JEOPOLİTİK STRATEJİ

In today’s international order, the ideological polarization of opposing power blocks is not as sharp and rigid as it was during the Cold War era. The interconnectedness between liberal western powers and illiberal authoritarian powers is much higher now than it was between western capitalist and eastern communist countries during the Cold war era. This suggests that we now live in a multiplex world order. Not only are there more actors in international relations but also issues have become so complex that dealing with them increasingly requires global perspectives. This world order leads states with various power capabilities to adopt multidimensional and multidirectional foreign policy strategies.

Even though the debate on the decline of the West still lingers and many question the idea of declinizm in the United States, it is now clear that the United States under Trump’s presidency no longer wants to play the leader of the liberal international order. This creates enough room for non-western rising powers to act more assertively and become more visible across the globe.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements in the options related to fourth generation geopolitics are correct.

Critical Geopolitics

The word ‘geopolitics’ consists of two different words. ‘Geo’ is the abbreviation of geography. Politics means deciding who gets what, how and when. Geography consists of two words, geo and graphy. Geo means earth and graphy means writing. Geopolitics means the politics of writing the earth. 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.

Geopolitics and Power Relations

From the perspective of critical geopolitics, meanings attributed to particular geographical locations emanate from deeply held political interests and subjective understandings of identity (O Tuathail, 1996). Power relations determine purchasing value of geopolitical understandings. Throughout history different meanings have been attributed to geographical sites. The question to be asked, from the perspective of critical geopolitics, should be which political interests are cloaked under particular geopolitical conceptualizations at different times. Identifying a physical place on earth with particular national interests, identities, ideologies or civilizations is in fact a political exercise. The question of whose geopolitical imagination will prevail in the final analysis will be profoundly determined by the distribution of power capabilities within the international system. All claims to objective geopolitical analyses in fact mask particular political motivations and interests (Ingram and Dodds, 2009). To give an example, one can underline the fact that many people in the world today call the place Middle East as Middle East without thinking any moment why this region is called Middle East. Which actors first depicted this region as such and for which particular purposes? Critical geopolitics as a subfield of geopolitics tries to uncover hidden political purposes and motivations lying behind allegedly objective and neutral geopolitical observations. From the perspective of critical geopolitics, there are no objective geopolitical claims. All such claims are for someone and for some purposes.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements in the options related to critical geopolitics are correct.

The word ‘geopolitics’ consists of two different words. ‘Geo’ is the abbreviation of geography. Politics means deciding who gets what, how and when. Geography consists of two words, geo and graphy. Geo means earth and graphy means writing. Geopolitics means the politics of writing the earth.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements in the options related to the meaning of geopolitics are correct.

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.

Geopolitical understandings of different time periods tend to demonstrate diverging conceptualizations of power. Power is closely related to geopolitics. For example, while first and fourth generation of geopolitical competitions underline the primacy of hard power calculations and behaviors in relational relations, second and third generation of geopolitics tend to put more emphasis on soft power. Critical geopolitics would on the other hand say that it is not easy to separate hard power from soft power and states employ a mix of all power capabilities and relations in their efforts to justify their geopolitical view and claims. That said, a brief discussion on the concept of power would be meaningful in this context.

The concept of power is one of the most popular and elusive concepts in the academic discipline of International Relations (Nye, 2011). To many, power is the ability of one actor to influence the behavior, interests and identity of other actors in the image of its own priorities, preferences and values. Put differently, power is the ability of one actor to get what it wants from others. The crux of the issue here is to define from where this ability comes and whether one can measure it. This suggests that power has both residual and relational aspects. Power is residual because being powerful requires a particular state to possess both some capabilities, of both tangible and intangible sorts, and the will to use them in order to have an impact on others. Without those capabilities at the first instance and the will in the background, it is nearly impossible to influence others. Tangible sources are those that can be quantified, measured, observed and categorized. Such sources are military capability, economic might, geographical location, population number, human development, technological prowess, environmental factors, and etc. Intangible sources of power are those that cannot be easily observed, tested or measured. Values, norms, societal cohesion, culture, image and identity are typical examples of intangible power capabilities.

Power is also relational because for power to exist there needs to be at least two actors interacting with each other. For example, if the state B does not meet the demands of the state A or change its behaviors along the expectations of the State A, the state A does not have power over the state B. Possessing mere power capabilities and the will to use them does not automatically translate into being powerful. Being powerful requires the compliance of others with the demands of the state that tries to have an impact on their choices.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements in the options related to power and geopolitics are correct.

Not all states are willing to have an influence on the choices of others. Some states are defined as status-quo oriented powers whereas some others are considered to be as status-seekers or status-quo changers. Status-quo oriented states are those that are content with the current power configuration in the system and they do not aspire to change it. They are merely concerned with their existing status within the system and want to make sure that it continues. Their foreign policies most of the time begin and end at their national borders. They are generally risk-averse states. Rather than act, they react to external developments. They are not concerned with how other states are ruled internally and act externally. In their imaginations the number one foreign policy interest/priority is to make sure that external developments do not affect their internal order and current position within the system negatively. Even though many of such states can be found at fringes of international politics, it is extremely difficult to put a particular state into this category because even the status-quo oriented states have to play by the rules of power politics and engage others instrumentally to protect what they possess at a given time.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements in the options related to status-quo oriented states are correct.

Not all states are willing to have an influence on the choices of others. Some states are defined as status-quo oriented powers whereas some others are considered to be as status-seekers or status-quo changers. Status-quo oriented states are those that are content with the current power configuration in the system and they do not aspire to change it. They are merely concerned with their existing status within the system and want to make sure that it continues. Their foreign policies most of the time begin and end at their national borders. They are generally risk-averse states. Rather than act, they react to external developments. They are not concerned with how other states are ruled internally and act externally. In their imaginations the number one foreign policy interest/priority is to make sure that external developments do not affect their internal order and current position within the system negatively. Even though many of such states can be found at fringes of international politics, it is extremely difficult to put a particular state into this category because even the status-quo oriented states have to play by the rules of power politics and engage others instrumentally to protect what they possess at a given time.

On the other hand, some states have a much broader definition of national interests. Such states tend to have aspirations transcending their national orders. They are risk-takers in that they try to help bring into existence a new power configuration within the existing system so that they find themselves in a much better and prestigious position than before. Whereas some status-quo changer states are only concerned with having an impact on foreign policy behaviors of other states, some others would be very much preoccupied with the projection and promotion of their values and norms onto others. The status-quo changer states prioritizing foreign policy behaviors of others would primarily focus on increasing their material power capabilities vis-a-vis others. At stake for them is the material distribution of power capabilities within the system at a given time. The status-quo changer states trying to project their values and norms onto others would on the other hand be profoundly concerned with the normative foundations of the system. They would hold that their power over others would positively vary with their ability to help transform them in the image of their values and norms. In this sense, status-quo changer states of this kind are all normative powers in that they try to achieve their goals by projecting and expanding their norms onto others.

As also understood from the information given, the answer is E. All of the statements in the options related to status-quo changer states are correct. All great powers, such as the United States, China, Russia and the European Union, are normative powers. The countries that wish to have regional spheres of influence are also within this camp. For example, following its ascendance to the top position of international power hierarchy, the United States has put the transformation of international politics in line with American values and standards at the center of its foreign policy. Similarly, the ongoing discussions on rising powers make it explicitly clear that those states are status-quo changer states because they put a strong challenge to the privileged position of western actors within the existing global order, both materially and normatively.

Geopolitics as a unique academic discipline has also close links to International Relations, Security Studies, and Strategic Studies. The correct answer is C

Mackinder, a geographer in the United Kingdom, is considered to be the first important geopolitical thinker. The correct answer is B

The second generation of geopolitical studies came to the fore following the end of the Second World War. The correct answer is A.

Third generation geopolitics began with the end of the Cold War rivalry between two opposing power blocks adopting diverging political ideologies. The correct answer is C

Ideology and identity were the main signifiers of second era's geopolitical soul. The correct answer is E.

Since the early 1990s until 2008, the United States, in partnership with its European allies within NATO and the European Union, dictated international politics. This period was the heyday of the liberal international order. The correct answer is C.

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. The correct answer is D

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. The correct answer is B

The correct answer is A