Senior Research Fellow in International Relations Research, Expediency Council Center for Strategic Research, PhD student in Central Asia and the Caucasus Studies, University of Tehran
Abstract
The Middle East and its surrounding regions, namely Central Asia and the Caucasus and the Indian Sub-continent have become one of the important cauldrons of terrorism in the contemporary era. In the last couple of decades, the emergence of extremist currents such as Taliban and Al-Qaeda has drastically shaped the political, social and security landscape of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Among the Islamic movements, ISIS has paid special attention to the Caucasus and Central Asia, Afghanistan and Pakistan region which it has styled as ‘The Islamic Emirate of the Caucasus’ and ‘Historical Khorasan’ respectively. As waves of terrorism and extremist violence engulf the region and poses serious threat to all the nations in the region, the civilization and cultural heritage shared among the ten Member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization, could provide a platform for countering the spread of terrorism, violence and extremism in the region.
Kouzegar Kaleji,V. (2016). Common Civilization and Cultural Spheres in the Fight Against Traditional and Modern Extremism in ECO region. Foreign Relations History, 17(66), 151-168.
MLA
Kouzegar Kaleji,V. . "Common Civilization and Cultural Spheres in the Fight Against Traditional and Modern Extremism in ECO region", Foreign Relations History, 17, 66, 2016, 151-168.
HARVARD
Kouzegar Kaleji V. (2016). 'Common Civilization and Cultural Spheres in the Fight Against Traditional and Modern Extremism in ECO region', Foreign Relations History, 17(66), pp. 151-168.
CHICAGO
V. Kouzegar Kaleji, "Common Civilization and Cultural Spheres in the Fight Against Traditional and Modern Extremism in ECO region," Foreign Relations History, 17 66 (2016): 151-168,
VANCOUVER
Kouzegar Kaleji V. Common Civilization and Cultural Spheres in the Fight Against Traditional and Modern Extremism in ECO region. Foreign Relations History, 2016; 17(66): 151-168.
