تحلیل مقایسه‌ای الگوی رقابت ایالات ‌متحد و فدراسیون روسیه در اوراسیای مرکزی (2020-2000)

با توجه به تغییر و تحول‌هایی که در سال‌ها و دهه‌های اخیر در هرم قدرت جهانی پدید آمده است، فرهنگ راهبردی مولفۀ بنیادینِ مهمی است که در مناظرۀ چهارم روابط بین‌الملل با تاثیرگذاری بر نوع نگرش دولت‌مردان کشورهای موثر در عرصۀ سیاست بین‌الملل، همپای مولفه‌های مادی قدرت در شکل‌دهی به کُنش راهبردی کشورها در عرصۀ سیاست و روابط بین‌الملل پیش رفته است. با توجه به این انگارۀ بنیادین که فرهنگ راهبردی می‌تواند نوع کنشگری ایالات ‌متحد و فدراسیون روسیه در حوزۀ راهبردی اوراسیای مرکزی در فضای پساشوروی به‌عنوان یکی از مهم‌ترین مناطق ژئوپلیتیک و ژئواستراتژیک جهان را تجزیه‌ و تحلیل کند، با رویکردی توصیفی تحلیلی و با بهره‌گیری از مفروض‌های نظری فرهنگ راهبردی در پی پاسخ به این پرسش هستیم: در دو دهۀ اخیر فرهنگ راهبردی و مولفه‌هایِ برخاسته از آن چه تاثیرهایی بر اقدام‌های فدراسیون روسیه و ایالات ‌متحد در حوزۀ اوراسیای مرکزی برجای نهاده است؟ در پاسخ این فرضیه مطرح می‌شود که فرهنگ راهبردی به‌مثابۀ عامل و پیشرانِ موثر بر مجموعۀ اقدام‌های فدراسیون روسیه در فضای پساشوروی شامل مولفه‌هایی مانند توسعه‌طلبی راهبردی، گسترش هویت اسلاو ارتودکس و گفتمان ملی‌گرایی روسی و تثبیت قدرت ملی در محیط ژئوپلیتیک است. در مقابل، ایالات‌ متحد برای ترویج فرهنگ لیبرال دموکراسی، تثبیت موقعیت ابرقدرتی و ایجاد موازنه‌گرایی منطقه‌ای، فرهنگ راهبردیِ خاصی را در این حوزۀ قدرت‌آفرین و چالش‌زا برای خود ترسیم کرده است.

Comparative Analysis of the Competition Model of the United States and the Russian Federation in Central Eurasia (20002020)

The strategic area of Central Eurasia is one of the most important regions in the postSoviet space, accepting the rivalry between the Russian Federation and the United States, and has introduced itself as a mirror of international politics. Regarding the strategic culture of Moscow’s foreign policy, it can be said that since the Russian Federation does not want to fully maintain the basic rules of the international system, nor does it seek to make extensive changes to the rules of this order, hence the idea of “reformist” activism Comes to mind. Reform activists are actors who pursue different motives and methods than other actors in international politics. The Russian Federation, as a reformist power, has on its agenda the two principles of peaceful coexistence and the creation of a multipolar world in its new foreign policy. In this context, the Russian Federation, on the one hand, does not reject any change in the status quo and intervention abroad (Central Asia, South Caucasus, Black Sea, and Baltic), and on the other, is dissatisfied with the current state of the international system and wants a complete transformation. It is not in the rules that govern it either.As for the United States’ movements in the geographical territory of Central Eurasia, it can be said that Washington generally seeks to sign bilateral and multilateral military agreements with Georgia, Ukraine, Romania, and the Czech Republic, following political intervention and attempts to bring the republics of the region under its security umbrella. In this regard, Poland is trying to move forward and most importantly, is building several antimissile defense systems in the frame of NATO expansion. Although the White House has claimed that the purpose of the missile defense shield is to protect the United States and NATO members from North Korea’s threats and the Islamic Republic of Iran’s ballistic missiles, nevertheless the Kremlin sees it as a serious threat to its national security. Moscow is very serious and determined in its position and constantly declares that the justification of the United States for the establishment of a missile defense shield is a mere excuse for the blockade of the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation considers the United States moves in this regard an attempt to achieve “strategic superiority” and to play with the result of a zerosum game, which is targeted at the same time as weakening strategic depth, geopolitical contraction, and Moscow’s exclusion from European arrangements. From the abovementioned points, it can be concluded that the main issues affecting the politicalsecurity relations between the Russian Federation and the United States are mutual threats and suspicions, successive and endless cycles of deescalation, and involvement of various internal and external variables in the current process between the two countries which shows the complexity and multilayered nature of this conflict.The Main Question is: what impact has the strategic culture and its components had on the actions of the Russian Federation and the United States in the Central Eurasian region in the last two decades?The Hypothesis posed by the abovementioned question is that strategic culture serves as a driving force behind Moscow’s postSoviet actions, including components such as strategic expansionism, the spread of Orthodox identity and the Russian nationalist discourse, and the consolidation of national power in the environment. In contrast, the United States has developed a special strategic culture to promote a culture of liberal democracy, establish a superpower position and create regional balance.The method used in this research is explanatoryprescriptive and the type of the research is fundamental. The nature of this writing is also qualitative. The data collection has been through the library method, the use of internet resources, articles, and documents.Analyzing the strategic behaviors of political units through the components of strategic culture has advantages the most important of which is the possibility of understanding the actions of the actor in question and predicting the behaviors arising from it. The theory makes it possible for researchers to understand how countries view strategic issues and what reactions they emit in a variety of situations, even in emergencies. Regarding strategic culture, it should be noted that this component is the product of the historical experience of countries. On the other hand, because experiences are different among governments, different actors have different strategic cultures. In this way, it can be said that the strategic culture acts as a magnifying glass through which the type of relationship between the international goals, motives, and actions of the Russian Federation and the United States can be evaluated and examined in the management of international crises.As mentioned at the beginning of the research, the most important components of the Russian Federation’s strategic culture include geopolitical features and a development view, the idea of great power and regional hegemony, dominant authoritarianism, Russian nationalist discourse, and SlavicOrthodox identity, and the notion of threat. They have left a deep impression on the strategic decisionmaking and foreign policy of the Russian Federation. In other words, it can be said that Moscow, in articulating its foreign policy discourse and strategic decisionmaking, has relied on the abovementioned components. Accordingly, the Russian Federation in the field of foreign policy has strategies such as selective interaction, soft balance and an emphasis on multilateralism, the great normative modern strategy, eastward policy, confrontation with fundamentalism and terrorism, and Russianoriented political and security institutionalism in the region which has made the headline of its work. Regarding the strategic culture of the United States, it must be acknowledged that to achieve the goals that have been formed under the influence of its strategic culture, it seeks hegemony and consolidation of its power in the world. In this regard, the United States has a mission to lead the world and is committed to global governance. In the meantime, if the country resorts to military force, it will inevitably use it. As a result, it can be said that the components that shape the strategic culture of the United States are aggressive, which is effective in pursuing its aggressive foreign policy in the strategic context of Central Eurasia.