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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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).
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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.
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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,
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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.
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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.
Wael Khalil, PhD Strategist & Researcher
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
Top Related