Geopolitics of Development

National interest, power, bilateral political ties, ideas&values,

multilateral cooperation

r redaelli – Master CRI – Legnano, 15 VII 2010

Geography is about power

«Geography is about power. Although often assumed to be innocent, the geography of the world is not a product of nature but a product of histories of struggle between competing authorities over the power to organize, occupy and administer space… within the context of this struggle, the cartographic and other descriptive forms of knowledge that took the name “geography” in the early modern period and that were written in the name of the sovereign could hardly be anything else but political» [G. O’ Tuathail, Critical Geopolitics. The Politics of Writing Global Space, London, 1996, p.1]

What does Geopolitics means, what not - I

Geop is a much-overused term. Common users ignore that geop as a method

of analyzing IR has a history that includes a common vocabulary, well-established if sometimes conflicting concepts, an established body of thought and a recognized group of theorists.

Proliferation of geos- (geopolitics, geoeconomy, geostrategy, geohistory).

What does Geopolitics means, what not - II

Not a science, but rather a scientific approach; Lack of clear definition. “Best definition of Geop is

that there is no definition; The deeper you get involved in Geopolitics, the

harder you find it to give an appropriate definition Geop is a new way of seeing international as a

unified worldwide scene (especially classical “hard” geop);

What does Geopolitics means, what not - III

Geop is not a “neutral science”: it gives a set of forecasts and suggestions to the power;

Classical geop represented a “power-discourse” made by a group of imperialists, not scientists;

Deeply intertwined with the political, ideological and cultural atmosphere of Imperialism and the decline of the traditional “balance of power” in Europe.

Classical definitions of geopolitics - I

Cohen (2003) notes that intellectuals such as Aristoteles, Montesquieu, Kant, Hegel and Humboldt already had an understanding of Geopolitics. Nonetheless, Geopolitics as a concept emerged much later (Dodds and Atkinson, 2000):

"Geopolitical thought emerged at the close of the nineteenth century as geographers and other thinkers sought to analyse, explain and understand the transformations and finite spaces of the fin de siècle world."

Kjellen (Swedish citizen, 1864-1922) was the first who coined the concept of Geopolitics in 1899 (Cohen, 2003), defining it as:

"the theory of the state as a geographical organism or phenomenon in space"

This definition contains two elements that are crucial within the concept of geopolitics: power (influence, politics) and space (territory, soil). The central role for the state as only powerful entity is very typical for the definition of Kjellen.

Classical definitions of geopolitics - II

Haushofer (1869-1946), whose ideas inspired the Nazi-regime, added political processes to the definition of Geopolitics (Cohen, 2003):

"Geopolitics is the new national science of the state, ... a doctrine on the spatial determinism of all political processes, based on the broad foundations of geography, especially of political geography."

Haushofer considered Political Geography as an essential part of Geopolitics.

Classical definitions of geopolitics - III

In 1993, Taylor wrote that the revival of Geopolitics had taken shape in three ways:

"...geopolitics has become a popular term for describing global rivalries in world politics."

"...the second form...is an academic one, a new more critical geopolitics. Critical historiographical studies of past geopolitics have been a necessary component of this 'geographer's geopolitics'."

"...the third form...is associated with the neo-conservative, pro-military lobby which have added geopolitical arguments to their 'Cold War rhetoric'. Such studies talk of 'geopolitical imperatives' and treat geography as 'the permanent factor' that all strategic thinking must revolve around."

Taylor further stated that geopolitical analyses always had a national bias: "In the case of geopolitics, it has always been very easy to identify the nationality of an author from the content of his or her writings.". Taylor related Geopolitics to International Relations: "Geopolitics has generally been part of the realist tradition of International Relations

Classical definitions of geopolitics - IV

Chauprade (1999) has developed a well-structured geopolitical methodology. He defined geopolitics as:

La science géopolitique est la recherche de la compréhension des réalités géopolitiques et de leur devenir, à travers l'étude des profiles, figures et dispositifs géopolitiques"

This definition left open what Chauprade meant by Geopolitics, but subsequently he clarified his position:

"La géopolitique n'est pas seulement une science de la réalité identitaire, elle est aussi une science marquée par la continuité du temps:

Although Chauprade appreciated the role of the state, he deviated from the definition of the classical geopoliticians:

"...dire que ces États sont les centres et les enjeux des ambitions géopolitiques, ne signifie pas que les États sont les seuls acteurs mondiaux; à la différence des relations internationales, (...) la science géopolitique admet d'autres acteurs et d'autres réalités géopolitiques."

Chauprade distinguished sharply between Geopolitics and International Relations

Classical definitions of geopolitics - V

Yves Lacoste has contributed substantially to the revival of Geopolitics in France since the 1970s. In a recent book (2006), he stated that:

"Le terme de géopolitique, dont on fait de nos jours de multiples usages, désigne en fait tout ce qui concerne les rivalités de pouvoirs ou d'influence sur des territoires et les populations qui y vivent: rivalités entre des pouvoirs politiques de toutes sortes - et pas seulement entre des États, mais aussi entre des mouvements politiques ou des groupes armés plus ou moins clandestins - rivalités pour le contrôle ou la domination de territoires de grande ou petite taille."

This definition stresses the importance of the scale of both power (states versus organisations) and space (large versus small territories).

Classical definitions of geopolitics - VI

Flint (2006) extensively discussed the historical development of the concept of Geopolitics. He noted that power has always had a central role in the definition, although its meaning has been subject to several changes:

"Geopolitics, the struggle over the control of spaces and places, focuses upon power. (...) In nineteenth and early twentieth century geopolitical practises, power was seen simply as the relative power of countries in foreign affairs. In the late twentieth century, (...) [d]efinitions of power were dominated by a focus on a country's ability to wage war with other countries. However, recent discussions of power have become more sophisticated."

Flint further stressed the need to define Geopolitics in various ways::

"So how should we define geopolitics, in the contemporary world and with the intent of offering a critical analysis? Our goals of understanding, analyzing, and being able to critique world politics require us to work with more than one definition."

He notes that "...geopolitics is a way of 'seeing' the world" and disagrees with those geopolitical analysts that pretend that one individual can fully understand the world

Classical geopolitics

Social darwinism and national rivalry; Looking for world domination. The geohistorical crucial “element” for political

domination: Heartland, Seapower, Rimland. Quantitative obsessions, geographical determinism:

Hard geopolitics and Hard security; The end of glassical geop with the end of the

German School of Haushofer.

The “new” geopolitics

The end of the ideological monopoly; Tensions and crises beyond the “bipolar

system”; New issues of geop: soft geopolitics, human

security, critical geopolitics. National interest, public opinion, the role of

the international community.

Mackinder’s theory

Spykman’s theory

Lacoste’s vision

Chokepoints China

Chokepoints