Compiled by Professor Bert Chapman, MA, MSLS, Purdue University Libraries and School of Information Studies and Leonard Hochberg, PhD, Coordinator, Mackinder Forum-US
The term “geopolitics” is an overused phrase. It can be heard on television, in the lecture hall, and is now the synonym for international strategic rivalry. Yet, few universities and colleges actually offer courses devoted to geopolitical analysis. If you want to find out more about geopolitics or even major in geopolitics, what should you do? This document has been prepared as a guide to the study of geopolitics.
Essentially, geopolitics is the study of interstate conflict in geographic perspective. States seek a favorable environment for the projection of military force, political influence, cultural values, and economic opportunity. Geopolitics, therefore, focuses on, first, the structure of alliances; second, the access to strategic goods; third, the size, geographic concentration and loyalties of ethnic groups; and, finally, the locations of natural and artificial barriers or carriers for inhibiting or facilitating the movement of weapons, materiel and armed force during wartime.
Geopolitics assumes that adversarial relationships among states will remain a massive fact of the human condition. War will not disappear. In fact, the fundamental way to secure “peace” is to deter aggression by maintaining a favorable balance of power. But how much power is adequate? How much is too much? One of the strategic dilemmas of the balance of power is that too much power provokes fear and consternation among neighbors, including potential allies, leading to an attempt to rebalance regional and, potentially, extra-regional power relations. Another dilemma arises from the fact that states that cannot or will not contribute signficantly to the balance of power find that their options for independent action in the international arena to be highly constrained despite their legal claim to sovereignty. The ideal of legal equality among states is undermined by the reality of power relationships. The practice of geopolitics and the implementation of grand strategy are replete with such strategic dilemmas.
National security advisors formulate grand strategy. The practitioner of grand strategy should adopt an attitude toward the world that takes into account the evolving intentions and capabilities of adversaries, competitors and client states—as well as those of one’s own government and its allies. A grand strategy must have a clearly articulated goal, one that the citizenry in a democracy can accept and rally around.
For those who implement a grand strategy, constant vigilance is required. Intelligence services must gather actionable information on how the intentions and capabilities of enemies are changing; homeland security agents must seek to detect, forestall and quash terror attacks, sometimes sponsored by enemy states. Those who formulate or implement grand strategy must be women and men of character who are not faint of heart.
Geopolitics draws together the insights of various academic disciplines, most notably geography, history and international relations. A geopolitical thinker attempts to discern the geographical patterns underpinning the politics of the international arena. It combines an appreciation of the conditioning influences of geography with how certain locations will, over time, become more or less significant due to changes in transport and weapons.
Geopolitics regards international relations as a puzzle, with each new piece (i.e., observation or theory) providing a more fulsome picture of the causes, course and consequences of conflict. Because no one discipline has a monopoly on an understanding of international conflict, we believe that one of the great strengths of geopolitics is its bias toward interdisciplinary studies and the integration of distinct, though related, bodies of knowledge.
Geopolitics does a number of things that make it worthy of study. First, it defines the scope of its subject matter with a degree of precision and identifies how an investigation ought to proceed to connect geography with history and international relations. Second, it holds out the prospect of forecasting the future, just as Halford John Mackinder did in 1904 and 1919 when he identified how the building of the trans-Siberian railway occasioned the rise a new and significant land-based threat, emerging from the Eurasian “Heartland,” to the maritime powers located along the Eurasian littoral. Third, it seeks to reconcile grand theory with the facts "on the ground."
How is it possible to see the facts “on the ground” from your dorm room, library or home office? Not everyone can travel the world, from Iran and Afghanistan, to Egypt and India, to the Balkans and the lands of the former Ottoman Empire, and to the Indian Ocean and beyond, searching for first-hand geopolitical insights. Reading Robert D. Kaplan’s theoretically informed assessments of local conflicts enables the armchair geopolitical thinker to capture, through the eyes of an astute observer, an appreciation of the causes of geopolitical conflict.
If you cannot travel to geopolitical flashpoints, what should you do? We recommend reading widely from various sources, including historical accounts of conflict and position papers and blog posts of the think tanks and government agencies. When selecting what to read, do not limit yourself. Read well beyond the apologists for the powers that are engaged in the conflict.
Your mission is to rise above subjectivity and partisanship in order to achieve an objective assessment of not only the causes of conflict but also the consequences for the security of your own nation-state. Without such an objective assessment, the geopolitical analyst is likely to parrot a “party line,” thereby falling prey to ideological or wishful thinking. As Raymond Aron wrote in Peace and War, 1966: “It is prudent to act in accordance with the particular situation and the concrete data, and not in accordance with some system, or out of passive obedience to a norm or pseudo-norm … such as a ‘world safe for democracy’ or a ‘world from which power politics will have disappeared.’”
Geopolitical thinking has its origins in the early part of the twentieth century when there emerged for the first time a “closed” international political system. The “known” terrain of the world no longer blended into the “half known” and then into the “unknown.” The land masses of the world were not only mapped but events occurring in remote locations reverberated across the globe. The assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria Hungry in June of 1914 triggered a war in which none of the major powers of Europe (and beyond) could remain either neutral or indifferent.
In a recent incarnation, geopolitical thought emerged just as “globalization” began to retreat before ethnic conflict, inter-civilizational conflict, the rise of terrorism, etc. Suddenly, the underside of globalization was exposed: gun running, narcotics smuggling, counterfeiting currencies, antiquities theft, illegal migration, and human trafficking. The exposure of these hidden supply and demand chains revealed that globalization was not an unalloyed good. The illicit flows of messages, goods and humans required a response: states began to reconstruct strong borders by installing high-tech sensors and physical barriers.
More recently, the rise of interstate competition, particularly between autocratic regimes such as the People’s Republic of China and more liberal ones such as the United States, has sparked a revival of interest in geopolitics, geoeconomics and grand strategy. “Geopolitics” is now in vogue. If you Google “geopolitics,” you will find that there are approximately 28,500,000 results.
By contrast, geostrategy, or the impact of geography on military affairs, is a very old concern. Geostrategic thought appeared in many ancient civilizations, usually when a war or invasion threatened the very survival of a polity. Thucydides (The History of the Peloponnesian War) in Ancient Greece and Sun Tzu (The Art of War) in Ancient China are usually mentioned as the founders of geostrategic thought. For those students who seek an appreciation of the geostrategy of insurrection in the ancient world, we recommend reading Samuel I and II from the Hebrew Bible. Kautilya in Ancient India also wrote a foundational geopolitical text (Arthaśhāstra). All four are available in multiple translations. Students should seek mastery of these texts as experts in the field of geopolitics will often communicate by referencing salient events or theories first mentioned in these texts.
We believe that there is no substitute for reading the works of the great geopolitical thinkers, ancient and modern. Alfred Thayer Mahan, Halford John Mackinder, and Nicholas Spykman—to mention but three modern authors—must be read in order to gain an understanding of how geopolitical thought integrates disparate fields of knowledge into coherent patterns and predictions. By reading and absorbing the thought of these authors, students enter into a long, vibrant, and complex tradition.
Fortunately, our colleague, Professor Geoff Sloan, who is the Coordinator of the Mackinder Forum-UK, published a basic syllabus on March 12, 2009 in Foreign Affairs entitled “What to Read on Geopolitics”. Professor Albert Chapman has published two books providing a guide to research and relevant resources: Researching National Security and Intelligence Policy and Geopolitics: A Guide to the Issues. Dartmouth University has posted several guides to the study of geopolitics. The “Classics of Strategy and Diplomacy” website provides access to several relevant syllabi and interesting posts. For a guide to geopolitical hypotheses and theories, please consult Professor Phil Kelly’s Classical Geopolitics: A New Analytical Model. Finally, one goal of the Mackinder Forum website is to make geopolitical thought accessible to undergraduates and graduate students.
If a student wishes to specialize in geopolitics, and if his or her home institution does not offer courses in the field, then he or she may have to create a personal academic focus. This is not as hard as it sounds. Some institutions allow the student to major and minor (or even double major) in the two most important fields related to geopolitics, specifically international relations and geography. Other institutions allow the student to construct an “interdisciplinary major.” Figuring out how to combine courses in international relations and geography is the critical first step. It may also be possible to enroll in an online course that specifically focuses on geopolitics, some of which are listed below. Consult your catalog to determine if the credits will transfer to your home institution.
The student should also consult with a sympathetic member of the faculty. In a large university setting, this may be a hurdle. Visiting an advisor during office hours may be an intimidating experience. Suppose you drop by during office hours and discover that your advisor is not sympathetic, in that case seek counsel in the Dean of Students office. Students at a large university do have one advantage; they usually have a smorgasbord of courses from which to select in order to construct an individualized major. On the other hand, students at a small liberal arts college may find their choices more constrained. However, they might more readily secure opportunities for independent study or tutorials. Do not give up. In either case, the student should carefully weigh what courses to take and when to enroll so as to complete their graduation requirements in a timely fashion.
We enthusiastically recommend taking courses on the history, economy, culture and the relevant language of an adversary or allied power. Courses on the Middle East, China, Russia, Eastern Europe or another significant flashpoint where conflict is likely to occur will ground your understanding of geopolitical theories in the actual circumstances of a specific region.
Having completed technical courses in geographic information systems (GIS) and remote sensing is another means by which students majoring in geopolitics may more readily secure an appointment with a national security or intelligence agency. In the near future, major corporations and consulting firms (TD International, LLC (TDI) and Ernst and Young (EY)) may begin to seek experts in geopolitics and grand strategy in order to navigate the political shoals associated with interstate geoeconomic conflict. (Note: Another good idea is to secure an internship with an online publisher, a think tank, a corporation (such as Microsoft), or a government agency that engages in geopolitical analysis.) We highly recommend mastering a skill set that will result in gainful employment.
Here are some topics that might be embedded in courses offered by your university which, when taken over a four-year curriculum, should be considered as fundamental for a geopolitical focus. Please note that we are not insisting on specific course titles; instead, we are suggesting relevant topics.
*In the field of geography: world geography, domestic political geography, economic geography, military geography (tactical and operational), and international geopolitics (if offered).
*In the field of political science: international relations (introductory and advanced), comparative politics (introductory and advanced), global politics, national security, strategic culture, grand strategy (if offered).
*In the field of history: Ancient Greece (to appreciate fully the work of Thucydides), 19th and 20th century European history (to appreciate fully the work of the foundational geopolitical thinkers, such as Mahan, Mackinder, and Spykman), the history of 20th century diplomacy and war (World War I, World War II and the Cold War), history of technology.
*In the field of economics: international trade, comparative economic systems and geoeconomics (if offered).
*In an area study of choice: relevant courses in history, sociology, anthropology, political science, geography, religion, philosophy, literature, art and language.
*In new or emerging technologies and their likely political impact: new energy technologies, interplanetary travel, military innovations, artificial intelligence/machine learning, innovative solutions for batteries, mineral processing and/or history of manufacturing, etc.
*In mathematics: statistics.
*Critical skill sets: geographic information systems analysis and remote sensing in order to engage in computerized mapping and geospatial intelligence analysis.
As you develop your program, one of your tasks will be to assess the validity of allegedly universal theories (that are typically developed in the social sciences) against the relevant facts as observed in particular locations and at specific times. Geopolitical analysis requires that you walk an intellectual tight rope. You must avoid the lure of grand theories that may not square with the facts “on the ground” while recognizing that generalization and prediction requires that you envision patterns that are frequently obscured by focusing solely on isolated locations and idiosyncratic events.
Thankfully, there are a number of websites that attempt to reconcile unique events in specific locales with regional or global processes and trajectories. But before mentioning those websites, we must discuss how maps and atlases advance the study of geopolitics.
In making the leap from partisanship to an objective understanding, you must place the conflict in its relevant geographic context. To do this, we also recommend learning to “read” maps and atlases. Maps orient the analyst to the places where the action occurred. Every placename mentioned in your assessment (either an article or a term paper) should be depicted on a map. There is no substitute for knowing and showing where the action has taken place.
But that is just the beginning. Maps enable a deeper understanding of international conflict by allowing you to visualize strategic information: first and foremost, the shifting nature of alliances over time; second, the location of minerals and food stuffs required to sustain a society or an armed force during times of war; third, the concentration of (potentially disloyal) ethnic groups inhabiting part of the territorial jurisdiction of a state; fourth, transportation and travel routes required to sustain markets or military campaigns; and, finally, the locations from which military campaigns might be launched or a defense might be mounted. Having such strategic locations, routes, territorial boundaries, and alliances clearly in mind and ultimately drawn on a map is critical for appreciating the relationships among these factors.
Imagine, by way of example, that you wanted to write a paper on Napoleon’s Russian campaign, which began in June and ended in December of 1812. In researching why Napoleon’s invasion of Russia resulted in a disastrous defeat, several factors may seem significant: the distance to Moscow from the French army’s staging areas; the necessity of foraging for food as the French army marched ahead of its supply train; the Russian defenders declined to offer battle as they retreat toward Moscow, thereby denying Napoleon the prospect of a decisive victory; the scorched earth policy initiated by the Russian peasantry; the onset of winter; and the Russian refusal to offer terms after Napoleon took Moscow, which led him to order a desperate retreat in the teeth of falling temperatures. All these factors conspired to destroy Napoleon’s army.
How to capture the relationship of geography, to timing, distance, location, routes taken, and temperature, and relate these factors to the number of the Napoleon’s forces, as they invade and later as they retreat, is the problem. Here is how a French engineer, Charles Minard, mapped these factors in 1869, creating a dramatic cartographic representation of this military disaster.
Notice what Minard’s map did not do. It did not depict the Russian forces: the size of the Russian army (and allied forces) as it retreated before the French invading forces. How fast did the Russian army retreat? Where did it retreat? Did the Russian army grow in size as garrisons joined the retreating defenders? Since a military invasion is the quintessential adversarial relationship, what the other side did, first to defend and later to counterattack, should also be depicted in a map similar to the one drawn by Minard. Such a map would round out this strategic story.
Here too the geopolitical analyst must be wary. Strategic maps are depictions of power relationships through space. At least since the time that the administrators of the Habsburg Empire mapped the terrain of its domains and the surrounding contested environs in the eighteenth century, strategic thinkers and have recognized that maps are a military force multiplier. The maps generated by geopolitical analysts offer practical advice to those who know how to interpret them. Therefore, government officials have historically declared map collections a state secret. When they issued maps, state cartographers frequently included disinformation to deceive the unwary. Sometimes, maps have been deployed as instruments of propaganda. By seeking to heighten the perception of the threats posed by neighboring states, maps have been drawn not to elicit dispassionate assessments but emotional responses. Scholars have taken note of how cartography advances the purposes of states, and an entire cottage industry has emerged to deconstruct the meaning of maps and the intentions of the cartographers who drew them.
Nevertheless, maps and atlases are significant resources for geopolitical analysis. When writing a paper or an article, we recommend that you seek out the map librarian at your college or university library. He or she will be delighted to share their “treasured” collection with a serious researcher. Indicate clearly what your research topic is; the date and location are essential features in that description. The map librarian should be able to direct you to the maps or atlases most relevant to your research.
Learning how to draw your own maps is beyond the scope of this introduction to geopolitics. Instead, we recommend the following. If you need to include a map from an atlas or from the map collection, ask permission of the map librarian to take a picture of it for inclusion in your paper. Be careful to cite the origin of the map. If the map is still under copyright, then find a similar map on the web that is in the public domain. You may then copy it into your research paper or article but, once again, provide a citation. If all else fails and the map is still under copyright, link to its location in your footnotes. That way, the attentive reader of your work will follow the link in your footnote and thereby appreciate your effort to display the relevant geopolitical factors that informed your analysis.
Below we provide a very small sample of relevant atlases. Note: although we provide links to websites where these atlases may be purchased, it is not necessary to acquire them. Some are beyond the means of the most dedicated collectors. Others, such as the Shepherd’s Historical Atlas and the Oxford Atlas of the World, are essential references.
ATLASES
A basic, one volume atlas of the world:
*Oxford Atlas of the World (Oxford University Press, 2020).
*National Geographic Atlas of the World, 11th edition (National Geographic, 1919).
Historical atlases depicting the development of the European state system:
*Edward Whiting Fox, Atlas of European History (Oxford University Press, 1968).
*William R. Shepherd, Shepherd’s Historical Atlas, Ninth Edition Revised and Updated (Barnes and Noble Books, 1980).
Historical atlas, world history
Time Books, Times Atlas of World History (Hammond World Atlas Corp, 1993).
R.R. Palmer (ed.), Rand McNally Atlas of World History (Rand McNally, 1957).
Atlases of geopolitical flashpoints (maps of local territorial disputes):
*Andrew Boyd and Joshua Comenetz, An Atlas of World Affairs 11th edition (Routledge, 2007).
*Ewan W. Anderson,
