Highlight the main provisions of geopolitical theories. Classical geopolitical theories
Introduction
Talking about geopolitics, its main directions, presenting the development of this strategic and practical thinking, may seem like a hopeless task - the topic is too extensive. It requires so many facts of history and geography that a whole encyclopedia may not be enough ... Nevertheless, one should try to make a work of a sketchy nature.
1. Theoretical panorama of geopolitics
1.1 The concept of geopolitics
The first obvious and simple question is: what is geopolitics? A discipline rarely recognized as such that integrates political strategy, a discipline that uses purely scientific elements. Since geopolitics is a strategy, it should not be judged on the basis of static criteria, but exclusively on dynamic ones. Geography can be static; political geography, and, moreover, geopolitics, by no means can be static. The dynamics of political realities and the creative will of statesmen are constantly changing everything. "Theatre of the World" is a kaleidoscope of facts made by the willful efforts of numerous successful and unsuccessful attempts to change the world. Antonio Flamigni summarized the problem as follows: "Political geography is an analysis, while geopolitics is a synthesis."
1.2 Political communities are "living organisms"
The main conclusion from the synthesizing nature of geopolitics is that we can no longer consider political communities as stable political organisms, they must be considered living organisms. Political communities are always in motion, in fermentation (in "fermentation," as Haushofer puts it). Hence, states are also living organisms, although this fact is denied by the dominant ideologies, since they use the methodology of the Enlightenment; come from moralistic tinsel. The suspicion of anti-science that falls on geopolitics is therefore of ideological origin, based on the arguments of the mechanical concepts of the ideology of the Enlightenment, as if biology and medicine with their organic methodology are not scientific!
1.3 Psychology of the state
To know the geopolitical program of a nation is to know the deepest instincts. To analyze geographical consciousness means to carry out a psychoanalysis of peoples.
So, if Freud, Adler and Jung were the founding fathers of individual psychoanalysis, then who investigated the "political consciousness" of peoples, analyzed their deepest instincts? The list is quite long, starting from Antiquity - from Aristotle, Thucydides, Xenophon, Herodotus, Strabo, Eratosthenes, Pliny, etc., continuing to the Middle Ages - Ibn Khaldun, the Renaissance - Bodin, Montesquieu, Tocqueville, Herder, Humboldt and Karl Ritter.
During Antiquity - a simple but rich era - Aristotle understood the decisive geopolitical role of the islands; just listen: "Crete, by its position, is destined for dominating influence over Greece." Montesquieu spoke about climate as one of the factors influencing the formation of peoples, ways of thinking and political strategy. Herder mentioned culture, literature and linguistics as factors influencing the unification of territories.
1.4 "Political Geography" by Friedrich Ratzel
Geopolitics in the purest sense of the word begins with Friedrich Ratzel (1844 - 1904), who wrote the work "Political Geography" in 1897. His work can be summarized in six main ideas:
1) States are organisms that are born, live, grow old and die.
2) The growth of states as organisms is predetermined. Geography, therefore, sets itself the task of revealing and describing the laws that govern this growth.
3) The historical landscape leaves its mark on the citizen of the state.
4) The main idea is the theory of "living space".
Ratzel was the first to talk about it.
Ratzel also speaks of the confrontation between "continental powers" and "sea powers". He recalls the subjective aspect of "political geography" - at that time the term "geopolitics" did not yet exist - and proves the need to have a "sense of space" and "vital energy" in order to survive in the conditions of conflicting consent of nations and states.
1.5 "Probability Theory" by Vidal De La Blache and Vallo
The land, according to Vidal de la Blache, is not only a non-cultivated territory, but also a space transformed by a person in a differentiated way, depending on the technical development and the criteria of his religion; there are religions that are open to technological progress and religions that are hostile to it. Here Vidal de la Blache is more or less close to Max Weber, who introduces the notion of the Western Syndrome of which Protestantism is the bearer; and to Serge Christopher Colm arguing that Buddhism offers advantages in the modern economy. Finally, Vallot in 1911 introduces the concept of probability theory based on differences in territories. States that exercise control over several types of territories have greater adaptability, are forced to face a greater number of real and potential challenges, and eventually become stronger than other states. States that exercise control over only one type of territory have fewer options; their genius cannot manifest itself in such a variety of ways; their citizens are not internally ready, if history so requires, to give a worthy rebuff to the numerous challenges of the world.
1.6 The pulse of historical development
The Swedish professor Rudolf Kjellen (1864 - 1922) paints a concise and accurate picture of the position of the great world powers in the period 1923 - 1922. In Europe, his research covers such countries as France, Germany, Great Britain, Russia and Austria-Hungary. Outside of Europe, Japan and the United States attracted his attention.
Kjellen shows that France had two goals: to draw a border along the Rhine, which she did not succeed, and to cause chaos in Central Europe, which she quite succeeded in. Germany in 1914 felt surrounded by the Entente, which included England, France and Russia, which left her with two choices: create a delicate balance through diplomacy or go on the offensive, as some military men, such as Bernardi, foreshadowed. Germany, which was undergoing a rapid process of industrial development, needed colonial trade markets, and therefore could not help but come into conflict with England. Just as the New World was the preserve of England and the United States, which were beginning to gradually move beyond their vast domestic market, Germany relied on the Ottoman Empire to protect its economic expansion into southeast Middle Asia, Persia and Indonesia (in the time of the Dutch colony). From here arose the so-called. the idea of a diagonal stretching from Iceland all the way to Indonesia and passing on its way through the entire Eurasian continental mass.
1.7 Russia, Japan, United States
Russia, as Kjellen stated, also felt surrounded, even blocked, in its advance towards the warm seas. The Russian dilemma is to acquire maritime "windows" for the export of products in the event of the economic development of Siberia. Japan hatched plans to create a space of Asian co-prosperity in the Far East and the Pacific region around its growing power, which caused a clash with British interests in Malaysia and American interests in the Philippines and China. Having swallowed up German Micronesia in 1918, Japan acquired an additional trump card: henceforth it had fishing zones, direct sources of food supply, which allowed it to get rid of its dependence on food supplies. As for the United States, which owns the continental space stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, they set themselves the goal of controlling the opposing shores both in Europe and in Asia. For the most part, this analysis of Kjellen remains true today, even if many other circumstances have changed.
1.8 Three knots of unresolved problems
Kjellen outlined the main lines of development of the international situation since 1918. Three "nodal" problems remained unresolved:
1) Franco-German conflict.
2) The conflict between Germany and Austria-Hungary (on the one hand), and, on the other hand, Russia for establishing control in the Balkans.
3) The conflict between Germany and England, or, more precisely, between Germany and the dominant thalassocratic (i.e., dominant sea) power. In the role of the dominant maritime power, England begins to gradually give way to the United States.
1.9 Germany and the Anglo-Saxon thalassocracies (maritime powers)
The struggle between Germany and England was a struggle for dominance over oceanic routes and world trade. Equally, the economic conflict pitted the two northern European powers in Latin America as well. Before the First World War and between the two wars, Latin American countries formed two blocs, explains geopolitician Ernst Sahaber, an associate of Haushofer: a Pacific bloc of poor countries, including Chile, Peru and Bolivia, and an Atlantic bloc of richer countries, including Argentina (leading role), Uruguay and Brazil. The Pacific bloc faces the United States. And the Atlantic block - to England. To avoid dependence on only one external power, the Latin American countries are seeking to establish closer trade relations with France and Germany. This last power quickly makes success after success: in 1936-1937 it takes the first place in the import of goods to Brazil and Chile, invading at least two fiefdoms - American and British. In the Second World War, the British and Americans tried to put an end to this commercial success of the Germans in a zone that the Anglo-Saxons considered exclusively theirs.
In the post-war period, this conflict is of a hidden nature: one can recall the restraint of the Americans regarding the purchase of German military equipment and patents for the production of tanks and aircraft by Argentina; about the project of Bastian, a retired Bundeswehr general and Green MP in the Bundestag, to sell MBB helicopters to Sandinista Nicaragua; about the German-Brazilian intentions to build a complex of nuclear power plants in Brazil, a project against which the Americans took up arms; on the installation of a Volkswagen assembly line in Brazil and Mexico, etc.
1.10 Kjellen: German interests are identical to European ones
Kjellen's conclusion: Germany, located in the heart of the European continent, represents, consciously or unconsciously, Europe as a continental bloc. The interests of Germany, according to Swedish political scientists, are identical with the interests of Europe as a whole, even if the Europeans living on the periphery of Germany are not always convinced of this ... The geographical destiny of Germany will always force her to protect the fundamental interests of all of Europe. Of course, the German government started the Second World War, pursuing narrowly nationalistic goals that aroused distrust and hatred of peripheral countries. The most significant conclusion of the war is that the "state-nation" system has historically outlived itself, and its place must be taken by a structure on a continental scale.
In addition to the analysis of the three knots of unresolved problems, after Versailles and the First World War, Kjellen analyzes three geographical factors that play a decisive role in the process of activating world geopolitics. These three factors are expansion, territorial integrity and freedom of movement. Russia has a vast territory and territorial solidity, but not freedom of movement, since its access to warm seas is limited.
Great Britain has ample freedom of movement through fleet and dominance of the sea routes, expansion (thanks to such dominions as Canada, Austria, South Africa and India), but not territorial solidity: her Empire is torn and scattered over 24 percent of the surface of the globe. This was also the weakness of the former British Empire. Another solution, namely the creation of the Commonwealth of Nations, has not stood the test of time.
1.11 Land and sea centralization
Geopolitician and specialist in England Peter Richard Rowden quite rightly notes that the British never talk about geopolitics, but always about strategy or vital interests. Geopolitics presupposes land centralization, the centralization of territory shared by the French, Germans and Russians. The logic of the British Empire proclaimed maritime centralization, since the territory of the mother country was too insignificant and multi-ethnic.
As for Germany, it has neither extended territory nor freedom of movement (it undoubtedly has access to open waters through Hamburg, Bermen and Kiel, but the Westphalian treaties of 1648 secured the possession of mouths of rivers), but it has a territorial solidity and a single ethnic group. The United States has all the trump cards: extended space, freedom of movement and territorial solidity. This is the secret of their power and expansion. As for Japan, it has territorial solidity and freedom of movement in the Pacific Ocean, but does not have a sufficiently extended territory.
Based on these statements made by Kjellen, German geopoliticians and political scientists in the 1920s asked themselves the question: how to save the country and Europe from collapse? Their goals are: to bypass the financial and thalassocratic Anglo-Saxon powers, to free our subcontinent from the financial clutches of the American bankers, to bypass the obstacle of Bolshevik Russia, while not abandoning the desire to seek to create optimal conditions together with her. In 1908 - 1918, Germany under Wilhelm II sealed the German-Austrian-Turkish alliance, the central axis of which ran diagonally from Helgoland, the main base on the North Sea, opposite the mouth of the Elbe, towards Istanbul and further to the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean . This alliance provided a wide outlet to the North Sea, a presence in the eastern Mediterranean, joint control with the Russians in the Black Sea, absolute control in the Persian Gulf and access to the Indian Ocean, the reserved place of the British, the masters of India. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, which led to the split of the Turkish-Anatolian core in the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean and the creation of a whole mosaic of new states in the Balkans, the diagonal seems to have completely collapsed. Its restoration became the goal of German diplomacy and geopolitics.
1.12 "Middle Earth"
The greatest geopolitician of our time, the English scientist Halford John Mackinder (1861 - 1947), developed his main idea in a short article entitled "The Geographical Axis of History" in 1904. What did he mean by this term? For him, it was a continental space, not subject to the influence of the armed forces and maritime powers. Mackinder called this continental mass "heartland" (lit. "heart", central earth). This land, he explained, is protected from the history that shakes the rest of the world. History is now riddled with constant dialectical clashes between land and sea. On the sea, that is, on 3/4 of the surface of our planet, seafarers dominate, while the land, 1/4 of the planet, is the homeland of the peoples of the steppe riders. The two dominant figures, the sailor and the horseman, the Viking and the Mongol, are in constant motion, driven by inexhaustible dynamics.
This parable of the confrontation between land and sea, or between Behemoth and Leviathan (by Carl Schmitt), illustrates a very tangible reality: the confrontation between the gigantic continental mass formed by Europe, Africa and Asia, and the oceanic mass, dominated by the Anglo-Saxon maritime powers. The continental mass has a "middle" formed by Russia, the Urals, Western Siberia, Kazakhstan, Xinjiang and Mongolia.
1.13 "Fringe Lands"
Between this continental mass and the oceans stretches an adjacent zone, a "peripheral cordon", marginal lands: the countries of the Mediterranean, Western Europe of the Middle Ages, the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent and China. In this "peripheral cordon" there are homelands of urbanized peoples and zones of mixed culture. The complex created by the "middle earth" and the marginal lands is opposed by the island complex - America, Australia, Oceania and Great Britain. According to Mackinder and his Russian and German students, this place is the birthplace of commercial liberalism, that is, modern Carthage.
Mackinder shows that the "surrounded land" is invincible because 1) naval vessels, whether mobile or thalassocracy forces, cannot invade this zone; 2) the peoples of the outlying lands could never capture this zone, as evidenced by the unsuccessful attempts of the Swedish king Charles XII, Napoleon and Hitler. On the contrary, as Mackinder argues, the "middle earth" can invade and subjugate the fringe lands because 1) it is able to field enough warriors; 2) has timber (and other raw materials) in order to build ships, become in turn a thalassocracy and thus overcome its original weakness; 3) has rich food supplies. The only argument we can put forward against this assertion is that demographically, the "middle earth" has always been small in number.
Mackinder came to the conclusion that it was necessary for the sea peoples and the peoples of the marginal lands to restrain the peoples of the "middle earth". It was on this logic of deterrence that the American alliance strategists of our postwar era (NATO, CENTO, ASEAN) were based.
1.14 Three stages of history
After the Second World War, Mackinder's work must be linked to additional factors: 1) the confrontation between East and West shows that the strategy of containment works in favor of the thalassocracies. 2) the middle land is threatened by missiles and long-range aircraft, although it itself has become a maritime power and has an impressive fleet.
Mackinder oscillates between two poles: 1) he overestimates the power of the "middle earth" and is pessimistic about the western marginal lands, 2) he shares the optimism of the American general Maen (19th century), who declared that the power that dominates the sea automatically dominates on the planet.
1.15 Sources of German geopolitics
German geopolitics was born at the crossroads of three trends: 1) the political geography of Ritter and Ratzel, that is, a purely German tradition; 2) political geography and organic political science of Kjellen, which, in addition, was one of the components for the concepts of Herder and Tonnies; 3) Mackinder's political geography with its "driving force of history" and "land-sea" dualism.
It was Haushofer (1869 - 1945), a geographer and professional military man, who forged, based on this material, an instrument of first-order geopolitics, which the Germans used as the ideological basis of their diplomacy. On December 15, 1923, he founded his famous Journal of Geopolitics. A real school was formed around this journal, in which all the international problems of our time were discussed from the standpoint of various sciences.
Haushofer understood that forces of an intellectual or spiritual nature can sometimes tip the balance one way or the other. That is why knowledge of the influential ideas of major religious or ideological currents is a necessity for a politician involved in geopolitics, diplomacy or military affairs.
1.16 Haushofer's great project
The Haushofer geopolitical school developed the "concept of a large space", showing interest in a number of theories popular in the 1920s: pan-European, pan-Asian and pan-American. These are large continental associations - the imperative of the times; industry is becoming too specialized, too complex, the need for raw materials today is such that the limited spaces of ordinary nation-states are too small. As a consequence, peoples must orient their development towards a new form of political organization: a large space. According to Haushofer, these are: 1) Euroafrica, dominated by the Franco-German tandem; 2) Soviet Russia, which will extend its influence to Persia, Afghanistan and the Indian subcontinent; 3) East Asia, regrouped around Japan, the region's driving force; 4) North and South America under the leadership of the United States.
Based on this, Haushofer secretly recommended the famous German-Soviet pact concluded in August 1939. He developed his theory and about a year later proposed a plan for a large continental Eurasian alliance, uniting Franco's Spain, Italy, Vichy France, Germany, Russia and Japan against the British Empire. In November, this project was presented to Molotov and Stalin, who ignored it without giving any answer. In striving to complete this great continental unification, Haushofer always supported the movement for the independence of the Hindu, Arab countries, Persians, etc., hoping to throw off the fetters placed by British imperialism on the Eurasian coast.
The invasion of Hitler's troops into the Soviet Union destroyed the great project.
1.17 Caesura: 1945
1945 double victory: the victory of the American thalassocracy and the continental power of the Soviet Union. If in the weeks and months after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki the US looked invincible, the victory of Mao Zedong in China in 1949 seemed to usher in an era of Marxist ideological dominance across much of Eurasia. Since the US entered the war to split the large European (and East Asian territories centered in Japan) gathered around Germany, the emergence of a large communist region could not be accepted by Washington: hence the Cold War and the Korean War.
In the period 1975 - 1980. one could speak of real American hegemony. 1) Washington has been moving closer to China since 1972 and thereby split the unity of communist Eurasia. 2) There has never been a genuine economic upsurge in the USSR, and the gap between the West and the Sovietized world has constantly deepened, which the latter tried unsuccessfully to overcome. 3) Moscow was losing the influence it had in the so-called. outlying lands through intermediary parties. The communist ideology ceased to seem progressive. 4) Due to the technological backwardness of the USSR, it can no longer produce modern weapons. The level of production of information technology in the USSR is low, it has to be imported: for example, the software developed jointly by the Norwegian company Konsberg and the Japanese Toshiba made it possible to create engines for submarines that the Soviet Navy is equipped with, the operation of which is detected by American sonar systems only from a distance of 20 miles, while before that the US Navy detected the engines of Soviet submarines at a distance of 200 miles. This fact shows the fidelity of Haushofer's Euro-Asian project: the Scandinavian Far West and the Japanese Far East are jointly trying to strengthen the Slavic Middle Land to the detriment of the American thalassocracy.
1.18 Admiral Main's theses
US Navy Admiral Main wrote at a time when the United States had not yet become a world power. The requests of the Americans then were very modest and boiled down to the simple and precise formula of the Monroe Doctrine: "America to the Americans." To carry out this project, the United States must remove the powers of the Old World from its immediate geographical environment. In 1898 they forced the withdrawal of Spain, which gave them the opportunity to control the main islands of the Caribbean - Cuba and Santo Domingo. Thus, the United States drove a major European power out of the inland sea located directly off the coast of the United States. At the same time, they began to conquer the space of the Pacific region: they seized the Hawaiian Islands, the Philippines and Guam, as well as approaches to the market with unimaginable potentialities - China with its huge population.
Maine's modern successor is Nicholas J. Spykman, who developed the admiral's idea in his American Strategy in World Politics (1942). To have power, he notes, one should take into account: 1) territory, space; 2) type of boundaries (i.e. safe boundaries); 3) the number of the population; 4) raw materials; 5) economic and technological development; 6) financial strength; 7) racial homogeneity; 8) optimal integration of all social strata (the goal of the American Democrats - supporters of the new course); 9) political stability; 10) national spirit.
According to Spykman, the center of history is no longer the "middle earth", but the "middle ocean", which washes the shores of North America and Western Europe, i.e. "Atlantic community". This is reminiscent of the saying: "Whoever controls Western Europe controls the 'grey matter of the whole world'; whoever controls the 'grey matter', i.e. the brain bank, controls the 'evolution of history'."
According to Spykman, "middle earth" is inferior in meaning to "middle ocean". The "Atlantic Community" is now the center of the world. New York and the US coast are its nerve center. And the United States, being the driving force behind this Atlantic community, has secure borders - the oceanic belt. With this in mind, Great Britain is losing its importance and is turning into one of the American aircraft carriers; France is only America's springboard in case the European continent becomes obstinate again. France acquired this unenviable position in 1945. And only after the decisive actions of de Gaulle in 1963-1968. Paris got rid of this humiliating situation. In 1968 - 1973 France once again had a chance to become an Atlantic power, thanks in part to the rise to power of Mitterrand. According to Spykman's logic, Germany, divided into two parts, is politically non-existent and therefore not dangerous. As for the United States and Canada, they are strategic reserves, the territory on which weapons factories are concentrated.
Conclusion: According to Spykman, American policy should be aimed at controlling the totality of the fringe lands through military deterrents: NATO, ASEAN, ANZUS and CENTO.
1.19 Europe's challenge
In the context of the Cold War, or, in geopolitical terms, in the context of a clash between the island belt and the surrounding continental lands, Europe finds itself between a rock and a hard place. It is therefore in its interests to bring together (which is a difficult task) a heterogeneous mosaic of forces and peoples of the marginal lands (located along the perimeter of the Pacific region), who want to preserve their own characteristics intact and refuse to impose an association for the purpose of universalization, as well as the one imposed on them as a trade liberalism and hard communism of the surrounding lands. From Iceland to New Zealand, the peoples must unite their efforts against the aspirations of the thalassocracy and the steppe powers. The strategy envisioned in such a context is one of dual deterrence based on fringe lands, accompanied by constant vigilance against superpower interference.
If the perestroika announced by the Soviet leadership does not hide behind itself an offensive strategy of the new order, then it is obvious that Europe and Russia are interested in their respective trump cards in the Eurasian perspective, combining the actual forces of the surrounding and "middle lands", the diversity of the sea front and inland lands. Sweden, uniting to implement various projects with neutral India, was the only European power with a significant diplomatic corps, which carried out this geopolitics on a very limited scale along the Reykjavik-Wellington diagonal.
1.20 Geopolitics of the Diagonal
If ideologies classified as right-wing in our post-war era have retained a weakness for practices aimed at establishing strength in international unity, and if ideologies classified as left-wing have developed an anti-American orientation, showing the dangers of thalassocracy for the independence of Europe and the Third World, tomorrow's geopolitical synthesis should represent a fusion of all these elements and create an "objective political science" in the interests of the peoples of Europe, their industrial apparatus and food independence. Is this not the politics of power? Undoubtedly. But we are talking about a group of peoples who draw strength from themselves, and not outside their territory, from other peoples. This power politics is the complete antonym of imperialism. Imperialism uses the living forces of the mother nation to colonize and exploit outlying territories.
The politics of power that we advocate is primarily a politics of balance. Its strength lies in the art of creating a permanent balance, despite all the vicissitudes of history, as Bismarck did at the end of the 19th century.
Conclusion
Reflections on two sayings
It is necessary to develop "objective political science" on the basis of two old sayings "If you want peace, prepare for war" and "Struggle is the beginning of everything." These old sayings testify to the need for struggle, the fragility of balances, which must be endlessly restored with the help of bold decisions. The ephemeral and inevitable nature of political equilibria does not allow us to share the fierce convictions of pacifists who talk about eternal peace. The geopolitical schools, in particular the Haushofer school, wanted to create the conditions for a conscious world, based on an ethics that did not exclude, a priori, the existence of political tension. The rejection of both globalism and the ideology of eternal peace means the recognition of the possibility of the existence of conflicts, but at the same time, it means a rejection of the recognition that they spread to adjacent areas and even to the entire planet.
Thus, Europe's task is to restore, with the help of "Bismarck's practice", the balance between the powers and spread it along the entire Reykjavik-Wellington diagonal. Thus, Europe will consciously use the resources of the German-Swedish geopolitics (Kjellen, Haushofer) and the Gaullist heritage (the speeches in Phnom Penh and the strategic courses outlined by Michel Jaubert).
So, the formula of our synthesis is the following: Kjellen - Haushofer - de Gaulle and Jaubert
Only gradually, and especially in recent decades, interest in geopolitics began to awaken again and with particular force. In a short time, geopolitics has become an extremely popular discipline in US strategic and military planning, so that at present the teaching of this science is generally required in all higher educational institutions of the West, preparing future leaders of states and responsible analysts. A mandatory discipline is geopolitics in the higher military institutions of developed countries.
Tutoring
Need help learning a topic?
Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
Geopolitics is also called the practical actions of the state or another actor (participant) to control space and the resources contained in it.
Geopolitics is the science of the connection between space in the aggregate of all its characteristics and the society of people that lives and acts in this space.
Geopolitics: concept, sources, categories
Plan
Lecture 8. Geopolitics
8.1. Geopolitics: concept, sources, categories.
8.2. Basic theories of geopolitics.
8.3. General characteristics of the modern geopolitical
world order.
8.4. Russia in the new system of geopolitical relations.
The objectives of the study of the topic:
– to understand the essence and modern understanding of geopolitics;
– to carry out a geopolitical analysis of modern international relations;
– to consider the place and role of Russia in the modern geopolitical picture of the world.
Basic concepts: geopolitics, Heartland, Rimland, world geopolitical space, geopolitical region, geostrategic region, buffer state, power of the state, geopolitical system.
Geopolitics has the subject of its study of global and national interests, priorities and methods of foreign policy of states, studying the territorial and demographic, power potentials of various countries.
The concept of "geopolitics" was introduced into science by the Swedish scientist Rudolf Kjellen (1864-1922). He defined geopolitics as "the doctrine that views the state as a geographical organism or spatial phenomenon."
Geopolitics reflects the real need of society to control space in order to use the resources contained in it for the purpose of survival and development.
Practical geopolitics studies everything that is connected with the territorial problems of the state, its borders, with the rational use and distribution of resources, including human ones.
The growing interest in geopolitics is due to:
1) the collapse of the USSR and the assessment of the current position of Russia in the world community;
2) the need to explain the transformations taking place with modern civilization;
3) the collapse of the bipolar world political system, the change in the entire world order.
Sources of geopolitics:
1) civilizational approach (N. Danilevsky, N. Leontiev, O. Spengler, A. Toynbee, S. Huntington): the geographical boundaries of civilizations determine the limits of the influence of great powers, the spheres of their vital interests and the territory of military-political control;
2) military-strategic approach (N. Machiavelli, K. Clausewitz, K. Moltke, A. Machen): there are key points and zones that allow you to control significant territories of a potential enemy;
3) the concept of geographical determinism (Herodotus, J. Bodin, C. Montesquieu): the geographical environment (climate, soil, rivers, etc.) influence history and man.
Since the middle of the XX century. to the new elements of the subject of geopolitics were added:
1) economic processes, their real globalization;
2) military-technical means;
3) scientific and technological revolution, the pace of development of science and technology;
4) the level of education and culture of the population;
5) the state of world religions;
6) the effectiveness of the political regimes of states.
atlanticism- a geopolitical concept that combines: historically - the western sector of human civilization; strategically - an alliance of Western countries dominated by liberal democratic ideology; military-strategically - NATO member countries; socially - orientation to the trading system and market values (USA model).
balance of power – the ratio of different types of power of countries in a certain period of time, the most important factor in the stability of international relations.
bipolar world- a geopolitical construction that reflects on a planetary scale the main geopolitical dualism - thalassocracy against tellurocracy.
Buffer state A state located between the territories of two or more major powers. Such a state allows you to control a geopolitically advantageous region.
Geographic axis of history(axial range, Heartland) is Mackinder's term denoting the inland Eurasian territories around which the spatial dynamics of historical development takes place. Coincides with the territory of Russia.
Geopolitical region- part of a geostrategic region with closer and more stable political, economic and cultural ties (Russia, Europe, America, Asia Pacific, Africa).
Geopolitical field- space controlled by a state or a union of states. Types of geopolitical fields:
A) endemic- the territory of the historical center of the country, the area of its initial formation, generally recognized by its neighbors (European Russia without the North Caucasus, together with the Urals);
b) border field- territory controlled by the state, but not sufficiently developed by it (Siberia, the Far East);
c) cross field- space claimed by several neighboring states (Northern Kazakhstan, Donbass, Transnistria, Crimea);
d) total - continuous space under the control of a national community or state (Russia without Chechnya);
e) metafield- a space being developed simultaneously by several states (Western Europe for the EU and NATO).
Geostrategic region- a region formed around a state or a group of states that play a key role in world politics.
Space control- carried out in the following forms:
a) political - through the authorities on the basis of delegation of authority;
b) military - with the help of military means;
c) economic - on the part of the state and on the part of big business;
d) information - through the dissemination or non-distribution of the necessary information;
e) communication - through transport and communications;
f) civilizational - through cultural patterns;
g) demographic - according to the national composition of the population.
world island Mackinder term. Eurasia and the geographical axis of history. Spykman has a collection of thalassocratic zones.
Mondialism- a special ideology that involves the merging of all states and peoples into a single planetary formation with the establishment of a "world government", the destruction of racial, religious, ethnic, national and cultural borders.
Thalassocracy- "the power of sea powers", sea power.
Tellurocracy -"the power of land powers", land power.
anaconda strategy- the geopolitical line of Atlanticism, aimed at tearing away from Eurasia the largest possible amount of coastal territories in order to curb its geopolitical expansion.
Expansion- the expansion of the state of its political space through territorial acquisitions or the establishment of other forms of control.
Superpower- a state with the greatest combined power among the states of its era.
Regional superpower- a state with the greatest combined power among the states of a particular region. (Germany, France in Europe, Japan in Southeast Asia, Israel, Saudi Arabia in the Middle East, Iran in Central Asia, Brazil in South America).
regional power- a state that really and constantly influences the course of development of the states of a particular region within a given era.
small state- a state with an insignificant geopolitical role (Mongolia, Uganda, Fiji, etc.).
F. Ratzel(1844–1904) – founder of geopolitics
The main work is "Political Geography".
1. Organic approach: "States, at all stages of their development, are regarded as organisms that necessarily maintain a connection with their soil." The state is a living organism rooted in the soil.
2. Space - terrain and climate, which have a decisive impact on the cultural and political development of peoples.
3. The whole history of mankind is the history of adaptation to the environment. Like any living organism, the state is able to grow, develop or weaken.
4. The most important characteristics of a state are size, location and boundaries, followed by soil types, vegetation, irrigation, and relations to adjacent seas and uninhabited spaces. The prosperity of the state is entirely based on the properties of its territory.
5. In order to exist, the state must own sufficient living space, only a significant space can provide a dominant position in the world.
6. Spatial expansion is a natural living process, similar to the growth of a living organism.
The laws of spatial growth of the state:
1) the space of the state grows along with the growth of its culture;
2) the growth of the state is accompanied by the development of trade and increased activity in all spheres of society;
3) the growth of the state occurs due to the absorption of small states by it;
4) the border is a peripheral body of the state, in which the strength or weakness of the state is manifested;
5) in its growth, the state seeks to absorb the most valuable elements of the physical environment: coastlines, riverbeds, areas rich in resources;
6) the initial impulse to spatial growth comes to primitive states from more developed ones;
7) the desire of the state for naturally closed configurations.
The development of the fleet is a necessary condition for approaching the status of a "world power".
R. Challen (1864–1922)
The main work is “The state as a form of life”.
1. The central problem is the problem of the strength of the state. This strength depends on the geographic location of the country. "Small countries" (Sweden) must submit to the "great powers", with which they are close in culture, language, way of life. The power of England, Russia, and the USA is explained by the fact that these countries were able early to create "economic-geographical complexes" around themselves, that is, empires. In continental Europe, such a complex should be created around Germany.
2. The state develops according to the rules of the struggle for existence, and therefore the policy of the state lies outside morality. The strongest survives.
3. Three geographic factors play a major role in global geopolitics:
1) expansion (length of the territory);
2) territorial solidity (compactness);
3) freedom of movement (control over communications).
England has the first and third factors, Russia has the second. Germany has the second and third factors. Therefore, for her, an aggressive policy is absolutely natural.
H. Mackinder (1861–1947)
The main work is “Geographical axis of history”.
Created a global theory of geopolitics.
1. For the state, the most advantageous geographical position is the median, central position.
2. From a planetary point of view, in the center of the world lies the Eurasian continent, and in its center is the "heart of the world" - Heartland.
3. The Heartland is the concentration of the continental masses of Eurasia. This is the most favorable geographical base for control over the whole world.
4. The Heartland is a key area and within World Island. The World Island is Asia, Africa and Europe.
Mackinder hierarchizes planetary space through a system of concentric circles. In the very center is the “geographical axis of history”, or “axial area”. This concept is identical to Russia. This is the Heartland (Fig. 1).
Next comes the more outer circle: "the outer or insular crescent". This zone is entirely external to the World Island. Mackinder believes that the entire course of history is determined by the following processes. From the center of the Heartland to its periphery there is a constant pressure of the so-called " sushi robbers. This was especially clearly and clearly reflected in the Mongol conquests. But they were preceded by Scythians, Huns, Alans, etc. Civilizations stemming from the "geographical axis of history", from the innermost spaces of the Heartland, are, according to Mackinder, "authoritarian", "hierarchical", "undemocratic" and "non-commercial character ". In the ancient world, he is embodied in a society like Dorian Sparta or Ancient Rome.
From the outside, from the regions of the "island crescent", pressure is exerted on the World Island by the so-called " robbers of the sea" or "island dwellers". These are colonial expeditions emanating from the extra-Eurasian center, seeking to balance the overland impulses emanating from the inner reaches of the continent. The civilization of the "outer crescent" is characterized by a "commercial" character and "democratic forms" of politics.
Rice. 1. Heartland and Rimland
In ancient times, the Athenian state and Carthage were distinguished by this character. Between these two polar civilizational-geographical impulses there is an “inner crescent” zone, which, being dual and constantly experiencing opposing cultural influences, was the most mobile and, thanks to this, became a place of priority development of civilization.
History, according to Mackinder, geographically revolves around the continental axis. This history is most clearly felt in the space of the "inner crescent", while "frozen" archaism reigns in the Heartland, and a kind of civilizational chaos reigns in the "outer crescent".
Mackinder identified his interests with the interests of the Anglo-Saxon island world, that is, with the position of the "outer crescent". In such a situation, he saw the basis of the geopolitical orientation of the "island world" in the maximum weakening of the Heartland and in the maximum possible expansion of the influence of the "outer crescent" on the "inner crescent". Mackinder emphasized the strategic priority of the “geographical axis of history” in all world politics and formulated the most important geopolitical law in this way:
“Whoever controls Eastern Europe dominates the Heartland; whoever dominates the Heartland dominates the World Island; whoever dominates the World Island dominates the world."
At the political level, this meant recognition of the leading role of Russia in a strategic sense. Mackinder wrote:
“Russia occupies the same central strategic position in the whole world as Germany occupies in relation to Europe. It can carry out attacks in all directions and be subjected to them from all directions except the north. The full development of its railway capabilities is a matter of time.”
Proceeding from this, Mackinder believed that the main task of Anglo-Saxon geopolitics is to prevent the formation of a strategic continental union around the “geographical axis of history” (Russia). Consequently, the strategy of the forces of the "outer crescent" is to tear off the maximum amount of coastal spaces from the Heartland and put them under the influence of the "island civilization".
“The shift in the balance of power towards the “pivot state” (Russia), accompanied by its expansion into the peripheral spaces of Eurasia, will allow the use of huge continental resources to create a powerful navy: it is not far from the world empire. This will become possible if Russia unites with Germany. The threat of such a development will force France into an alliance with the overseas powers, and France, Italy, Egypt, India and Korea will become coastal bases where the flotillas of the outer powers will moor to disperse the forces of the "axial area" in all directions and prevent them from concentrating all their efforts on creation of a powerful navy".
It was Mackinder who laid the main trend in Anglo-Saxon geopolitics, which became the geopolitics of the United States and the North Atlantic Alliance half a century later: by any means to prevent the very possibility of creating a Eurasian bloc, the creation of a strategic alliance between Russia and Germany, the geopolitical strengthening of the Heartland and its expansion.
A. Mahan (1840–1914)
1. The main instrument of policy is trade. Military action should only provide the most favorable conditions for the creation of a planetary commercial civilization.
2. The geopolitical status of a state is determined by the following criteria:
a) the geographical position of the state, its openness to the seas, the possibility of sea communications with other countries;
b) the length of land borders, the ability to control strategically important areas. The ability to threaten enemy territory with your fleet;
c) "the physical configuration of the state", i.e. the configuration of sea coasts and the number of ports;
d) the length of the territory. It is equal to the length of the coastline;
e) the number of the population. It is important for assessing the ability of the state to build and maintain ships;
e) national character. The ability of the people to engage in trade, since maritime power is based on peaceful and wide trade;
g) the political nature of government. The reorientation of the best natural and human resources for the creation of a powerful sea power depends on this.
Mahan bases his geopolitical theory solely on Sea Power and its interests. For Mahan, ancient Carthage was the model of Naval Power, and historically England of the 18th-19th centuries is closer to us.
Mahan's ideas were accepted all over the world and influenced many European strategists. Even land and continental Germany - in the person of Admiral Tirpitz - took Mahan's theses personally and began to actively develop their fleet. In 1940 and in 1941 two of Mahan's books were also published in the USSR.
But these ideas were intended primarily for America and the Americans. Mahan was an ardent supporter of the doctrine of President Monroe (1758-1831), who in 1823 declared the principle of mutual non-intervention of the countries of America and Europe, and also made the growth of US power dependent on territorial expansion into nearby territories. Mahan believed that America had a "marine destiny" and that this Destiny consisted first of all in the strategic integration of the entire American continent, and then in the establishment of world domination.
Admiral Mahan predicted America's planetary fate, becoming the leading maritime power, directly influencing the fate of the world.
In America's Interest in Sea Power, Mahan argued that for America to become a world power, it must do the following:
1) cooperate actively with the British maritime power;
2) interfere with German maritime claims;
3) vigilantly monitor the expansion of Japan in the Pacific Ocean and counteract it,
4) to coordinate joint actions with the Europeans against the peoples of Asia.
Mahan saw the fate of the United States not in passive participation in the general context of the peripheral states of the "outer crescent", but in taking a leading position in economic, strategic and even ideological terms.
Independently of Mackinder, Mahan came to the same conclusions about the main danger to "maritime civilization." This danger is the continental states of Eurasia - first of all, Russia and China, and secondly - Germany. The struggle with Russia, with this "continuous continental mass of the Russian Empire, stretching from western Asia Minor to the Japanese meridian in the East," was the main long-term strategic task for Sea Force.
Mahan transferred to the planetary level the "anaconda" principle applied by the American General McClellan in the North American Civil War of 1861-1865. This principle consists in blocking enemy territories from the sea and along coastlines, which gradually leads to the strategic exhaustion of the enemy. Since Mahan believed that the power of the state is determined by its potential for becoming a Sea Power, then in the event of a confrontation, the number one strategic task is to prevent this formation in the enemy camp. Therefore, the purpose of America's historic confrontation is to strengthen its positions on four main points (listed above) and weaken the enemy on the same points. Own coastal expanses must be under control, and the corresponding zones of the enemy must be tried by any means to tear them away from the continental mass. And further: since the Monroe Doctrine (in its part of territorial integration) strengthens the power of the state, the creation of similar integration formations with the enemy should not be allowed. The enemy or rival - and these are the Eurasian powers (Russia, China, Germany) - should be strangled in the rings of the "anaconda". To squeeze the continental mass, taking coastal zones out of its control and blocking, if possible, exits to sea spaces.
N. Spikeman (1983–1943)
Spykman, who carefully studied the works of Mackinder, proposed his own version of the basic geopolitical scheme.
Spykman's main idea was that Mackinder allegedly overestimated the geopolitical importance of the Heartland. This reassessment affected not only the current position of forces on the world map, in particular the might of the USSR, but also the original historical scheme. Spykman believed that the geographical history of the "inner crescent", Rimland, "coastal zones" was carried out by itself, and not under the pressure of "Sushi nomads", as Mackinder believed. From his point of view, the Heartland is only a potential space that receives all the cultural impulses from the coastal zones and does not carry in itself any independent geopolitical mission or historical impulse. Rimland, not Heartland, is, in his opinion, the key to world domination.
Rimland is Britain, Spain, France, Greece, Turkey, ... Japan (see Fig. 1).
Mackinder's geopolitical formula Whoever controls Eastern Europe dominates the Heartland; whoever dominates the Heartland dominates the World Island; he who dominates the World Island dominates the world" - Spykman suggested replacing with his formula:
« Whoever dominates the Rimland dominates Eurasia; whoever dominates Eurasia holds the fate of the world in his hands.”
In his books American Strategy in World Politics and Geography of the World, Spykman identifies 10 criteria by which to determine the geopolitical power of a state. This is a development of the criteria first proposed by Mahan. They are:
1) the surface of the territory;
2) the nature of the boundaries;
3) population size;
4) the presence or absence of minerals;
5) economic and technological development;
6) financial strength;
7) ethnic homogeneity;
8) the level of social integration;
9) political stability;
10) national spirit.
If the total result of assessing the geopolitical capabilities of a state according to these criteria turns out to be relatively low, this almost automatically means that this state is forced to enter into a more general strategic alliance, sacrificing part of its sovereignty for the sake of global strategic geopolitical patronage.
K. Haushofer (1869–1946)
1. Strived to strengthen the political power of the German state, which meant industrial development, cultural upsurge and geopolitical expansion. But the very position of Germany, the spatial and cultural middle position, made her a natural adversary of the Western maritime powers - England, France, the USA. The thalassocratic geopoliticians themselves also did not hide their negative attitude towards Germany and considered it (along with Russia) one of the main geopolitical opponents of the maritime West.
Consequently, the future of great Germany lay in geopolitical confrontation with the West.
2. The Haushofer Doctrine: the need to create a "continental bloc", or axis Berlin - Moscow - Tokyo. Orientation to the East. It was about the joint civilizational effort of two continental powers - Russia and Germany, which were to establish the "New Eurasian Order" and restructure the continental space of the World Island in order to completely remove it from the influence of the Sea Power.
Chapter 24 Theories of Geopolitics
24.1. Origin of geopolitical ideas
Geopolitical ideas have undergone a long historical development and practical approbation. Geopolitical ideas were expressed by philosophers and historians of the Ancient World. Geopolitical thinking can be seen in the teachings of the Middle Ages and modern times. The figures of the Enlightenment expounded the geopolitical point of view in their writings. It runs like a red thread in the theories of the industrial age and continues in post-industrialism. At one time such movements as liberalism, conservatism, social democracy, communism, fascism, and environmentalism relied on the conclusions of geopolitical science.
There are three stages in the development of geopolitics as a scientific subdiscipline: 1 ) prehistory of geopolitics ; 2) classical geopolitics) 3 ) modern geopolitics .
At the first stage, which lasted from time immemorial until the end of the 19th century, there was still no separate geopolitical branch of knowledge, the concept of geopolitical; geopolitical ideas were an integral part of philosophical teachings, historical research and practical recommendations to rulers. The forerunners of geopolitics (let's call them that) expressed only separate ideas about the political structure of the world known to them, singled out from it separate areas of influence of certain powerful powers, determined their boundaries, speculated about the reasons for the unification of states into alliances, clashes for division and redistribution of the ecumene. There are three such ideas. The first is the fact of concluding an allied treaty of the ancient Greek policies against the power of Xerxes, described in the History of Herodotus, and in general the eternal confrontation between the Hellenes and the barbarians. The second is the reason for the war between Athens and Sparta, deduced by Thucydides, which consisted in the desire for hegemony in the zone of their interests, as well as in the constant clashes of powerful land and sea powers. And, finally, the third idea is the rules formulated in Arthashastra for conquest, settlement, arrangement of new territories and equipment of borders. At the same time, along with brilliant assumptions and conjectures, completely unrealistic, sometimes fantastic ideas were expressed. The same Herodotus, for example, considered the “kidnapping of wives” to be the main reason for the wars between the Hellenes and the barbarians.
Given that two ideas, namely: the desire for hegemony and the desire to conquer new territories can be reduced to one, the prehistory of geopolitics, as the Colossus of Rhodes stood on two legs, was based on two main ideas:
The desire of the powers for hegemony, conquest, expansion of their borders, development of new spaces;
The eternal confrontation between the powers of the Land and the Sea, civilized and barbarian peoples.
24.2. Theories and schools of classical geopolitics
The stage of classical geopolitics lasted from the end of the 19th to the middle of the 20th century. It was during this period that the definition of geopolitics as a separate branch of knowledge was given, an idea of the field of its research appeared, the main categories were proposed, and the main geopolitical concepts, theories and national schools of geopolitics were formed from individual ideas and assumptions of the previous era. In the spirit of that time, the classics of geopolitics even formulated geopolitical laws.
Each science, developing, is experiencing a period of apogee, the highest flowering, a kind of philosophical acme. The works of scientists who have brought their science to a previously unattainable height become classics, that is, those samples that many followers find and imitate; new generations learn from these samples. It was during this period that both scientists and all science were recognized not only by a narrow circle of specialists, but also by the entire political elite and broad sections of the reading public. The legitimization of geopolitics as a science and the basis of practical politics began in the classical period, the starting point of which, according to many political scientists, was the work of F. Ratzel (1880-1910s). In such fundamental works as "Anthropogeography" ("Ethnology"), "Earth and Life", he completed the efforts of his predecessors to create a theory of the state as a living organism and borders as living organs of the state, the theory of the spatial growth of states, the concepts of the connection of population with the earth and soil, the concept of the expansion of developed, advanced cultures, the dependence of the power of states on population density and the size of their territory. And with the work "Political Geography" (1898), he laid the foundation for a new scientific discipline, which was called "geopolitics". Thus, Ratzel was both the last of the forerunners of geopolitics and the first classical geopolitician.
At the beginning of the XIX century. geopolitical science developed rapidly and spread rapidly, primarily on the European and American continents. Geopolitical ideas were especially attractive for great powers - large countries that occupied vast territories (Russia, the USA), for relatively small but militarily and economically powerful metropolitan countries that created gigantic colonial empires (Great Britain, France), or for countries that claimed to the status of great powers (Japan after the victory in the Russo-Japanese War), or in states that considered themselves disadvantaged by the humiliating conditions of the world (Germany after World War I), or in powers that felt their strength, but did not have time for the colonial division of the world (Germany after unification and the Franco-Prussian War, Italy after the Risorgimento and the Franco-Austrian War). One of the main reasons for the surge in the popularity of geopolitics in a particular country was usually victory in a war, which always unites a nation, revives national culture, and promotes spiritual and territorial expansion to neighboring countries, to other continents. But defeat in a war can also become a catalyst for the creation and dissemination of geopolitical theories. This process was observed, for example, after the defeat of Germany in the First and Second World Wars, after the defeat of Russia in the Russo-Japanese War, after the collapse of the USSR and the loss by Russia of vast territories inhabited by Russians.
The next reason for the growing influence of geopolitics is the emergence of aggressive ideologies. Ideologies such as English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Belgian, Dutch colonialism, American expansionism, Soviet communism, Italian fascism, German Nazism, Japanese militarism, directly called for the capture and development of vast areas, expanding their borders at the expense of the territories of neighboring countries, spreading its influence on all continents of the Earth. It is important to note that the geopolitical ideas of the classical period have always been associated with the development of real, physical spaces of land, sea and sky by a person, they have always relied on the military power of the state, which could not but lead to the seizure and annexation of territories, divisions and redistributions of the world with the help of weapons and brute force.
A characteristic feature of the classical period of geopolitics (which, to be more precise, lasted from the 1880s of the 19th century to the 1950s) was not only the consolidation of different scientists in a single channel of geopolitical thought, but also the formation of its separate currents - national schools.
German school. The German school of geopolitics was the first to form. It originated in the depths of geographical and legal science. It was geographers and jurists interested in politics who developed the doctrine of the state that laid the foundations of a new science. Its origins were Karl Ritter, Friedrich Ratzel, Rudolf Kjellen.
The heyday of German geopolitics falls on the 1920s-1940s, when such geopoliticians as Karl Haushofer, Karl Schmitt, Erich Obet, Kurt Wowinkel, Adolf Grabowski wrote their works, created geopolitical institutions, and generally actively influenced the socio-political process in Germany. German geopolitics immediately began to develop in two directions. The source of the first nationalistic (to which the above geopolitics belonged) was the national dissatisfaction of the Germans, which consisted in excommunicating them from the process of creating colonial empires, in defeating them in the First World War.
The second direction of German geopolitics - internationalist, leftist, social-democratic - found its embodiment in the works of Georg Graf, Karl Wittfogel, and other supporters of reformist Marxism. It set itself the task of supplementing historical materialism with geographical determinism, "tying" economic and political relations between people and states to nature, land and soil. Thus, during its inception on German soil, geopolitics generated, first of all, radical (right and left) political theories. These theories assessed the possibilities and urgent tasks of Germany in different ways.
The theories of "Middle Europe" (Mitteleuropa) by Josef Parch and Friedrich Naumann put in the first place the expansion of German borders, the inclusion of all ethnic Germans with their territories in the "Vaterland", the formation of a powerful and geopolitically tenacious metropolis, which would "naturally" spread its influence to Turkey and the Middle East. In the theories of “world politics” (Weltpolitik) by Rudolf Kjellen and Erich Obet, geopolitical constructions began with the demand for the redistribution of colonial possessions, granting “independence” to the colonies of small (Belgium, Holland, Portugal) and lagging behind in their development (Spain) powers, which would serve to favor of a more powerful and developed Germany. These theories, in turn, were divided into "marine" ones, which affirmed the priority of the fleet in the geopolitical development of states (Alfred von Tirpitz), and land ones, insisting on the development by the German state, first of all, of neighboring and nearby land (R. Kjellen, F. Naumann) .
An important distinguishing feature of German geopolitics was the increased interest in it on the part of the state and society. The reasons for this, obviously, were the defeat in the First World War, the loss of all colonies, the need to pay huge reparations and the severe financial and economic crisis that engulfed the country. The increased susceptibility of the Germans to geopolitics contributed to the rapid rooting in the minds of the nation of the theory of "Middle Europe", the concept of "great spaces" (Friedrich List), the "continental block" Berlin - Moscow - Tokyo "" (K. Haushofer), etc. The main idea of all theories there was a confrontation between the continental, land powers (and primarily Germany), "offended" by fate, the powers of the sea, trade, rich, owning tens of millions of square kilometers of overseas territories.
This, in turn, contributed to the successful and rapid institutionalization of geopolitics. Already in 1919, K. Haushofer in the course of geography, which he reads at the University of Munich, sets out his geopolitical ideas. In 1924, A. Grabowski organized a geopolitical seminar at the Berlin Higher Political School. In the same year, Haushofer, together with E. Obet, O. Maul and G. Lautenzakh, began publishing the first geopolitical journal. After the Nazis came to power (1933), he created the Institute of Geopolitics in Munich, and in 1938 in Stuttgart, the National Union for the “geopolitical education” of Germans living abroad. Geopolitics is introduced as a compulsory subject in all universities in Germany.
National geopolitical schools supporting expansionist policies were being formed at that time in Japan and Italy.
Even before the outbreak of the First World War, humanity, as Ratzel predicted, began to actively develop the air environment (aerosphere) with the help of lighter-than-air devices - airships, balloons, etc., and heavier-than-air devices - airplanes and helicopters. Geopolitics of the 1920s-1940s comprehended the consequences of this development, and since things were going to a general war, this understanding was carried out for the most part in a geostrategic and military-strategic key. Representative Italian school of geopolitics, Air Force General Giulio Due. In his work “Supremacy in the Air” (1921), he concluded that aviation, unlike the previously invented machine gun, is not a defensive, but an offensive type of weapon and leads to the creation of not defensive, but offensive military doctrines. It is from the fact of the development of aviation that Douhet derives his strategy of air supremacy, which consists in unified planning, the unified development of military and civil aviation, aviation and other related industries. It was aviation, according to Douai's theory, that was supposed to decide the course and outcome of future wars.
Geopolitical schools of other leading states - Great Britain and France, who managed to build and maintain their colonial empires, did not express such aggressive intentions and advocated maintaining the status quo.
The founder of geopolitical science in France was Paul Vidal de la Blache, who created theory of "possibilism" according to which the geographical factor affects the policy of the state not directly, but through people, through the human factor. At the same time, people, having free will, can somehow transfer the influence of geography, and this “transfer” is not necessarily rigid, but probabilistic. The probability, the possibility (fr. possibele) of the influence of geography on politics, determined by the activity of people, gave the name to this theory.
In more detail, we will dwell on the geopolitical views of only two outstanding geopoliticians of the classical period, representing the German and British schools of thought - Ratzel and Mackinder.
Geopolitics, or political geography, for Ratzel follows from ethnology, or anthropogeography. Anthropogeography is based on the following postulates:
All the peoples of the world are interconnected;
Man, all human communities are included in the common life of the globe;
The people and the state of each human community are a single organism;
This organism is in constant historical movement, development and growth;
The growth of the state organism continues up to natural limits;
The growth and development of states is influenced by climate and geographical location, i.e., its territory, forms of the earth's surface, as well as population density;
The marine environment is essential for stimulating the development of the state organism. One of the most powerful "engines" for the development of human society has become the struggle against the sea. The mutual position of land and sea not only diversifies the surface of the Earth, but also plays an important role in the formation of peculiar “historical groupings”, such as the Mediterranean world, the Baltic countries, the Atlantic powers, the Pacific cultural region, etc.
In "Political Geography" (1898), Ratzel solves the problems of the existence and growth of states as living organisms. For Ratzel, the state is a form of life for people on earth, it is a living organism that “populates” all the continents and islands of the Earth together with people. The condition for the life and growth of states is an inseparable connection with the earth, the soil on which they exist. And since states are created people and exist inextricably with peoples And earth , then they turn out to be the “political glue” that connects this triad together. “The most powerful states will be those,” notes Ratzel, “where the political idea penetrates the entire state body, to its last part ... And the political idea embraces not only the people, but also its territory.”
So, political geography, that is, classical geopolitics, according to Ratzel, begins with the concept of the state as a living organism connected with the earth. The second most important problem of geopolitics for him is the questions of the historical movement and growth of the state, which are solved through conquest and colonization. The growth of states at the same time contributes to the differentiation of the world into strong (viable) and weak countries. The strong create colonial empires, the destiny of the weak is to be attached to strong powers or drawn into the orbit of their influence. Ratzel considers the third problem of geopolitics to be the problem of spaces, the spatial arrangement of states and the influence of geographical location on the political status of a state. Finally, Ratzel considered the fourth most important issue of political geography to be the issue of borders as peripheral organs of the state, as natural geographical boundaries and as political dividing lines. He devoted four sections of his "Political Geography" to the solution of this problem. He explored all possible geographical transitional zones where land and sea meet: coasts, peninsulas, isthmuses, islands, various surface forms (plains, mountains, lowlands, plateaus) - and revealed their influence on the formation and structure of states.
It can be stated that geopolitics as a scientific discipline took place precisely in the works of F. Ratzel. He, having set the range of problems, was the first to formulate the subject of the new science. These problems were solved in the works of other classics of geopolitics (Chellen, Mahan, Colomb, Mackinder, Haushofer, Obet, Naumann, Schmitt, Vidal de la Blache, Douai, V.P. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky, Savitsky, etc.). Their works for a long time, at least during the classical period, served as a guide, set the direction for the development of geopolitical science. Most of those problems today, of course, in the new geohistorical and geopolitical conditions, are being investigated and solved by geopoliticians.
Distinguished Representative British school of geopolitics The classical period, as already mentioned, was Halford Mackinder, a major British geographer and politician. In 1904, he spoke at a meeting of the Royal Geographical Society with a report "The Geographical Axis of History", in which he outlined his geopolitical views. According to Mackinder's concept, the determining factor in the history of peoples is the geographical location of countries. Moreover, with economic, social and cultural development, the influence of geographical, as well as military-strategic factors on the progress of mankind is constantly increasing. These factors are manifested in the relationship between land and sea peoples, their development of terrestrial and water spaces. These factors, ultimately, contribute to the formation of the geopolitical map of the world. At the beginning of the XX century. she looked like this. Of all the continents of the Earth, from a geographical point of view, the Eurasian continent (actually Russia) has the advantage, which has become an “axial region” in world politics. Here there are conditions (inaccessibility from the "powers of the sea", good communications - railways) for the development of industrial and military powers, which replace the Mongol empire of the Middle Ages. Beyond the "pivot region" is the "great inner crescent" formed by Germany, Austria, Turkey, India, and China, and the "outer crescent" which is made up of the maritime powers of Great Britain, the United States, Canada, South Africa, Australia, and Japan.
In this situation, the balance in the world is disturbed in favor of the peripheral maritime states of the "outer crescent". But the "axial" power - Russia, possessing huge resources, can add sea mobility to its land mobility, that is, significantly strengthen the fleet and enter the World Ocean. In addition, the industrial power and mobility of the continental empire could be dramatically increased by an alliance with Germany. This will change the balance of power in the world in favor of an axial empire and will push countries such as France, Italy, Egypt, India, Korea to an alliance with a maritime bloc led by Great Britain and the United States.
Later, in Democratic Ideals and Reality (1919), Mackinder revised his concept of the "pivot region", which he began to call the "heartland" (i.e., "heart of the earth"), and included Tibet and Mongolia, as well as Central and Eastern Europe. This change took into account such processes as the further progress of transport, population growth, industrialization. And here, Germany and Russia received new advantages in developing their territory and strengthening their influence on the entire Heartland and the world island (that is, on Asia, Europe and Africa taken together) (the latter did not use these advantages at the time of writing the report). The powers of the periphery, in order to maintain sea power, according to Mackinder, need an increasingly extensive network of bases, which only a few states can afford. This is where Mackinder's famous formula comes from: “Who rules Eastern Europe rules the Heartland; who rules the heartland - dominates the world island (i.e., we repeat, over Asia, Europe and Africa. - B . AND.)] who rules the world island - dominates the world.
One of the founders US geopolitical school was A. Mahan, the ancestor " maritime » directions classical geopolitics, which proceeded from the advantages of maritime powers over land ones. In the works of A. Mahan “The influence of sea power on history. 1660–1783”, “The Influence of Sea Power on the French Revolution and the Empire. 1783–1812” and others, the idea of the decisive role of sea power in the historical fate of the state was carried out. British dominance at the end of the 19th century. over other states, A. Mahan explained it by sea power. Based on this postulate, he substantiated the idea of the US emerging from international isolation, turning it into a great naval power capable of competing with the most powerful states.
A. Mahan transferred to the planetary level the principle of "anaconda", applied during the civil war of 1861-1865. US General McClennan. This principle was to block enemy territory from the sea and along coastlines for the purpose of strategic attrition. According to A. Mahan, the Eurasian powers (Russia, China, Germany) should be "strangled" by reducing the scope of their control over coastal zones and limiting their access to sea spaces.
Russian School of Geopolitics classical period (leading representatives - P. N. Savitsky, L. P. Karsavin, G. V. Vernadsky) developed the concept of Eurasianism, the key concept of which was the concept of "local development", denoting not only the geographical environment, but also the socio-historical space, which mutually complement each other, forming a single whole. The place of development, according to the Eurasianists, determines the national character of peoples, their fate and development prospects.
Russian geopoliticians-Eurasians were united by the vision of Russia as a special world generated by the space of Eurasia, the cultural influences of the Byzantine South, the European West and the Mongolian-Turkic East. They were convinced of the country's great future due to its unique geopolitical position in the center of a giant continent, its vast territory and cultural identity.
For greater clarity, let's bring all the directions of classical geopolitics into a single table (Table 24.1).
Summing up, we can say that classical geopolitics stands on three whales .
Firstly, it is an idea that came from the depths of centuries about the age-old, based on geographical location, Herodotus division of states into the powers of the Land and the powers of the Sea. In the classical period, it was reformulated by Karl Schmitt, who understood politics and geopolitics as an “either-or” scheme, or rather, “friend or foe, friend or foe, Land or Sea, West or East.” This idea was not shaken even by the fact of mastering the third environment - the atmosphere, and the doctrine of air supremacy formulated by Douai.
Secondly, this is Ratzel's theory, which states that the state is a living organism, that it behaves like a colony of mosses or algae. The state has only one alternative: either absorb neighboring countries and expand its geospace, or be eaten by a neighboring growing state. This theory of expansion adequately described the structure of the world of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which consisted of colonial metropolises, colonies and semi-colonies.
Thirdly, this is the Mackinder formula: due to the different geographical position of the states of the earth, zones such as the Heartland, which are unattainable for expansion, can also be formed. Hence - "Who owns the heartland - owns the world." True, in response to Mackinder's "law" Nicholas Speakman formulated the opposite "law of world control", which reads: "Who controls the Rimland - dominates Eurasia, who dominates Eurasia - holds the fate of the world in his hands."
The main goal of geopolitics is the development of the geostrategy of the state. The founder of geopolitics is Aristotle, who pointed to the geopolitical role of the islands and wrote that Crete, by its position, is intended for a dominant influence on Greece. Actually, the term "geopolitics" was introduced into scientific circulation by R. Kjellen, who understood it as a science that studies the state as an organism and a spatial phenomenon. R. Chellen believed that the strengthening of the state is directly proportional to the expansion of its territory.
Geopolitical concepts are based on the principles of natural landscape and geographic predetermination, based on which it is possible to build a model of behavior of various states. This is the principle of geographical determinism - the predetermining significance of geographical factors in the development of the state. The main criteria used by classical geopolitics are land (fixed space) and sea (dynamic space).
These obvious human ideas about the quality of earthly space gave rise to the terms:
- thalassocracy(from the Greek thalassa - sea, kratos - power) - the power of the country through the sea, implies the presence of metropolises and colonies, discontinuous territory;
- tellurocracy(from lat. Tellus - earth) - the power of the country through land, on which the entire territory of the country is located, implies the quality of territorial continuity.
Historically, thalassocracy is associated with the West and the Atlantic Ocean, and tellurocracy with the East and Eurasia. Further geopolitical constructions led to the emergence of the terms: “sea land” (i.e., islands are the basis for the existence of sea empires) and “terrestrial water” (i.e., land waters - rivers - the main transport arteries that determine the development of land empires).
In the geopolitical theories of the XIX century. natural areas and landscapes were of particular importance. Thus, it was believed that theocratic tendencies are maximum in deserts and steppes, therefore these natural zones contribute to the formation of vast empires. Conservative areas are confined to mountains and forests - zones of little-changing social patterns, where victims of national hostility and ethnic minorities are drawn together. The capitals of states, as a rule, are located on hills - symbols of royal power: on seven - according to the number of planets or on five - according to the number of elements.
The early geopolitical theories were characterized by the categories of "naturalness" (natural borders, spheres of influence, which were determined on the basis of physical and geographical realities - plains, rivers, mountains). The concept of "natural borders" was one of the first in geopolitics, the achievement of natural borders was considered the most important political goal of states.
With the development of geopolitical thought, the terminological vocabulary of geopolitics has also expanded. It includes such terms as: "sphere of influence", "buffer zone" - a zone formed around a certain state in order to stop its expansion, "vital nodes", "roads of life", "crisis arcs" - elements of the geopolitical structure of the world , "dynamic balance of interests". These terms are now widely used in the theory of international relations and the speeches of politicians.
Later, new areas of research appear: the study of geopolitical aspects of the development of the World Ocean, the interdependence between the ecological and socio-economic situation, border areas, conflict zones.
The main principle is the transition from the geopolitics of confrontation to the geopolitics of interdependence. Its essence lies in the study of new subjects of political activity on the world stage: transnational business, governmental and non-governmental international organizations, nationalist and separatist movements, terrorist organizations, people's liberation fronts, partisan and underground movements. Geopoliticians develop scenarios for the future global geopolitical order. At the beginning of the XX century. geopolitics has become dominant in political and geographical studies. Its scientific novelty consisted in the interpretation of the state as a subject of the global system.
The history of scientific geopolitical thought distinguishes several stages in its development:
- "civilized geopolitics" of the formation of a Eurocentric world;
- "nature-centric geopolitics", based on geographical determinism;
- "ideological geopolitics" of the second half of the XX century. - confrontation between the West (capitalism) and the East (socialism).
German school of geopolitics. The main representatives of the German school of geopolitics are F. Ratzel and R. Kjellen. They believed that the state is an organism inextricably linked with the territory, fighting for "living space". This theory, which appeared during the period of rapid industrialization of Germany, which entered into a struggle with England for markets, presented imperialist expansion as a necessary stage of development.
The core of geopolitics at the beginning of the 20th century. occupy specific geostrategies - sets of proposals for the policy of a particular state, based on an analysis of the geopolitical situation.
In 1897, F. Ratzel's work "Political Geography" was published, where the main theoretical provisions of geopolitics as a theory of dynamic understanding of space were outlined. They boiled down to the following:
- states are peculiar organisms, similar to living ones, which are born, grow old and die, that is, they are constantly in motion;
- the growth of states is predetermined in advance, and it is possible to “guess” its limits and consequences only by knowing the laws of geography;
- each state has its own "living space", which it seeks to expand.
States that control several types of territories have great economic and political opportunities, as they are forced to confront a large number of potential challenges, which makes them stronger than others.
Early 20th century: geographic factors of world politics. geopolitics of the early 20th century. geographic factors that play a decisive role in world politics have been identified. This is a desire to expand the area, territorial solidity and freedom of movement.
How was the policy of the main world powers at the beginning of the 20th century explained from these points of view?
Russia possessed an extended territory, territorial solidity, but not freedom of movement, since it did not have access to warm seas. The desire to ensure access to navigable seas explains the wars that Russia has waged over the past centuries on its southern and western borders.
Great Britain had complete freedom of movement thanks to the fleet and dominance on the sea routes. She increased her territory through colonies and dominions, which expanded her living space. Thus, the British Empire was scattered over 26% of the globe, and it was precisely in the absence of solidity that its main weakness was. A political solution was found in the creation of the British Commonwealth of Nations, which economically and politically tied overseas possessions, past and present, to Great Britain.
Germany had neither extended territory nor freedom of movement. The main port cities of Germany - Hamburg, Bremen, Kiel - were located at the mouths of the rivers assigned to the Dutch under the Treaty of Westphalia. However, Germany had a territorial solidity and a single ethnic group, which, as it were, prepared for its expansion, required the expansion of living space. Geopoliticians predicted the expansion and growth of the power of the United States, which possessed all three factors, and political tension in the Asia-Pacific region, where the main power - island Japan - did not have the opportunity to expand its territory.
Theories of Halford Mackinder. His main works: the article "The Geographical Axis of History" (1904), the book "Democratic Ideals and Reality" (1919) H. Mackinder was a representative of the British school of geopolitics, his theories were based on the differences between maritime and continental powers and their fundamental opposites as geopolitical antipodes. The former demonstrate their presence in the world with the help of the military and merchant fleet. Thanks to the fleet, they have mobility, they can protect their own interests around the world, controlling sea communications. Continental powers primarily control the landmasses and trade routes that provide them with everything they need.
According to X. Mackinder's model, in the center of the world there is a giant closed continent - the "middle earth" - an array of motionless land, where the geographical axis of history (the territory of Central Asia) passes. The "Inner Crescent" - the world of moving history and the birthplace of world culture (the countries of the Mediterranean, Western Europe, the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent) - is located between the "middle earth" and the oceans. The Outer Crescent contains the Americas, Sub-Saharan Africa, Australia, and Oceania. This is a zone of maritime powers.
The “Middle Land” is invincible, since the sea powers cannot invade this zone, therefore the countries of the “Inner Crescent” could never subjugate the peoples inhabiting the “Middle Land” (unsuccessful attempts of the Swedish king Charles XII, Napoleon, Hitler). At the same time, the peoples of the "middle earth", on the contrary, can easily invade the countries of the "inner crescent" and subdue them. This means that the peoples of the "outer crescent" and the "inner crescent" must play a deterrent role and always be ready for an attack by the peoples of the "middle earth". After the Great Geographical Discoveries, the balance of power changed only temporarily in favor of maritime countries, since the advent of rail transport again gave impetus to the development of land states.
Similar views were held by the American Admiral A. Mahen (work "The Influence of Sea Power on History, 1660-1783" 1890), who believed that control over the seas means control over the world. In 1943, in the article "The Round World and the Achievement of Peace", X. Mackinder proposed a new model - the union of the "Heartland" (USSR) with the "Middle Ocean" (Great Britain and the USA) against Germany. In this article, he substantiated the need to create a new geopolitical entity - the transatlantic community (North Atlantic bloc - NATO).
American School of Geopolitics. The principles of the British school are based on the American school of geopolitics, the impetus for the development of which was the transformation of the United States into a world power in the second half of the 20th century.
In 1942 Nicholas Speakman's American Strategy in World Politics was published. In his opinion, the role of the leading maritime power passed to the United States - a state located in the "outer crescent", and the role of the main continental rival - to the USSR. The concept of “rimland” was introduced into the new model - a contact zone (“inner crescent”), control over which ensures world domination.
These theoretical constructions formed the basis of the real political strategies of the era of confrontation and the Cold War - "geopolitical containment". Its practical implementation was expressed in the encirclement of the USSR by hostile states and military bases.
Of particular importance in American geopolitics was the so-called "domino effect", according to which the coming of the Communists to power in one country leads to similar processes in neighboring countries.
The concept of the geographical destination of Germany. The Swedish professor Rudolf Kjellen (1864-1922) moved from theoretical geopolitics to practical recommendations. He owns the idea of the geographical purpose of Germany: this country, located in the center of Europe, represents and protects the interests of Europe as a continental bloc, so its actions in the international arena are for the benefit of all European peoples. The geopolitician Arthur Dix showed that the existence of a "united Europe", whose interests are expressed by Germany, is possible only if there is a continuous spatial connection between the North Sea and the Persian Gulf. London's anti-continental strategy has always been aimed at breaking this diagonal: for this, Great Britain used and provoked conflict situations along this line - in the Balkans, in the Dardanelles region, in Armenia, Mesopotamia.
Under the German emperor Wilhelm II (reigned 1888-1918), an alliance was created between Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, the imaginary axis of which ran diagonally from the island of Helgoland (opposite the mouth of the Elbe) in the direction of Istanbul, the Persian Gulf, the Indian Ocean . This provided Germany with a presence in the Mediterranean, control over the Black Sea, the Persian Gulf, and access to the Indian Ocean, where the British then dominated.
After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the creation of a mosaic of states in the Balkans, this axis fell apart. Its restoration became the main goal of German diplomacy and military action in the following decades.
Geopolitical theories of Karl Haushofer as the ideological basis of German expansion in the first half of the 20th century.
K. Haushofer (1869-1945) created the scientific school of geopolitics and the geopolitical journal (“Zeitschrift fur Geopolitik”), the transformation of geopolitics into the ideological basis of German diplomacy in the first half of the 20th century is associated with his name.
The key concept of geopolitics of that time was the concept of "living space", introduced back in the 19th century. Ratzel. Following him, Haushofer believed that Germany's main problems were caused by unfair and tight borders. These provisions corresponded to the views of the German statesmen of that time, since they justified the need for expansion.
K. Haushofer also belongs to the idea of pan-regionalism. He believed that large continental associations are the imperative of the times. The peoples must orient themselves towards a new form of political organization - a large space, which is necessary, since the narrow state framework hinders the development of modern specialized industry and interferes with world trade flows, customs barriers increase the cost of production.
K. Haushofer identified the following potential large spaces that could have been formed by the middle of the 20th century: Euroafrica with the dominance of France and Germany; the USSR with a sphere of influence in Iran, Afghanistan, India; Japan as the geopolitical center of East Asia; United States with a sphere of influence in North and South America. He was one of those who recommended the conclusion of the Soviet-German pact of 1939 (known as the "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact"), proposed a failed plan for the creation of a continental Eurasian Union, which would include Spain (dictator Franco), Italy (Mussolini), France (the pro-fascist regime in France managed to hold out from 1940 to 1944), Germany (Hitler), the USSR (Stalin) and Japan. This alliance, acting in conjunction with the national liberation movements, was supposed to confront the maritime powers, primarily Great Britain.
After 1945, a large communist region appeared in the center of the "middle land", as a counterweight to which military blocs (NATO, CENTO, SEATO) were formed, and the so-called "cold war" began and real wars - Korean, Vietnamese, Afghan.
The theoretical basis of traditional geopolitics was geographical determinism. Developed by geopoliticians of the first half of the 20th century. strategies have become in fact programs of action for the opposing blocs. Geopolitical ideas about the “great destiny of Germany as the center of Europe”, about the “British Empire on which the sun never sets”, about “Russia helping the Orthodox in the Balkans”, etc., are firmly rooted in the mass consciousness, the thinking of politicians. The gradual transformation of geopolitical ideas into national doctrines was clearly manifested in countries with special national ambitions.
N. Spykman's theory was further developed in the writings of the American historian Stephen Friend Cohen which called into question the policy of containment. S. Cohen denied the existence of a geographical unity of space and singled out two types of regions in terms of scale: global and regional. As well as two major geostrategic spheres, each dominated by one of the two superpowers. The author called them: "the trade-dependent world of maritime powers" and "the Eurasian continental world". S. Cohen presented the spatial (two-hemispheric) structure of the world. This structure bears resemblance to old geopolitical models. However, he went further and divided each geostrategic sphere into geopolitical regions.
First, oceanic, sphere included in the 1991 scheme of 4 regions:
- 1) Anglo-America and Caribbean countries;
- 2) Europe and Maghreb countries;
- 3) South America and South Africa;
- 4) island (offshore) Asia and Oceania. Second, continental, sphere included two regions:
- 1) "Heartland" (CIS countries);
- 2) East Asia.
In addition to these regions, South Asia was also distinguished as special (potential) geostrategic sphere. As "separating belt" between the oceanic and continental hemispheres - the Middle East.
The scientist singled out 5 geopolitical centers of the world (powers of the first order): the USA, Russia, Japan, China and Europe (EU). Each center defines its geopolitical regions. Other geopolitical regions define second-tier states that dominate their regions, such as India, Brazil, and Nigeria. S. Cohen refers to the states of the second order about three dozen states. They are followed by states of the third, fourth and fifth orders. Their classification criterion is based on the size of their sphere of foreign policy influence.
If we carefully consider the main milestones in the development of geopolitical modeling by Western geographers, from F. Ratzel (1897) to S. Cohen (1991), we can note that their models directly reflected the ideology of nation states and their interests. But today's interpretation of geopolitics is presented more broadly - as a set of physical, social and moral resources of the state, which allows it to achieve its goals in the international arena. Pierre Galois is one of its representatives. He is the author of a number of books on international politics.
General Pierre Galois, a classic of modern geopolitics, a consistent supporter and adviser to de Gaulle, was one of the four persons who stood at the origins of the decision to create an independent French nuclear potential. It was thanks to him that France withdrew from the military structures of NATO.
As a result of the analysis of many views on the content of the term "geopolitics", P. Galois comes to the following conclusions:
- - modern geopolitics has nothing to do with both geographical determinism and the Nazi interpretation of this term in the 30s and 40s. XX century, when it was used for the purpose of crude propaganda of the war;
- - geopolitics is different from political geography, which explains international politics by the influence of the environment;
- - the fundamental elements of geopolitics include the spatial and territorial characteristics of the state (its geographical location, length, landscape, population, etc.);
- - Today, new criteria are being added that radically change our previous ideas about the strength of states. Here we are talking about weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, which equalize the power of the states that own them, and this does not depend on their remoteness, nor on their position or population.
The concept of P. Galois can be represented as follows. Based on the interaction of man with the environment, from the point of view of modern geopolitical analysis, three historical phases can be distinguished:
- - first - in the early stages of history, the influence of the natural environment on society and the state was very significant. And this fully explains the geographical fatalism that was characteristic of classical geopolitics;
- - second - the industrial revolution initiated the process of strengthening the influence of the anthropogenic factor on the Earth's climate, its flora, fauna, landscape and airspace, which created a threat to the very existence of civilization;
- - third phase in the interaction of man and the environment requires taking into account the "interests" of nature.
Today, geopolitics is no longer the lot of individual states. There is an urgent need for coordinated interaction of all states in the development and implementation of a planetary geopolitics, which would be based on the interests of preserving civilization. It is in this aspect that the concept of P. Galois is opposed to traditional concepts.
After the end of World War II, many positions in geopolitics were revised. A fundamentally new system of world order began to take shape, and this was due to the scientific and technological revolution and the invention of nuclear weapons, the previous approaches and methods were sharply outdated. Then two directions of geopolitics were formed: Atlanticism and mondialism.
Atlantism - it is the "sea power model" that is becoming official US policy. This concept presupposes the presence of global interests, as well as global security, and the strongest world power, the United States of America, must implement them. The founder of Atlanticism is D. Mining. In his work "Heartland and Rimland in Eurasian History" (1956), he speaks of the need to take into account those features that are inherent in states and peoples.
Mondialism - it is a theory that assumes the existence of a single dominant force in the entire space of the world. An example is the mondialist theory of an American political scientist, sociologist and statesman of Polish origin, who for a long time was one of the leading ideologists of US foreign policy. Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezhynski. His theory is also called the "convergence theory". Its idea was to bring together the two camps: the Atlantic and the continental. Namely, the USA and the USSR were supposed to create a "mixed type" civilization through overcoming the ideological contradictions of Marxism and liberalism, which involved concessions from each side in the sphere of economy, culture, and ideology. According to Z. Brzezinski, author of The Grand Chessboard: America's Dominance and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, this is what could unite the two systems based on the ideas of humanism, freedom, and democracy.
Geopolitical polycentrism - this is the third main direction in the development of geopolitics in the second half of the 20th century.
It is based on the idea that there are many centers of power in the world, in which the center of power alone can control other centers, but it is important for it to cooperate with other centers. But this is by no means a peaceful direction in modern geopolitics. Today's dynamic time requires knowledge and consideration of those factors that could effectively and realistically solve modern international problems and influence countries in the context of globalization.
Absolute and relative coordinate system
Mongol invasion on the territory of Kazakhstan
Construction of a line of intersection of planes defined in various ways