since the OIC countries are in the heart of global events, and the Middle East is classified

by the United States and EU as a breeding area for troubles, the countries in the region need to

develop a common geostrategic culture at two levels: First, at the local level within each country

to reduce the internal geopolitical disputes and problems. Second, at the regional level, to

develop a common regional geostrategic concept that is based on mutual benefits and mutual

strategic interests. If the countries in the region failed to do so, they will be following the

geostrategic interests of other powers. Not only that, but they will be implementing others‟

strategies at their expense.

Mitigating the regional geostrategic tension and concerns From an Islamic history perspective, the Islamic civilization has been built on three main

ethnic pillars amongst others: Arabs, Turks, and Persians. These three nations played central

roles in the Islamic civilization‟s history. During the modern history, regardless of the historical

events, each group positioned itself in a different geostrategic position, and situated itself in a

suspicious side relative to each other.

After the Islamic revolution in 1979, Iran tried to export the Islamic revolution to other

Islamic countries. This move has dramatically damaged the relations between Arabs and Iran. It

also, activated the “approach of protection” where some countries sought the USA‟s protection

against this move, and pushed themselves far away towards intensifying their security alliances

with Washington. Again, the USA was the greatest beneficiary from this move, and Iran became

further isolated (Inat & Yesitlas, 2005). The United States did collect benefits from the


9

expansionist trend of Shah after 1953 in the region by supporting him as its deputy policeman in

the area in order to keep USA‟s interests running as planned. After this Islamic Revolution, Iran

got infected by the same expansion fever, and adopted the concept of exporting the revolution.

Thus Arabs continued to be more cautious from Iran and aware of its intentions in the area. It is

true that after the Khomeini era, Iranian policy-makers realized that Iran‟s radical policies were

detrimental not only to the countries in the region but also to Iran itself. Consequently, they

developed a moderate foreign policy towards the near regional countries in order to gain their

support to break out the international isolation that Iran was in (Inat & yestilas, 2005). All over

again, the Arab fears start once more to rise rapidly during the Arab spring period, where Iran is

intervening in Syria by supporting the Syrian regime in order to maintain its strategic interests in

the area. Also, it‟s intervening in Yemen by supporting Hothies in northern Yemen. It is

remarkable that the Syrian governors are of Alawies background, Hothys in Yemen are of Shiite

background; and at the same time the Iranian governors are of Shiite background. This similarity

in the background of Iran and the background of the beneficiaries of its support has cornered Iran

in the sectarian angle. The fever of expansion is back again to Iran under the term of “protecting

the Iranian strategic interests”.

On the other hand, in 1990‟s, Turkey deepened its engagement with USA and Israel

which located turkey on the other side from the Middle East point of view. Therefore, shifting

the Turkish geostrategic position towards the region will be evaluated as a vital shift and will

cause huge impacts on the geostrategy in the region as well (Inat, 2005).

Evaluating the geostrategic needs and interests for locals and powers The Arab countries suffer from a strategic vacuum in their area because the Arab

countries are on the side of being followers and implementing others‟ interests rather than

making or participating in formulating their own strategies. This vacuum does not only attract

the supreme foreign powers, but also the emerging powers in the region such as Iran and Turkey.

At the same time, it attracts other rising powers such as China and Russia. The concerned

countries in the area need to come together and recognize the geostrategic needs for each

individual country far away from exploiting the weaknesses of each other. Iran and Turkey are

emerging regional powers that have their defined geostrategic needs; these needs are supposed to


10

be recognized by Arab countries and to be tackled accordingly on the base of geostrategic

cooperation not geostrategic exploitation.

Although the European powers are well considered in the region, the United States is still

the main geostrategic player. After the end of the cold war, the United States remained the

dominant in the geostrategic issues in the Middle East. This domination was hugely emphasized

after September 11.

Each country in the Middle East has a role to play at the geostrategic level; however,

countries like Turkey, Iran, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia have much importance as prospective

regional players. The United States pays much attention to those countries as main players in the

geostrategic formulation from its side, and it intervenes directly or indirectly not only in the

geostrategic issues of these countries, but in their very-own geopolitics issues as well.

The United States, like any other great power in history, has to pay close attention to

geopolitics in the Middle East along with in the concerned zones of its interest, and adapt its

geostrategy to reflect geopolitical changes. The USA tries to enforce its national values as

„universal standards‟ namely: liberal democracy, free market, and human rights (Ataman, 2005)

hopping to form the new world order, which was preached back in the days of George Bush as a

new missionary task for the American era.

In the cold war era and beyond, turkey has been part of the Western security system.

Thus USA and the leading powers have tried to influence Turkish foreign policy. Since the

foreign policy decisions are made by domestic actors who are influenced by domestic situations,

the USA‟s best approach is to influence the domestic policies of Turkey. From Washington‟s

perspective, Turkey is located next to a region from which the greatest dangers for the new world

order originate; such as international terrorism, political Islam, and proliferation of weapons of

mass destruction. Again, since USA considers the Middle East as a breeding- ground for these

dangers, Turkey, from the American perception, is considered a vital partner in combating these

dangers (Inat, 2005).

Understanding the geostrategic needs of the supreme powers and other players is

essential to know how to tackle the geostrategic issues. Although it seems hard to modify the


11

geostrategic trends, it is not impossible to change the geostrategic situation in the region;

especially, there is a limit to the United States power and ability to overcome future geostrategic

changes in other regions. However, changing the geostrategic map entails the comprehension of

the geostrategic situation, to define the needs of the supreme powers, and to recognize the

regional abilities and limitations. In this context, it is needed to think from the others‟

perspective, and trying to speculate how the United States and the Europeans are going to map

the new distribution of powers? Which regions of the world are of strategic interest to them?

Where are the potential zones of conflict? Where will the United States and others concentrate

their attention?

To firmly handle the geostrategic issues in the region, it is essential to understand the

methodology practiced in the United States when it comes to deciding on the regions of interest,

and defining the related stakeholders in this process. Although the American president is

responsible for the foreign states policy, there are many players who have influence in a way or

another such as: the congress, the security advisor, the national Security Council, the secretary of

State, the secretary of defense, and the director of the CIA. In addition, the public context, the

media, and the interest groups as important stakeholders.

Reaching the point of “geostrategic equilibrium” As a matter of fact, empires rise and fall as that is a historical fact; that is what happened

with all the previous empires and powers such as Great Britain, the Ottoman Empire, the Rome

Empire, Ming China and others. However, it is important to remember that just as in the case of

past empires and great powers, the United States has an understanding of geopolitics and that the

necessity to reflect it in foreign policy remains vital. Over the past decade, the United States has

faced, and in coming years will continue to face, a geopolitical change of proportions similar to

those faced by Venice, the Ottoman Empire, and Ming China (Grygiel & Jakub, 2006).

Turkey, Iran, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia with other effectual countries such as Qatar and

Syria can lead these geostrategic changes if they well. Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia bear most

of the burden in bringing this change to reality. These “vanguard” countries have the economic

potential, natural resources, and represent the three main Islamic pillar groups; Arabs, Turks, and


12

Persians. To do so, Iran, as an emerging power, needs to enhance its relations with the countries

in the region in order to lessen the foreign powers from intervening in its own affairs and those

of the Middle East; accordingly, Iran needs to develop its relation with GCC countries, Egypt,

Turkey, and other OIC countries. Iran had previously done just that with the Soviet Union as

well as with current Russia. Iran strengthened its relation with Russia to a large extent, and

cooperated with Moscow to handle the geostrategic situation with its northeastern neighbors.

Therefore, Iran did not support Chechnya‟s Mujahedeen nor did it support Tajik insurgents. In

return, Moscow prevented Azerbaijan from interfering in the northern provinces of Iran, reduced

the isolation of the Iranian regime, and, according to Inat & yestilas, (2005) Moscow played an

important role in internationalizing the foreign policy of Iran. So Iran, in terms of logic, is asked

to strengthen its relations with its Arab and Turk neighbors. On the other hand, Turkey is asked

to strengthen its relations with the Arabs and Iranians, as well.

Unpredictability and uncertainty are dominant in the region; as a result there is a chance

for Turkey to play the role by creating a certain positive pattern or process in Iraq (Khalil, 2011),

and other neighbors as well. The Arabs, who are the weakest in the triple chain, are required to

do the same. But the problem with the Arabs is that they do not have one single representative as

others which leaves them without unity, making them vulnerable, and easy to be manipulated by

external powers. In contrast, the Arab nation in most Arab countries are leading a severe

changing process in their countries in what is called the “Arab spring”, and they have paid and

still are paying a very high costly price to achieve the change. Hundreds of thousands have been

killed in this tough process. This situation has put more pressure on Iran and Turkey to lead the

geostrategic changes in the region till the Arab nation recovers from the consequences of this

severe changing process.

The process of geostrategic changes requires support from the public in each individual

country, and requires developing local geopolitical factors as well to reach the next leap towards

the regional strategy. In fact, Turkey, Iran, and the Arab countries are exposed to internal

changes and to external pressures as well which necessitates bringing an end to this down

drifting and then ascending up to the point of “geostrategic equilibrium” at the local „national‟

level. Stopping the deterioration on the strategy curve is a timely essential task; before reaching


13

the point „of no return‟. Without reaching the point of “geostrategic equilibrium” in the main

countries in the region, the process of regional geostrategic changes will be lame and incomplete.

Reaching this point requires real internal changes in the political system, economical system,

utilizing of resources, development of education; it requires a harmonious internal social fabric,

democracy, freedom, values, a common national culture, professional media, durable infra-

structure, plausible health services, and an attractive ambitious vision.

Geostrategic interests’ integration management and the geostrategic

initiatives Working on reaching the point of “geostrategic equilibrium” should be performed in parallel

with establishing the concept of “geostrategic interests’ integration management” amongst

the countries in the region. The geostrategic interests‟ integration management concept is built

on the following principles:

- Recognizing and evaluating the geostrategic interests and ambitions of countries in the

region.

- Respecting the fair geostrategic interests and ambitions and defining the boarders and

overlaps amongst these interests.

- Advocating and promoting the spirit of cooperation by utilizing many factors such as

religion, civilization, heritage, languages, history, geographic relations, technology,

economic interests, and co-existence in order to achieve prosperity, strategic stability, and

maintaining an identity for all countries in the region.

- Avoiding disastrous adventures, especially with internal wars; the history proves that

there are no winners in sectarian conflicts, and no one can pull out or uproot any sect or

identity.

- Developing regional collaboration and common policies with western countries; and

being ready for rapid adaptation to any developments during these processes to face the

complexity in a flexible style rather than a rigid one is required. (Khalil, 2011). The

importance of the interests‟ integration management is in avoiding geostrategic

confrontation amongst the countries in the region, geostrategic exclusion, despair,


14

marginalization, exploiting the strategic opportunities, and to reserve the rights for fair

geostrategic ambitions.

Common interests that overlap require interests-integration management and conflict of

interests requires a rational strategy to resolve conflicts. At the same time “sacrificing some

interests from all parts is an urgent appeal” (Khalil, 2011, P.391). This is an imperative to

succeed in this geostrategic endeavor.

Reaching the point of „geostrategic equilibrium” and applying the interests‟ integration

management concept will prepare the region for launching “geostrategic initiatives” to share in

the strategic formulations in the region according to the interests of the countries in the region,

to resist the external pressure or any imposed geostrategic trends, and to decreasing the external

intervention by the external powers.

The OIC countries, in general, are witnessing a dynamic, complex, and turbulent period,

specifically, the Arab world due to the Arab spring events and their consequences. Accordingly,

some crucial strategic imperatives are urgently needed within the context of the complex

dynamic of the Arab spring transitional period in order to support and ease the interests‟

integration among countries in this dilemma. Following are points that should be considered

while compiling an action-plan:

Identifying the competitive advantage of each group to utilize it in developing the

strategic approaches (Khalil, 2011).

Maintaining strategic sustainability and not abandoning or neglecting the crucial strategic

elements even under pressure and complexity.

Reducing the cost of maintaining strategy sustainability through sharing the risk with

other countries on win - win basis.

Developing geostrategic goals and vision in each country and promoting a regional vision

seeking prosperity.

Collaborating in performing active scanning, and exchange information in order to

develop realistic scenarios.

Module products (developing mutual interests amongst countries such as currencies,

industries, manufacturing, common projects…etc.)

Adapting negotiation amongst countries to keep a balanced geostrategic level in the

region, and to lower the level of external intervention.


15

Conclusion The Middle East region is facing a complex and turbulent environment where supreme

powers intervene not only in the geopolitics of each country, but also in the geostrategy of the

region as a whole. At the same time, the United States and other powers faced and are still facing

serious changes in the geopolitics in many countries in the region which will be reflected on the

geostrategy of the region. However, the United States power has a limit that they cannot go

beyond. Therefore, there is an opportunity for the countries in the region to first develop a local

geostrategic understanding, and then to reach the point of “geostrategic equilibrium” in order to

implement interests‟ integration management amongst the countries in the region. This opens the

doors to propose geostrategic initiatives at the regional level. History tells us that the three ethnic

components of the Islamic civilization: Arabs, Turks, Persians, and other groups were able to

develop a distinguished civilization during their history. This compels all countries in the region

to find a way to control their geostrategic circumstances instead of abandoning it to external

powers. It is recommended that in the early stages of this strategic development, that the

countries involved should utilize the political and economic difficulties and opportunities to at

least reach a geostrategic understanding memorandum.


16

References

1. Ataman, muhittin. "United States of America." Foreign Policy of States. Ed. Wolfgand

Gieler, Kemal Inat, and Claudio Kullmann. Istanbul: Tasam, 2005. 523-42. Print.

2. babkayi, Rebwar. New World order and the issue of Nationalities in the Middle East.

Arbeel: Ministry of Culture and Youth, 2011. Print.

3. Inat, Kemal, and Murat Yesitlas. "Islamic Republic of Iran." Foreign Policy of States. Ed.

Wolfgand Gieler, Kemal Inat, and Claudio Kullmann. Istanbul: Tasam, 2005. 222-29.

Print.

4. Inat, Kemal. "Republic of Turkey." Foreign Policy of States. Ed. Wolfgand Gieler,

Kemal Inat, and Claudio Kullmann. Istanbul: Tasam, 2005. 499-506. Print.

5. Khalil, Wael. "Analyzing Iraqi Complexity from Turkey Strategic perspective." State

building and Security in Iraq. Ed. Muharram H. Ozev. Istanbul: Tasam, 2011. 385-91.

Print.

6. Sultan, Jasem. Geopolitic. Beirut: Dar Tamkeen, 2013. Print.

7. Grygiel, Jakub J. (2006) Great Powers and Geopolitical Change. Baltimore, MD, USA:

Johns Hopkins University Press.

http://site.ebrary.com/lib/qfnl/Doc?id=10188449&ppg=186

http://site.ebrary.com/lib/qfnl/Doc?id=10188449&ppg=186

Crucial Geostrategic Concepts towards Achieving Strategic Harmony amongst OIC Countries

Documents

Transcript of Crucial Geostrategic Concepts towards Achieving Strategic Harmony amongst OIC Countries