A Comparative Study of the Role of Geographic Sources of Power in Geopolitical Crises (Case Study: Ukraine and Taiwan Crisis)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Sajed Bahrami Jaf 1
Darya Mazandarani 2
Rasul Eydi 3
1 Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Geography, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
3 Master's Degree Holder, Department of Political Geography, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
10.22034/el.2025.501300.1052
Abstract
This study examines the geopolitical crises in Ukraine and Taiwan using a qualitative and comparative approach and analyzes the role of various components of the geography of power, including ethnic and religious compositions, strategic location, natural resources, and human dimensions (human rights), in the formation and escalation of these crises. The findings show that in Ukraine, the ethnic and linguistic compositions in the east of the country, the strategic location as a bridge between Russia and the West, and rich natural resources such as gas and agricultural land have directly contributed to geopolitical competition and have led to foreign interventions. In Taiwan, although the ethnic composition is less diverse, the identity distinction of the Taiwanese from the Chinese and its strategic location in the vital waterways of the China Sea have made this island one of the most sensitive points in the geopolitical confrontations between China and the United States. Also, Taiwan’s role in the semiconductor industry as a strategic resource in the global technology supply chain has strongly influenced international competition. Furthermore, human rights issues have been used as political tools in both crises to justify international interventions and support. This research shows how geographical, identity, and natural resource factors have played a role in exacerbating geopolitical crises and have become tools to advance the goals of great powers.

Keywords

Subjects

  1. بهرامی جاف، س.، جان پرور، م.، سلطانی، ن.، و محمدپور، ع. (1392). تبیین نظری مولفه های مؤثر در روابط ژئوپلیتیک و ارائه الگوی پیشنهادی. پژوهش های جغرافیای انسانی، 55(3)، 225-241.
  2. ​​ جان پرور، م (1396); ژئوپلیتیک برای همه، نشر انتخاب، چاپ اول.
  3. بهرامی­جاف، ساجد، جان­پرور، محسن. (1403). کتاب نگرشی نو به مناسبات ژئوپلیتیک ایران و آمریکا (گذشته، حال و آینده)، انتشارات صنایع نرم، تهران.
  4. ولیقلی زاده، ع.، و کریمی، م. (1395). تبیین جغرافیایی عوامل مورد مناقشه در بحران ژئوپلیتیک قره باغ. مجله مطالعات اوراسیا، 7، 172 - 180.

 

  1. Allison, R. (2014). Russian ‘deniable’ intervention in Ukraine: how and why Russia broke the rules. International Affairs, 90, 1255-1297. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12170.
  2. Amable, B., & Palombarini, S. (2023). Multidimensional social conflict and institutional change. New Political Economy, 28, 942 - 957. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2023.2215701.
  3. Bazzi, S., & Gudgeon, M. (2021). The Political Boundaries of Ethnic Divisions. American Economic Journal:Applied Economics. https://doi.org/10.1257/APP.20190309.
  4. Cabestan, J. (2017). Changing Identities in Taiwan under Ma Ying-jeou. , 42-60. https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.38.c.
  5. Chen, Y. (2015). Human Rights in China-Taiwan Relations: How Taiwan Can Engage China. . https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2502674.
  6. Cheng, M. (2022). The Ukraine Crisis: Causes, Conundrum and Consequences. Journal of Social and Political Sciences. https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1991.05.02.350.
  7. Chiu, Y. (2012). Taiwan's tech hubs take advantage of disasters. . https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2012.6172791.
  8. Chruzik, K. (2019). Risk Management in Crisis. Journal of KONBiN, 49, 245 - 264. https://doi.org/10.2478/jok-2019-0085.
  9. Coyne, C. (2010). Constitutions and Crisis. Law & Economics eJournal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1647846.
  10. Crane, N., & Grove, K. (2018). An active role for political geography in our current conjuncture. Geography Compass. https://doi.org/10.1111/GEC3.12410.
  11. Czepek, J. (2023). ECtHR Case-law Concerning Russian Aggression on Ukraine and the Events Taking Place after 2014. International Community Law Review. https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-bja10115.
  12. Danilin, I., & Selyanin, Y. (2023). Race for Nanometers: American Policy Toward Taiwan and Republic of Korea. World Economy and International Relations. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2023-67-11-80-88.
  13. Erfan, A. (2021). The Geopolitical Influential Components in the Afghan Crisis. JournalofHumanitiesandSocialSciencesStudies. https://doi.org/10.32996/jhsss.2021.4.7.5.
  14. Farooq, M. (2023). US’ TAIWAN STRATEGY: AN INSTRUMENT TO CONTAINCHINA.Mar Papers. https://doi.org/10.54690/margallapapers.27.1.154.
  15. Fedorenko, V., Iukhymiuk, O., & Adler, A. (2022). VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS AS A RESULT OF MILITARY AGGRESSION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AGAINST UKRAINE IN 2022 AND MECHANISMS OF BRINGING WAR CRIMINALS TO LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY. Expert: Paradigm of Law and Public Administration. https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-9660-2022-2(20)-32-59.
  16. Götz, E., & Staun, J. (2022). Why Russia attacked Ukraine: Strategic culture and radicalized narratives. Contemporary Security Policy, 43, 482 - 497. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2022.2082633.
  17. Grebogi, C., Ott, E., & Yorke, J. (1983). Crises, sudden changes in chaotic attractors, and transient chaos. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 7, 181-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(83)90126-4.
  18. Grimes, S., & Du, D. (2020). China's emerging role in the global semiconductor value chain. Telecommunications Policy, 101959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101959.
  19. Grygiel, J. (2006). Great powers and geopolitical change. . https://doi.org/10.1353/book.3284.
  20. Gulick, E. (1982). Europe's Classical Balance of Power: A Case History of the Theory and Practice of One of the Great Concepts of European Statecraft. . https://doi.org/10.2307/1848519.
  21. Hashmi, S. (2023). Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region: Prospects and Challenges. Asian Perspective, 47, 229 - 245. https://doi.org/10.1353/apr.2023.0010.
  22. Huang, M. (2023). The Dilemmas of Becoming Chinese in Taiwan. China Review, 23, 149 - 164.
  23. Huang, S. (2000). Language, identity and conflict: a Taiwanese study. , 143, 139 - 150. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2000.143.139.
  24. Jagtap, S., Trollman, H., Trollman, F., Garcia-Garcia, G., Parra-López, C., Duong, L., Martindale, W., Munekata, P., Lorenzo, J., Hdaifeh, A., Hassoun, A., Salonitis, K., & Afy-Shararah, M. (2022). The Russia-Ukraine Conflict: Its Implications for the Global Food Supply Chains. Foods, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142098.
  25. Janparvar, M., Jaf, S. B., Salehabadi, R., Chatterjee, U., & Shahbazi, M. (2022). The Geopolitics of Refugees: A Strategic Tool for Explaining the Concept of Migration in Developing Countries. In Sustainable Urbanism in Developing Countries (pp. 41-53). CRC Press.‏
  26. Kahn, W., Barton, M., & Fellows, S. (2013). Organizational Crises and the Disturbance of Relational Systems. Academy of Management Review, 38, 377-396. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.0363.
  27. Kondratenko, O. (2022). Crisis of the eastern vector of foreign policy of Ukraine. Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.53317/2786-4774-2022-1-7.
  28. Koroutchev, R. (2023). Internal Displacement of the Ukrainians. Migration towards Moldova, Romania and Bulgaria. Espacio Tiempo y Forma. Serie VI, Geografía. https://doi.org/10.5944/etfvi.16.2023.37182.
  29. Kropatcheva, E. (2011). Playing Both Ends Against the Middle: Russia's Geopolitical Energy Games with the EU and Ukraine. Geopolitics, 16, 553 - 573. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2011.520863.
  30. Leasure, D., Kashyap, R., Rampazzo, F., Dooley, C., Elbers, B., Bondarenko, M., Verhagen, M., Frey, A., Yan, J., Akimova, E., Fatehkia, M., Trigwell, R., Tatem, A., Weber, I., & Mills, M. (2023). Nowcasting Daily Population Displacement in Ukraine through Social Media Advertising Data. Population and Development Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/padr.12558.
  31. Markowitz, J., & Fariss, C. (2017). Power, Proximity, and Democracy: Geopolitical Competition in the International System. Journal of Peace Research, 55, 78-93. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2204867.
  32. Mikhailov, V. (2021). The third Generation of Human Rights and the Issue of Legal Protection of the Russian-Speaking Population of Ukraine. Proceedings of the Southwest State University. Series: History and Law. https://doi.org/10.21869/2223-1501-2021-11-5-10-18.
  33. Moslinejad, A. (2013); Ukraine crisis and the intensification of regional competition, scientific research quarterly of world politics, second period, fourth issue.
  34. Mukhtar, Z. (2023). The Impact of the Ukraine-Russia War on Food Security and Countries Exposed to Food Supply Shock. European Journal of Business and Management Research. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2023.8.2.1861.
  35. Musa, M., & Mutlaq, D. (2023). The Impact of Taiwan’s Status on US-Chinese Relations Under President Joe Biden. The International and Political Journal. https://doi.org/10.31272/ipj.i55.185.
  36. Ning, Y. (2020). Separatism in Taiwan: The Taiwan Independence Movement and possible development of future Cross-Strait Relations. , 317-320. https://doi.org/10.2991/icesed-19.2020.21.
  37. Obushnyj, M. (2021). PECULIARITIES OF CONFLICT NATURE OF SEPARATISM IN MODERN UKRAINE. Almanac of Ukrainian Studies. https://doi.org/10.17721/2520-2626/2021.29.16.
  38. Orenstein, M. (2023). The European Union’s transformation after Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Journal of European Integration, 45, 333 - 342. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2023.2183393.
  39. Qiang, X., & Wang, J. (2023). Parallel Perceptions: Divergent Perspectives of the United States and China on the Taiwan Issue and Risky Implications. China Review, 23, 41 - 76.
  40. Reynal-Querol, M. (2002). Ethnicity, Political Systems, and Civil Wars. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46, 29 - 54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002702046001003.
  41. Rumyantsev, O. (2022). National Minorities and Ethnic Groups in Ukraine as Part of the Linguistic Identity Question. 2 | 1 | 2022. https://doi.org/10.30687/bes/2785-3187/2022/01/002.
  42. Sobolewska, M., Fisher, S., Heath, A., & Sanders, D. (2015). Understanding the effects of religious attendance on political participation among ethnic minorities of different religions. European Journal of Political Research, 54, 271-287. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12081.
  43. Stekić, N. (2023). China's geopolitical design for East Asia: Taiwanese piece of the puzzle. Politika nacionalne bezbednosti. https://doi.org/10.5937/pnb24-43441.
  44. Vinson, L. (2018). The Logic of Ethnic and Religious Conflict in Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press,. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755048318000615.
  45. Yakoviyk, I., & Tsvelikh, M. (2023). Energy Security of the European Union in the Context of Russian Aggression against Ukraine. Problems of legality. https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.160.274518.
  46. Zhong, Y. (2016). Explaining National Identity Shift in Taiwan. Journal of Contemporary China, 25, 336 - 352. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2015.1104866.
  1. Коваленко, А. (2021). Reliable instrumental metering of natural gas is the key to Ukraine’s energy independence. Ukrainian Metrological Journal. https://doi.org/10.24027/2306-7039.2.2021.236084.
Human Ecology
Volume 3, Issue 9
Winter 2025
Pages 733-746