JEOPOLİTİK STRATEJİ - Deneme Sınavı - 12

Another close relationship exists between geopolitics and geo-economics. Differentiating between the use of geography for political goals and economic goals is not an easy exercise to do because political and economic motivations of states are very much intermingled with each other. The best example to offer in this regard is China’s One-Road-One-Belt Initiative.

What lies at the roots of geopolitical thinking is the never-ending process of attributing an overarching meaning to physical geography (O Tauthail and Dalby, 2002). The way how physical geography is defined requires at the outset a discursive effort. The impact of geography on politics cannot be solely studied in a positivist fashion because statesmen and people who are interested in geopolitics tend to interpret the impact of physical characteristics of geography on politics through their subjective understandings. This suggests that geopolitics as an academic field can best be analyzed through the techniques of critical epistemology and methodology. The meaning of geopolitics at times when geographical location and physical terrain were too important in the quest of states to maximize their political and economic power was quite different than the meaning of geopolitics at times when technological developments in

Since the second half of the nineteenth century till the onset of the Cold War era, geopolitics was mainly an imperial exercise undertaken by great powers. Mackinder, a geographer in the United Kingdom, is considered to be the first important geopolitical thinker.

Mackinder, a geographer in the United Kingdom, is considered to be the first important geopolitical thinker. His heartland theory assumes that the particular power that controls the Eurasian landmass would eventually control the global politics and master the universe. In his characterization, land powers are more likely to lay claim to regional and global hegemony than maritime powers. From this perspective all great powers of the time were in a geopolitical competition to ensure that their rivals do not possess full control of the Eurasian landmass. His thoughts seem to have had great impact on Anglo-Saxon geopolitical tradition in that both the British empire during the age of Pax-Britanica and the United States during the age of Pax-Americana spent a good deal of effort to prevent any particular European or Asian country from dominating the Eurasian heartland.

Unlike Mackinder, Alfred Mahan, a military historian in the United States, argued that the road to global primacy in international politics would go through mastering oceans and other sea lines. He recommended that the leaders of the United States follow in the footsteps of the British Empire to build up a massive naval force if they want to become the most powerful country on earth. Controlling international trade routes at sea would require huge investments in bluewater navy as well as the United States establishing military bases in vital choke points. In Mahan’s thinking, controlling sea traffic through a powerful navy would absolve the United States of taking direct control of other countries. To him, the United States should avoid transforming other nations in the image of American values and stay away from nation-building exercises in far distant places. The United States is already safe because of its territorial location.

For example, the containment policy that was initially put into existence by the US-led western camp in order to prevent the Soviet Union from physically dominating particular geographical locations reflected ideational motivations in the background. At stake was not only containing the physicalSoviet penetration into some geographical locations but also ensuring that Soviet ideology did not enlarge to those locations.

New world order geopolitics suggested that there was only one super power all over the world and all other states would gain influence in international politics in relation to the status of their relationship with the global hegemon. That sole superpower happened to be the United States. There was a huge power gap between the United States and all other countries and it was nearly impossible for any country, acting alone or in cooperation with others, to counterbalance the American hegemony. Hence, bandwagoning appears to have replaced balancing in the age American primacy in global politics.

Third generation geopolitics began with the end of the Cold War rivalry between two opposing power blocks adopting diverging political ideologies. The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the unification of Germany in 1990 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 epitomized the end of ideological geopolitics. (Page 32)

FOURTH GENERATION OF GEOPOLITICS

Even though the 9/11 attacks on the US homeland dented the image of the United States as the omnipotent global hegemon and criticisms of the American approach to the global war on terror intensified following the US occupation of Iraq, it was primarily following the financial crisis of the late 2000s that a sense of decline began to percolate down to the western elites in the United States and EU members.

The liberal world order, which has come into being following the end of World War II under American leadership, has been going through a radical transformation in recent years mostly owing to China’s spectacular rise. In parallel to its increasing material power capability, China is also posing fundamental challenges to the normative fabric of the liberal world order.

Persuasive soft powers are those that think they need to invest some capital in order to help create legitimacy and attraction in the eyes of others. They develop specific strategies not only to brandish their achievements but also persuade others that their behaviors and policies are legitimate and other-regarding. In this regard, persuasive soft powers take great pains in helping manufacture attraction in the eyes of targeted countries through the employment of diplomatic means of conflict resolution, public diplomacy efforts, development aids and multilateral and facilitative diplomacy at interstate and intrastate disputes.

Unlike Mackinder, Alfred Mahan, a military historian in the United States, argued that the road to global primacy in international politics would go through mastering oceans and other sea lines. He recommended that the leaders of the United States follow in the footsteps of the British Empire to build up a massive naval force if they want to become the most powerful country on earth. Controlling international trade routes at sea would require huge investments in bluewater navy as well as the United States establishing military bases in vital choke points. In Mahan’s thinking, controlling sea traffic through a powerful navy would absolve the United States of taking direct control of other countries. Therefore, the correct option is B.

Geopolitics in its early stages was closely associated with Germany’s foreign policy practices, a latecomer in the struggle for building colonial empires across the globe. Friedrich Ratzel and Karl Haushofer are the most notable German geopolitical thinkers and their thoughts on geopolitics profoundly shaped foreign policies of Nazi Germany during the interwar years and Second World War. The impact of their thought on Nazi Germany’s policies was so decisive and pernicious that geopolitics had been for a long time associated with Hitler’s Germany and considered to be an intellectual exercise serving Hitler’s goals to institute German hegemony across the globe. Rather than geopolitics being recognized as a respectable field of academic study, even the word of geopolitics was avoided in writings on international relations. Hitler’s policies gave a bad reputation to geopolitics. It took some time to recognize geopolitics as a distinct academic discipline. Therefore, the correct option is A.

The idea that countries’ geographical location is their destiny is very much informed by such imperial/first-age geopolitical thinking. Geography serves either as a power multiplier or constraint on maneuvering capability. First generation geopolitical thinkers were quite influential in the dissemination of the idea that geography is destiny. Therefore, the correct option is B.

The idea that geography is destiny manifests itself in security culture and practices of other countries as well. For example while the United States is mainly a sea power trying to project power across the world through its blue water navy and marine forces, Russia, China and Germany are textbook examples of land powers. Land powers tend to invest a lot in their armies and defensive military capabilities mainly because they feel themselves surrounded by numerous neighboring countries. Therefore, the correct option is D.

The second generation of geopolitical studies came to the fore following the end of the Second World War. Throughout the long Cold war years, the US-led Western camp was in bitter ideological competition with the Soviet Union-led eastern camp. Therefore, the correct option is B.

Third generation geopolitics began with the end of the Cold War rivalry between two opposing power blocks adopting diverging political ideologies. The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the unification of Germany in 1990 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 epitomized the end of ideological geopolitics. Since the early 1990s till the end of the first decade of the twenty first century, analysts observed the rise of a new geopolitical understanding being defined by many as a new world order. Therefore, the correct option is A.

Third generation geopolitics began with the end of the Cold War rivalry between two opposing power blocks adopting diverging political ideologies. The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the unification of Germany in 1990 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 epitomized the end of ideological geopolitics. Since the early 1990s till the end of the first decade of the twenty first century, analysts observed the rise of a new geopolitical understanding being defined by many as a new world order. New world order geopolitics suggested that there was only one super power all over the world and all other states would gain influence in international politics in relation to the status of their relationship with the global hegemon. That sole superpower happened to be the United States. Therefore, the correct option is C.

China’s gains from the liberal-capitalist global order have mainly emanated from western sponsorship, rather than from China acting as a convicted disciple. So long as the western powers, particularly the United States, assumed that China would turn out to become a responsible stakeholder and gradually transform into a liberal democratic polity, they tolerated China’s rise and its inappropriate trade practices and non-democratic political values. The West was able to endure some economic losses relative to emerging powers, so long as it had self-confidence. The western powers have not been immune to such currents either. The last decade has witnessed the rise of populist and illiberal political movements in key western countries. The internal criticism of liberal democratic practices has severely affected the attractiveness of a liberal world order. As the Brexit decision in the United Kingdom and the election of Donald Trump to presidency in the United States demonstrate, the forces of illiberalism, populism, protectionism, and xenophobia have gained ground in key western countries. Therefore, the correct option is E.

The fundamental claim of critical geopolitical studies is that all kinds of geopolitical understandings are subjective and reflect particular values and previously conceived national interests. There is not an objective scientific understanding of geopolitics as claimed by first generation geopolitical writers. Naming particular physical locations as they are and attributing meanings to geographical locations are all political exercises in the background. There is not a bird-view of geopolitics which is claimed to be timeless and ahistorical. Therefore, the correct option is A.

The term geopolitics basically refers to the political significance of geography in the analysis of international relations and thus takes geographical expression of the world as a political construct. A fairly recent phenomenon, international relations (or International RelationsIR as a scholarly discipline and field of study) has been understood mainly through the lens of geopolitics and the geopolitical connotations of the international events and developments for decades. In other words, it is fair to argue that geopolitics has served as the basis and foundation that helped IR scholars better understand and explain the political aspects of the world and conceptualize the interstate affairs. Geopolitical references in the study of international relations have been the norm in many scholarly accounts; more importantly, early theoretical premises seeking to offer a generalizable framework for international politics have heavily relied on assumptions of geopolitics and geopolitical considerations as a whole. For instance, Realism, considered the theory of the IR for a long time, places a great emphasis upon, among other concepts, the term geopolitics which, according to the Realist scholars, holds the potential of properly explaining the root causes of perpetual conflicts between states. For sure, it is no surprise that early IR scholars and theories make much use of geopolitics in their analyses and approaches given that international relations have long been defined in terms of power struggle which eventually makes sense only if territorial gains are examined. Relevance and significance of geopolitics in early stages of the IR as a discipline become more visible when the fact that the IR has evolved out of considerations to put an end to the state of constant warfare is underlined more in stronger terms. In other words, the IR emerged as a response to the challenges posed by the interstate struggle for power which is best reflected in territorial interventions including most notably invasion and conquests which obviously bear relevance only when they are associated with the understanding of geopolitics.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements related to the dynamics of geopolitics in a changing environment of global politics and its relevance to the premises of globalization in the options are correct.

Geography, territory as a political construct, is also relevant from the perspective of international law as well. According to Montevideo Convention which sets out the parameters of a state spells out four aspects for a political entity to be properly called a state: defined territory, permanent people, centralized authority and sovereignty. As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All these aspects and characteristics are basic criteria to define the modern nation state and to distinguish it from other political entities.