درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The complexity of global order is often obscured by the oversimplified representations of international relations, illustrated through political maps. These maps, while seemingly objective, are subjective projections that reflect the ideology of their creators and fail to capture the nuanced dynamics of power and control among states. Such a misrepresentation contributes to a distorted understanding of global dynamics. Meanwhile, the origins of political geography can be traced back to the 18th century, particularly with the establishment of the first school of political geography in Saint-Petersburg, Russia, between 1720 and 1750. Political geography, however, is not entirely homogenic; it encompasses several competing theories regarding the perception of space. It has developed gradually with the changes in perception of space: as an absolute, relative and cognitive space respectively. Recognizing the complexity and evolutionary features of a political map and political geography as whole thus appears to be crucial for understanding global politics.

The African continent has, to date, been mostly perceived as a “marginalized” geographical or geopolitical foundation and is represented in international relations (IR) so narrowly in the definitions provided by classical geopolitical knowledge or hegemonic knowledge of international relations. Nevertheless, efforts must be made by intellectual and practical elites worldwide for a more realistic representation of the opportunities and potentials of this continent by relying on conceptual-theoretical formulations. To address the main question of the relationship between Africa's geopolitical position and its conceptual and theoretical representation within the discipline of International Relations. The author suggests examining the pathology of conceptual-theoretical formulations in International Relations (IR) and Geopolitics.  this requires a new reading of critical geopolitics drawn on the works of Andrew Linklater, which can provide more basic explanatory ideas with the critique of epistemological foundationalism, state-centrism, narrative-based approach, and nature of the disciplines. This paper is a theoretical research that proposes a new conceptual framework. It adopts an explanatory-critical analytical method to explain the theoretical approach of global critical geopolitics. The results of the paper emphasize that the theories and texts of IR and Geopolitics must be reviewed and reformulated with innovative evaluations centered on the position and role of Africa in the international history of the world. It highlights the importance of considering the distinct lived experiences of the continent which can serve as a basis for developing a methodological, epistemological, and ontological research program for participation in global politics and non-western international relations.

Since the beginning, Indonesia’s foreign policy has adhered to the “free-active” principle. Nevertheless, the facts demonstrate that during President Sukarno’s administration, Indonesia’s foreign policy was considered to be leaning left and close to communist countries. During the Suharto era, Indonesia, on the other hand, grew closer to the West, specifically the United States and its allies. The succession of post-Suharto leadership, from Habibie, Abdurrahman Wahid, and Megawati to Yudhoyono, major countries particularly the United States, continues to influence the pattern of Indonesia’s foreign policy. This pattern of foreign policy appears to have also had an effect on Indonesia’s defence posture and orientation. The question that should be addressed is: to what extent do great powers influence Indonesia’s defence policy during Jokowi administration? In the midst of various issues ranging from the maritime fulcrum, the sink the vessels’ policy, the issue of purchasing Russian-made fighter aircraft, the Sukhoi Su-35, and China’s Belt and Road initiative projects, have triggered reactions from neighbouring countries and major powers. Using a historical explanatory approach, this article argues that Indonesia’s defence strategy has been influenced by great powers since its foundation. Furthermore, despite Jokowi’s efforts to show that Indonesia is an independent and neutral country it remains under the influence of great powers.

The Middle East has witnessed many identity conflicts and rising violent extremist groups after 2003. The most prominent one has been the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which has come to the sphere of politics, in the post Arab Spring era. The goal of this paper is to examine the roots of the emergence of violent extremist groups, principally with reference to ISIS rising in Iraq. To do this authors propose “the four-dimensional thick recognition” model that consists of four concepts i.e., 1) historical narratives, 2) self-esteem 3) ontological security, and 4) hubristic identity. This model highlights that historical narratives of conflict, along with lack of self-esteem leads to feeling of ontological insecurity. This, in turn, leads to a kind of hubristic identity crisis, which often paves the way through struggle for regaining it. By content analysis of major texts published by the ISIS through two major magazines, namely Dabiq and Rumiyah, we try to demonstrate how the rise of ISIS was rooted in the issue of thick recognition failure. The paper concludes that thick recognition failure in these four phases, led to the establishment of violent extremist groups particularly in regions with memories of conflict.

Conducting a special military operation in Ukraine has created a crisis in legal and geopolitical order. Political documents such as ``On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians`` and ``on conducting a special military operation`` cannot be truly re-read except by re-interpreting the geopolitico-theological texts of the Heideggerian theoreticians of the Russian Katechonic identity. By re-visiting the theory of Katechon, this article aims to examine the so-called Katechontic identity of Russia in the geopolitics of crisis and the dimensions of the Russian mindset in intervention in legal rule making in the global state of war. In fact, the main question of this article is how the Katechonic identity of Russia is defined in apocalyptic geopolitics, and theories such as neo-Eurasianism and National Bolshevism, based on theological and philosophical foundations, have worked to prepare an anti-legal order beyond the international legal order? The Russo-Ukrainian War is the main case. This article is in the framework of radical political theology, critical theory in international law and critical geopolitics.