The Revival of Geopolitics (Hepple 1986)
Since 1980s, the term geopolitics has reemerged and geopolitical analysis of global and regional problems has become more common, and widely used in media and political discussion. Linguistic changes in geopolitical language correspond to real changes in substantive content and analysis.
The decline of geopolitics
Defeat of Germany 1945 and death of Haushofer in 46 meant the end of his school of German geopolitics, also decline in geopolitical traditions in Italy and Japan ans decline of American interest. Similarly the prewar French critical interest in geopolitics disappeared with the end of the war. The association with German geopolitik was almost fatal. However, evidence of decline limited- West Germany, however revival was premature. Overall picture 50s and 60s, term geopolitics being avoided and relegated to the historical sections of text in both political geography and political science, avoided because of its Nazi connotations
Geopolitical interpretation and analysis continued, sailed under different colours such as strategic studies or even political geography. Geographers continued to review and explore geographical perspectives, especially within views of heartland, rim-land and containment , a period in which an inward looking geography was isolated from developments in other social sciences and would depoliticise concepts and remove them from the public and political debate,
geopolitics continued to be taught in military academies and staff colleges, and occasionally this aspect surfaced in publication
US policy of containment that emerged in the late 1940s, debate over whether this policy was indebted to Mackinder's ideas, why was containment not debated in geopolitical terms during the 50s and 60s- complex issue, critical element was the emergence of nuclear strategy as the cornerstone of US global policy
The beginning of revival
Roots of a revival in geopolitical reflection and writing lie in the changing international political and economic environment, growing multi-polarity and complexity in international politics during late 50s early 60s. Increasing cracks and holes in the logic of existing US global strategy
Memories of the third reich were fading, at least in the West, time was a good healer, key trigger, was the increasing use of the term by Henry Kissinger- signalled the rebirth of Western geopolitical writing, also gave substantial impetus in new directions
Kissinger's geopolitics
Nixons National security adviser and later US secretary of state, use of term brought it into speeches and writing, popular press and magazines and into popular language, however led to ambiguity and confusion of meaning
His use of the term somewhat individual, and the geographical content of Kissinger's geopolitics is not always clear , associates it with global equilibrium and permanent national interest in the world balance of power, opposing it to liberal policies of idealism and conservative policies ot total ideological anti-communism
Kissinger's use of the term was thus part of an attempt to turn American foreign policy towards a realpolitik balance-of-power perspective.
He is concerned to thwart Soviet expansionism, but sees US containment policy as excessively ideological, based too much on a military, rather than political, concept of the balance of power. Growing Soviet power had destroyed the earlier strategic equilibrium- ‘an eroding of strategic equilibrium was bound to have geopolitical consequences’ (p. 205) -and with US relative power declining (as exemplified by the Vietnam agony), Kissinger’s aim was to restore a balance of power, but retain political flexibility.
Kissinger's perspective is from a need to derive a balance of power in an increasingly multi-polar world
The geopolitics of global strategy
1970s several attempts to rethink geopolitics of US global strategy, two different examples are Walters (1975) and Gray (1977)
Walters 1975- argues Western strategy has been based on an erroneous perspective since 1975- argues Mackinder's heartland theory lies at the core of Western strategy, assumption Soviet Union has superior geographical and strategic position, argues nuclear deterrence was given such a prominent role in Westerns strategy because the US believed the Soviet heartland has overwhelming strategic advantage in Europe in terms of conventional warfare
Gray 1977- draws on Mahan, Mackinder and Spykman, his argument is that US foreign policy has increasingly ignored the geopolitical realities of Soviet expansionism and needs to focus more sharply on national interest and power politics, Soviet ideology is not based on stable power relationships or equilibrium but is remorselessly expansionist
Jay's alternative to the restrictive view of geopolitics as traditonal, geographical factors and power politics is one that looks as geopolitics as the art and process of managing global rivalry
The popularisation of geopolitics
Kissinger second legacy was to popularise the term geopolitics, it carries connotation of hard-headed, no nonsense realism, become especially prevalent in discussions of US foreign policy in central America and the Caribbean
The geographers contribution
Invovement of geographers in revival of geopolitics has only come recently
Now a surge in interest of geopolitics
Revival made up of many different strands- first been a willingness to use the term geopolitical where it would have been avoided previously and to explore more fully the political implication of there analyses, 2nd strand has been the development of a behavioural geopolitics, constructing behavioural and statistical models of the international diffusion of wars and conflicts across frontiers. , 3rd strand from those influenced by marxist or neo-marxist theory- critiquing earlier geopolitics and reconstruction of contemporary geopolitics based upon economic relationships and particularly on the role of capitalism in the world economy. Harvey 1985, geopolitics of capitalism derives geopolitical policies and conflicts from the logic of uneven development
Opportunities and dangers
A flourishing intellectual debate on geopolitics is an important guarantee not only against dangerously misleading geopolitical doctrines and policies but also help in the construction of more sensitive and coherent strategies, however present geopolitical literature is very fragmented, little cross referencing between different strands. Furthermore the global strategy literature often seems trapped in a few traditional concepts, ignoring wider economic and political issues that have a strong spatial structure and uncritical in its political assumptions
Conclusions
This paper traced the revival of geopolitics in North America and Europe since the 1970s- argued the revival has its roots in the changing international political and economic situation and growing multi-polarity and complexity of world politics
However, this revival is not a unified body of knowledge or policy analysis. It is very diverse. One strand is the revival of global geopolitical speculation, particularly as it relates to US global strategy. A second element is the popularization of the term ‘geopolitics’ and its use in varied and vague contexts as an ‘umbrella’ term for policy in a global-regional context.
Geographers can make a valuable retribution to both the theoretical and contextual analysis of geopolitical problems, must be more historically and politically sensitive than many earlier studies. An equally important task is the historical and political critique of geopolitics. Geopolitics must cQme to terms with its past, and examine the nature of its discourse. It is somewhat remarkable that geopolitics has not so far attracted more attention from those interested in social theory in human geography, for geopolitics is probably the outstanding example of a set of concepts originating in geographical analysis that has been absorbed into social and political practice.