قدرت‌های بندری: حکمروایی ژئوپلیتیکی چین و هند در جغرافیاهای زیرساختی و تخیلی اقیانوس هند

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای، گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکدۀ جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

2 دانشیار، گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکدۀ جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

3 دانشیار، گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکدۀ جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

4 استاد، گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکدۀ جغرافیا، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

5 استاد، گروه جغرافیای سیاسی، دانشکدۀ علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

در این مقاله، رقابت چین و هند برای حکمروایی ژئوپلیتیکی در فضاهای سرزمینی اقیانوس هند را با استفاده از منطق ژئوپلی‌نومیک (جغرافیا، سیاست و اقتصاد) به‌عنوان لنزی از فرایندهای مادی و گفتمانی بررسی می‌کنیم و رویکردی ژئوساختاری ارائه می‌دهیم که پلی روش‌شناختی میان جغرافیاهای کلاسیک و انتقادی است. این رویکرد با تمرکز همزمان بر جهان فیزیکی/مادی (به‌عنوان زیرساخت) و کدهای تنظیمی/تصوری (به‌عنوان گفتمان) پیش می‌رود. در این تحلیل، بر کدهای ژئوپلی‌نومیک تمرکز می‌کنیم که موقعیت تصوری یک کشور در جهان را با بینشی از مفصل‌بندی مادی فضا ترکیب می‌کند تا نقشه‌بندی موقعیت و قدرت را با اقتصاد سیاسی سرزمینی همسو کند. در بحث تجربی ما، این یک فرایند مادی است، زیرا سیاست بندرپایه، یک ابزار سرزمینی برای اقدامات نظامی و اقتصادی در رقابت‌های قدرت و موقعیت در جهت شکل‌دهی و تنظیم کدهای ژئوپلی‌نومیک محسوب می‌شود. همچنین این یک فرایند گفتمانی است که تولید تصاویر را برای توجیه کدهای ژئوپلی‌نومیک در فرایندهای شمول و جذب بسیج می‌کند. این یک درک ژئوپلیتیکی و ژئوپلی‌نومیک از فضا به‌عنوان مقوله‌های خیالی و واقعی در ساخت رویکرد ژئوپلیتیک ساختارگرایانه ارائه می‌دهد. از طریق مطالعة موردی رقابت بندری بین چین و هند، به‌طور گسترده‌تری نشان می‌دهیم که شیوه‌های حکمرانی بندری پیام‌های نمادینی ایجاد می‌کنند، درحالی‌که از نظر فیزیکی فضا را تغییر می‌دهند. کد ژئوپلی‌نومیک چین ساخت و توسعة زنجیره‌ای از بنادر خارجی و کریدورهای بین‌المللی برای تغییرات در نظام حکمرانی جهانی است. کد ژئوپلی‌نومیک هند نیز مهار قدرت بندری چین در اقیانوس هند از طریق سرمایه‌گذاری‌های خارجی در بنادر و حمل‌ونقل دریایی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Port Powers: Geopolitical Governance of China and India in Infrastructural and Imaginary Geographies of the Indian Ocean

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hassan Noorali 1
  • Seyyed Abbas Ahmadi 2
  • Qiomars Yazdanpanah Dero 3
  • Zahra Pishgahi Fard 4
  • Mohammad Reza Hafez Nia 5
1 PhD Candidate, Political Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Political Geography, University of Tehran Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor in Political Geography, University Of Tehran, Iran.
4 Professor in political Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
5 Professor in Political Geography at the University of Tarbiat Modares
چکیده [English]

Introduction
The competition for dominance over maritime routes and land connectivity pits strategic national frameworks—or "geopolinomic codes"—against one another. This rivalry emphasizes the construction, development, governance, and hegemony of strategic port spaces worldwide. Such competition justifies the expansion of transboundary infrastructure projects and the development of regional and global spheres of influence, often articulated through geopolitical narratives. These geopolinomic codes intertwine a nation's foreign policy orientations with the goal of regulating global economic connectivity networks, merging them with perceived notions of power and position. Consequently, major powers treat these connectivity codes as fundamental to the global economy's functioning, using them to spatialize their imagined geopolitical mappings. Within the new global power structure—a structure based on connectivity and port dominance, and perpetually influenced by hegemonic politics—the dynamic role of transport thus assumes a distinctly geopolinomic character.
 
Methodology
This research seeks to break away from the methodological dichotomies prevalent in geopolitical literature. Consequently, we propose an approach based on "geopolinomic codes," which we view as a process that is simultaneously material/territorial and discursive/representational. It is material because port strategy functions as a territorial tool for political, military, and economic actions in competitions for power and position. It is discursive because the distinct geopolinomic codes adopted by China and India in the global port power game—propagated through their political and social forces—generate discursive actions that shape geopolitical perceptions. China's port power is actively setting geopolinomic codes on a global scale, building, investing in, and developing seaports to achieve port hegemony. For India, the application of geopolinomics has a more regional dimension, becoming pervasive in its foreign investment strategy within the Indian Ocean. Thus, the competing port governance practices of these two countries not only physically alter spaces but also produce symbolic messages, contrasting geographical metaphors and making their physical positions on ports tangibly evident.
Results and discussion
orts are integral to geopolinomic logic due to their territorial potential in political, strategic, and economic power competitions, which can elevate a country to a port power at regional or global levels. As territorial nodes for commanding global trade networks at strategic points, ports function as essential geopolinomic assets that enhance national power, security, and economic development.
The status of ports as geopolitical assets for a maritime nation can be understood through several key components: their potential to stimulate industrial development; their role as geographical gateways through which countries enter the arena of maritime and global power competition; their capacity to strengthen the maritime geopolitical capabilities of the coastal state; and their function as a primary conduit to the global economy. Furthermore, this status is reinforced by the desire of regional and global powers to make long-term investments in port infrastructure, the role of ports in ensuring business security and meeting geo-energy needs, their position as intersections for transportation corridors, and their ability to justify geopolinomic codes to other actors through territorial imaginations and geopolitical representations.
Conclusion
Today, ports have evolved beyond their traditional role as conduits of trade to become critical infrastructure for economic power within the new global geopolitical system. Consequently, the acquisition and control of ports has become a fundamental component of national power. A combined perspective on the global distribution of power reveals that the geopolitical and geopolinomic significance of ports can shift the cycle of world power at all scales in favor of a "port hegemon." However, this hegemony can be challenged discursively when competing powers frame ports as threatening resources capable of altering the world order. Among the various instruments of economic governance, investment in offshore ports is a crucial geopolinomic code for establishing hegemony in strategic coastal areas. China stands as the primary port hegemon, with foreign investments in more than 100 ports worldwide. On a regional scale, India has sought to challenge China's dominance by developing its own network of invested ports throughout the Indian Ocean, creating a significant geopolinomic counterweight.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Port Power
  • Maritime Silk Road Initiative
  • INSTC
  • IMEC
  • String of Pearls

مراجع

Refrences
Abb, P. (2022). All geopolitics is local: the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor amidst overlapping center-periphery relations, Third World Quarterly, https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2022.2128329
Alti, A. (2019). China, Israel, and the Geopolitics of Seaports, What could the Chinese investment in the Israeli port of Haifa mean for regional geopolitics in the Middle East? July 16, 2019. The Diplomat, https://thediplomat.com/2019/07/china-israel-and-the-geopolitics-of-seaports Accessed September 24, 2021
Ashraf, J. (2017). String of Pearls and China's Emerging Strategic Culture. Strategic Studies, 37(4):166-181.
Bajpaee, C. (2015). China-India Regional Dimensions of the Bilateral Relationship. Strategic Studies Quarterly 9(4): 108-145.
Barton, B. (2020). Leveraging the “String of Pearls” for strategic gains? An assessment of the Maritime Silk Road Initiative’s (MSRI) economic/security nexus in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR), Asian Security, 17(2): 216-235. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855. 2020. 1844664
Baruah, S.Kr. (2024). How India develop ports abroad to promote its geopolitical objectives, The Week, June 16, 2024.
Bastanifar, I., Khan, K. H., Shah, H., & Koch, H. (2024). India's trade corridors: A shopping time model analysis for IMEEC and INSTC. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 14(12):932-946.
Bastanifar, I., Omidi, A., & Khan, K. H. (2024). A recursive networking economic analysis of international economic corridors: IMEEC and INSTC. Cogent Economics & Finance, 12(1):2363457.
Becker, J. (2020). China Maritime Report No. 11: Securing China's Lifelines across the Indian Ocean. CMSI China Maritime Reports. 11. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cmsi-maritime-reports/11
Bhattacharya, S. et al, (2021). Can India’s Necklace of Diamonds Strategy Defeat the China’s String of Pearls, International Journal of Recent Advances in Multidisciplinary Topics, 2 (11): 105-108.
Bhatti, K. A., Kharl, S. H., & Butt, K. M. (2020). String of pearls: Politics of ports in Indian Ocean. South Asian Studies, 35(01), 73-86.‏
Blanchard, J. M. F. (2024). Chinese Overseas Ports in Europe and the Americas. London: Routledge.
Brewster, D. (2017). Silk roads and strings of pearls: The strategic geography of China’s new pathways in the Indian Ocean. Geopolitics, 22(2), 269-291.
Cafiero, G. (2023). The Geopolitics of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, Arab Center Washington DC. October 10, 2023. https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/the-geopolitics-of-the-india-middle-east-europe-economic-corridor
Chalikyan, N., & Tashjian, Y., (2021). Geopolitics of the North-South Transport Corridor. South Asian Voices. https://southasianvoices.org/ geopolitics-of-the-north-south-transport-corridor Accessed by November 14, 2022.
Chaudhury, A. B. R., Basu, P., & Bose, S. (2019). Exploring India's Maritime Connectivity in the Extended Bay of Bengal (p. 41). Observer Research Foundation.‏
Chen, E. (2024). China’s Port Power: A massive new Chinese-owned port in Peru is set to extend the country’s influence in South America, The Wire China, August 25, 2024.
Chen, J., Feia, Y., Tae-Woo Lee, P., Tao, X., (2018). Overseas port investment policy for China’s central and local governments in the Belt and Road Initiative. J. Contemp. China 28 (116): 196–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2018.1511392.
Chubb, A. (2018). The Geotechnical Imaginary of the Belt and Road: Mobilising Imaginative Labour, IQAS 53: 357–384.
Dodds, K. Taylor, Z., Akbari, A. Castán Broto, V., Detterbeck, K., Inverardi-Ferri, C., Ok Lee, K., Mamadouh, V., Ramutsindela, M., & Yuan Woon, C. (2023). The Russian invasion of Ukraine: implications for politics, territory and governance, Territory, Politics, Governance, DOI: 10.1080/21622671.2023.2256119
Dorsey, J. (2020). Flying Under the Radar: Iranian Alternatives to Suez and Belt and Road. Modern Diplomacy: Project: Middle East, July 23, 2020. https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/07/23/flying-under-the-radar-iranian-alternatives-to-suez-and-belt-and-road Accessed July 2, 2022.
Drun, J. (2017). China’s Maritime Ambitions: a Sinister String of Pearls or a Benevolent Silk Road (or Both)?, Center for Advanced China Research, Dec 5, 2017, https://www.ccpwatch.org/single-post/2017/12/05/china-s-maritime-ambitions-a-sinister-string-of-pearls-or-a-benevolent-silk-road-or-both
EPRS, (2023). Chinese strategic interests in European ports, European Parliament, by Jacobs, K.S. –February 2023. https://www.europarl. europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2023/739367/EPRS_ATA(2023)739367_EN.pdf
Faridi, S. (2021). China’s ports in the Indian Ocean, Gateway House, August 19, 2021, https://www.gatewayhouse.in/chinas-ports-in-the-indian-ocean-region
Flint, C. (2022). Putting the “geo” into geopolitics: a heuristic framework and the example of Australian foreign policy, Geojournal, 87: 2577-2592.
Flint, C. (2024). Near and Far Waters: The Geopolitics of Seapower. Stanford University Press.
Flint, C. & Zhu, C. (201۹). The geopolitics of connectivity, cooperation, and hegemonic competition: The Belt and Road Initiative. Geoforum, 99, 95-101.
Flint, C., and Noorali, H. (2024). The relationality of geopolitical codes: the example of the Belt and Road Initiative, Asian Geographer, 41(1): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2023.2227618.
Glosserman, B. (2023). China’s port investments and risks to national security, The Japan Times, Sep 26.https://www.japantimes.co.jp/ commentary/2023/09/26/world/china-ports/#:~:text=Chinese%20companies%20have%20investments%20in,as%20Rotterdam%2C%20Hamburg%20and%20Valencia.
Hardy, C. & Thomas, R. (2014). Discourse in a Material World, Journal of Management Studies 52(5): 1-27.
Iftikhar, M. & Vivian Jan, J. (2022). The Geopolitics of China’s Overseas Port Investments: A Comparative Analysis of Greece and Pakistan. Geopolitics, 27(3), 826-851. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14650045.2020.1832473
Khan, A. (2023). Limited Hard Balancing: Explaining India’s Counter Response to Chinese Encirclement, Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, 6(3): 92-108.
Khan, K. H. (2024). A Discourse on Economic Corridors: INSTC and Chabahar Port. Saudi J Econ Fin, 8(9), 284-289.‏
Khan, K. H., & Omidi, A. (2023). China-India counterbalancing measures through international corridors and ports: The focus on Chabahar and Gwadar Ports. Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, 9(2), 144-163.‏
Khan, K. H. et al. (2024). Integrating gravity models and network analysis in logistical strategic planning: a case of the India Middle-East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC). Maritime Economics & Logistics. 1-36.
Krothwal, I., & Kumar, N. (2023). Theater of India-China strategic rivalry: The Indian Ocean. Comparative Strategy, 42(5), 655–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2023.2236490
Kutty, S.N. (2020). Connectivity and Chabahar: The Eurasian Future of India’s Iran Policy, In book: Iran in the New Eurasian Context (Middle East Institute, National University of Singapore and Bourse & Bazaar(.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lidarev, I., & Pant, H. V. (2022). India and maritime governance in the Indian ocean: the impact of geopolitics on India’s involvement in maritime governance. Contemporary South Asia, 30(2), 269–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/09584935.2022.2059062
Lin, W. (2019). Transport geography and geopolitics: Visions, rules and militarism in China's Belt and Road Initiative and beyond. Journal of Transport Geography, 81:102436. Available from:  https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.05.001
Liu, Z., Schindler, S., & Liu, W. (2020). Demystifying Chinese overseas investment in infrastructure: Port development, the belt and road initiative and regional development. Journal of Transport Geography, 87, 102812. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102812
Liu, Z.Z. (2024). Tracking China’s Control of Overseas Ports, Council on Foreign Relations, August 26, 2024
Lloyd’s List., (2023). One Hundred Container Ports 2023. Lloyd’s List. https://lloydslist.com/one-hundred-container-ports-2023
Manhas, N. (2020). China's Policy of 'String of Pearls'. International Journal of Social Impact, 5 (3): 166-181. doi: 10.25215/2455/0503003
Medby, I.A. (2021). An articulation of geopolitics otherwise? Indigenous language-use in spaces of Arctic geopolitics, Area 55 (1):18-25.
Medcalf, R., (2020). Indo-Pacific Empire: China, America, and the Contest for the World's Pivotal Region. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.
Mangal, J. and Nadeem Mirza, M. (2022). The String of Pearls and the Diamond Necklace: China and India's Geostrategic Competition in the Indian Ocean, Asia Pacific, 40: 21-41.
Merk, O. (2017). Geopolitics and commercial seaports. Revue internationale et stratégique, 107(3), 16-27.
Modi, N., (2014). Modi's Speech in Tokyo in February 2014, quoted Khan, H.U. & Khalid, I. 2018. New Delhi Response to Beijing ‘BRI’ Project: A Lucid Connection with Chinese “String of Pearls”. Journal of Political Studies. 25 (1), 243:254.
Mohan, C., (2012). Samudra Manthan Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Indo-Pacific. Carnegie Endowment for Int’l Peace.
Montolalu, R.R.K. (2022). US Indo-Pacific Strategy: Using the US-Australian Military Alliance as Part of the US Balance of Power Strategy to Respond to Chinese Influence in Indochina, Montolalu/Jurnal Pertahanan 8(2): 222-233.
Noorali, H. (2024). Geopolinomic codes: Territorial and discursive practices of connectivity networks of political economy. The Geographical Journal. e12597. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12597
Noorali, H., and Ahmadi, S.A. (2023). Iran's new geopolitics: heartland of the world’s corridors. GeoJournal 88: 1889–1904. DOI:10.1007/s10708-022-10727-z
Noorali, H., and Mamadouh, V. (2025). Port power 02: Chinese geoeconomic hopes and American geopolitical fears. Journal of Transport Geography, 125, 104207. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jtrangeo. 2025.104207
Noorali, H., Flint, C., and Ahmadi, S. A. (2022). Port Power: Towards a New Geopolitical World Order, Transport Geography, 105: 103483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103483.
Noorali, H., & Ahmadi, S.A. (2022). Analysis of Iran's Geopolitical Role in International Corridors. Human Geography Research, 54(3), 1161-1187. (in Persian)
Noorali, H., & Ahmadi, S.A. (2020). Investigating the role of ports in theories of political geography/geopolitics and theorizing the "port power" concept. Research Political Geography Quarterly, 5(4), 91-114. (in Persian)
Notteboom, T., Pallis, A. & Rodrigue, JP. (2023). Port Economics, Management and Policy, London and New York: Routledge.
Notteboom, T., & Haralambides, H. (2025). Seaports in a tense geopolitical environment: key agents or sitting ducks?. Maritime Economics & Logistics, 27:1-24. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-025-00313-8
Oltean, S. (2024). Seaport Geopolitics in South Asia, with Special Attention on BRI Projects, Geopolitics Quarterly, 20(2): 302-322.
Oulmakki, O., Rodrigue, JP., Hernandez Meza, A. et al. (2023). The implications of Chinese investments on Mediterranean trade and maritime hubs. J. shipp. trd. 8, 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-023-00157-6
Price, G., & House, C. (2007). Price, G., House, C. China and India: Cooperation and competition, Asia Programme Briefing Paper, 7(1): 1–11.
Roy Chaudhury, D. (2023). Bangladesh Gives India permanent access to Chattogram, Mongla ports, The Economic Times, April 30, 2023.
Sajith, S., Raju, T.B, Aswani, RS. (2024). Are Indian ports safe? Identifying, analysing and prioritizing the risks affecting India's major ports,  Maritime Transport Research,  6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.martra.2024. 100108.
Sen, S., & Majumdar, A. J. (2024). India’s Maritime Geopolitics: Philosophy and Practice. Strategic Analysis, 48(4), 297–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09700161.2024.2404554
Sharp, J. (2020). Materials, forensics, and feminist geopolitics, Progress in Human Geography 45 (5): 1-16.
Shaw, J. & Sidaway, J.D. (2011) Making links: on (re)engaging with transport and transport geography. Progress in Human Geography, 35(4), 502–520.
Sidharth, R. (2024). India's Wins Bangladesh's Mongla Port: A Boost to Maritime Influence, Logistics Insider, July 24, 2024. https://www.logisticsinsider.in/india-wins-bangladeshs-mongla-port-a-boost-to-maritime-influence
Singh, S., Singh, B. (2019). Geopolitics of ports: factoring Iran in India’s counterbalancing strategy for “Sino-Pak Axis”. J. Eurasian Stud. 10 (2): 169–182. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1879366519850712.
Sinha, R. (2024). Building bridges across the Indian Ocean: Australia-India cooperation for port development, United States Student Center, 13 December, 2024.
Small, A. (2015). The China-Pakistan axis: Asia’s new geopolitics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. NY: Oxford University Press.
Summers, T., (2021). Negotiating the boundaries of China's Belt and Road Initiative, Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 38(5): https://doi.org/10.1177/2399654420911410b
Sykes, O. and Shaw, D. (2018), Unpacking the spatial imaginaries of “One Belt, One Road”: from representation to performativity. Town Planning Review, 89, 120–24.
Tashjian, Y. (2021). Armenia and India’s Vision of “North-South Corridor”: A Strategy or a “Pipe Dream”? Armenian Weekly, March 24, 2021. https://armenianweekly.com/2021/03/24/armenia-and-indias-vision-of-north-south-corridor-a-strategy-or-a-pipe-dream. Accessed by November 14, 2022.
Taylor, P. (1982). A Materialist Framework for Political Geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 7(1):  15-34.
UNCTAD (2023). Review of Maritime Transport 2023. Towards a Green and Just Transition. United Nations publication. Sales No. E.23.II.D. 23. Geneva. https://hbs.unctad.org/maritime-transport-indicators
Upadhyay, S. (2024a). India’s Growing ‘Port’ Print in Indo-Pacific, June 13, 2024. Institute for Security & Development Policy (ISDP), Voices 37. https://www.isdp.eu/indias-growing-port-print-in-indo-pacific
Upadhyay, S. (2024b). Ports, Pearls, and Power in the Indo-Pacific: A Geopolitical Analysis, USANAS Fundation, May 22, 2024, https://usanasfoundation.com/ports-pearls-and-power-in-the-indo-pacific-a-geopolitical-analysis
Wang, YI., (2015). Foreign Minister Wang Yi Meets the Press, May 2015, https://www.mfa.gov.cn.
Watterson, CJ., de Saint Rapt, J-A., Yun, E., (2023). China’s state-led international port development: Challenges for port states. Marine Policy. 155, 105697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105697
Xi, J.P., (2023). Building an Open, Inclusive and Interconnected World for Common Development, MFAPRC, 2023-10-18.
Xinhua, (2023b). Xi Story: Shining pearls of civilization along ancient Silk Road, Xinhua, 2023-05-15, https://english.news.cn/20230515/ 3d7fd8af845c489ebb73a9cf9d7c5372/c.html
Xinhua., (2023). Interview: China's BRI, U.S. Marshall Plan essentially different. Croatian expert says. Xinhua. 2023-10-13. https://english. news.cn/20231013/a2475e8bce584fb2bb7f4b2be2af827a/c.html
Yang, Z., Yunzhu, H., Zhu, H. & Notteboom, T. (2020). China’s Investment in African Ports: Spatial Distribution, Entry Modes and Investor Profile, Research in Transportation Business & Management, 37: 100571.
Zhang, C, Zhang, M. and Xiao, C. (2022). From traditional infrastructure to new infrastructure: a new focus of China’s Belt and Road Initiative diplomacy? Eurasian Geography and Economics 63 (3): 424-443.
Zhang, X. (2017) Chinese Capitalism and the Maritime Silk Road: A World-Systems Perspective. Geopolitics, 22(2): 310-331.
فصلنامه سیاست
دوره 55، شماره 4
دی 1404
صفحه 1195-1165

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 01 فروردین 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 13 خرداد 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 21 مرداد 1404

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار