Introduction
When I say the word “geopolitics”, I immediately become self conscious. I imagine that my listener has framed me, labeled me, and put me into a box marked “pompous ass.” Geopolitics sounds an awful lot like other quasi-words that set off bullshit detectors everywhere. Think of “edutainment” or “guesstimate.” There’s an air of forced cleverness.
Every one of us forms a mental picture of the world. The picture below was created by someone critical of Ronald Reagan. Reagan’s mental picture would have been quite different. You and I have different pictures. I don’t mean to suggest there’s a Denny’s fun-facts Word Map on the table in your brain, but there is a combination of pictures, sounds, and feelings that shaped it. The study of geopolitics asks that you suppress your natural tendencies. It’s a very different method of learning about and describing the world. So what, exactly, is it?
This 100% accurate representation of the world as imagined by former president Ronald Reagan was recalled by one of his many critics. Had his brain been implanted into a Cyborg exoskeleton, he would have used a combination of telepathy and plasma-beam vision to refashion the world into a nightmarish dystopia while cackling in the antechamber of his hovering mega-fortress.
A Simple Test
Before we move on, answer the following question.
When Barack Obama was elected president, which of the following best represented your feelings?
- Fail. America’s power would certainly fall, continually and painfully.
- Success. American troops would immediately stream out of Iraq and Afghanistan.
- Rapture! The Lord would come again, take all the righteous and leaving the sinners in its wake.
Our inherent partisan assumptions don’t have much to do with geopolitics. Personalities certainly can have an effect, but their actions exist against the backdrop of geography and civilization. This is more important than cable news would lead you to believe. It’s as though we care about the pieces but not the game board.
Some Definitions
Geopolitics is the art and practice of using political power over a given territory. Traditionally, the term has applied primarily to the impact of geography on politics, but its usage has evolved over the past century to encompass a wider connotation.
In academic circles, the study of Geopolitics involves the analysis of geography, history and social science with reference to spatial politics and patterns at various scales (ranging from the level of the state to international). (Wikipedia)
That’s a pretty dry and conservative description of geopolitics, but it does the job. However, there’s a more colorful definition from George Friedman on hand:
Geopolitics is not simply a pretentious way of saying “international relations.” It is a method for thinking about the world and forecasting what will happen down the road. Economists talk about an invisible hand, in which the self-interested, short-term activities of people lead to what Adam Smith called “the wealth of nations.” Geopolitics applies the concept of the invisible hand to the behavior of nations and other international actors. The pursuit of short-term self-interest by nations and by their leaders leads, if not to the wealth of nations, then at least to predictable behavior and, therefore, the ability to forecast the shape of the future international systems. – The Next Hundred Years page 10 (emphasis mine)
We must look at a bunch of factors in order to figure out why the world turns out the way it does. It’s more an art than a science, but there’s a scientifically-minded approach that’s quite satisfying. I fear that improper use could take me down a blind alley or reinforce useless biases. But as imperfect tools go, it’s an order of magnitude better than the partisan political take.
If geopolitics is the confluence of these different factors, then realpolitik is the ugly result. Through the partisan lens, the decisions of leaders can appear inscrutable or evil, but examining things in this faction means that events make a bit more sense. Whether as hard-won compromises or decisions that violate our national sense of self, it’s the most likely approach you can count on. There’s also the war, oppression, and death that comes with it. By contrast, our tedious political temper tantrums seem like a puppet show.
Every government on the planet engages in realpolitik because we – you and I – do it too. Once you have enough people to call an “us” you find a “them” out there to compete with. We may do it with stolen office supplies, parental negligence, and passive-aggressive bitching, but that’s only due to the scope of our control over the world. Realpolitik is human nature writ large, temper tantrum and all.
The Ugly Word
Assume we’re chatting at a party and you ask me about my interests. Thanks to the martini, my brain’s internal editor is passed out. I say the word “geopolitics” and then I think, “Oh shit, they’re going to think I’m a pompous ass.”
A split second later, as an uncontrollable response, you think, “Oh shit, this guy is probably a pompous ass.”
You might become worried that I’ll pat my breast pocket and search out a mahogany pipe while slowly lecturing. I’d probably say “gestalt” or something. Getting a handle on how to speak about this is difficult.
Specialized sciences are great because the immediate emotional reactions are reduced. The discussion is so specific and abstract that nobody can mass the moral energy to have a hissy fit. There are a few obvious and troubling exceptions to this, but on the whole, it’s true. A discussion of the laws of motion doesn’t cause controversy. If I examine part of a cell, a shouting match won’t erupt.
But then start talking about politics. Maybe you’ll get nervous agreement or the polite nod that says “please stop.” But sometimes nothing says “ignore my opinions” more than a good old fashioned shouting match.
Our knowledge in these matches is staggering. We all know that our government is a bi-curious legislature and it has tons of democracy. The president competes against the organized C-SPAN leagues and has to beat the spread. And each of us would be a much better president than the bum in charge right now. Our analysis of world issues has been carefully crafted by fringe nut jobs, puff pieces, and newscasts with all the depth of a puddle.
Even if we are sincere and try really hard, there are so many confusing subjects. Our emotional responses take the place of observations about the world. This is because there is no national discourse on the mechanics of geopolitics.
Unintentional Education
In the days and weeks after the 9/11 tragedy, like a lot of Americans, I became a ravenous consumer of news. I kept asking why. I lost my balance, but then a discovery helped me to regain some of it.
While chronically flipping between news channels one afternoon, I came across three people sitting on bar-stools on some news show. It wasn’t formal, but one of those shows with a brighter Morning Edition vibe. On the floor was a huge map of Afghanistan. The map was divided into constituent regions and was colored, denoting ethnic and religious breakdowns.
It was a very rich graphic. All I really remember about it was this: One host was excitedly talking about the Shia, the Sunni, the north, the south – all that stuff. This person was creating a strong sense of context. The other two hosts were visibly flustered and added weak observations. But they also asked questions that didn’t inject partisan bias. It was too complex.
The show gave the appearance that group of people were realizing geopolitics. I don’t know what these people actually thought, of course. Objectively, it might have been pedestrian and I’m coloring it with my own perceptions. But compared to the shows airing during the post 9/11 weep-a-thon, it was a change from the composed droning of factoids that constituted most cable news coverage.
I want to try to understand the behavior of nations against the background of humanity’s continued existence over the long term. I want to figure out that invisible hand that’s moving us. Of course, I’ll stumble around in the dark and be wrong a whole lot, but it’s fascinating, overwhelming, and terrifying. I hope you’ll join me.
