Introduction to Geopolitics

in its global role as world leader
is readily
and unquestionably offered. However, the actions of the National Guard members are
no means pre-determined. Their loyalties to family, for example, in addition to the way
1111
2
3
41
5
6
7
8
91
10
1
2
31111
4
5
6
7
8
9
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
30
1
2
3
4
51
6
7
8
9
40
1
2
3
4
5111
M E S S Y   G E O P O L I T I C S
195

---

their actions are interpreted in their home communities (especially if opinion toward
their military mission becomes negative) suggest that the level of their commitment may
change. In other words, they are not automatons within a geopolitical structure, but
complex agents who make decisions. It is well within the realms of possibility that
people choose self and family over military service, for example. Indeed, the purpose
of military recruiting campaigns is to ensure that people choose national service, while
the modern military is very aware that long overseas deployment puts stress on the
family and decreases retention.
Let us compare the geographic connectivity of the National Guard in a contempo-
rary conflict with the experience of citizens drafted to serve in World War II. Fussell
(1989, p. 288) notes the way war was reported and the self-censorship involved while
writing letters home meant “a slice of actuality was off limits.” In a statement that could
be applied beyond the single case of World War II, he goes on to argue that war’s “full
dimensions are inaccessible to the ideological frameworks that we have inherited from
the liberal era” (Fussell, 1989, p. 290). For Fussell the meaning and experience of war
could never be comprehended except by those who witnessed combat.
The focus on the “messiness” of geopolitics shows that the reality and experience of
conflict is very different from the simplicity and singular explanations provided by, say,
Modelski’s model or definitions of nationalism, etc. However, that does not mean 
that models and theoretical concepts are unimportant. The role of models and concepts
is to simplify in order to understand key structures and processes. The trick is to realize
that any given situation is the coming together of a variety of geopolitical agents and
I N T R O D U C T I O N   T O   G E O P O L I T I C S
196
Figure 8.2
Returning from war.

---

structures operating at different scales. In other words, we can try and make sense of
the “messiness” by first identifying the multiple structures and agents at work and,
second, seeing how they interact in complementary and competing ways. The following
case study is of the nationalist conflict in the disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir
(Figure 8.3). As well as providing background to this particular conflict, the case study
will attempt to show the interaction between geopolitical agents and structures, namely
political parties, state officials, nationalist groups, and individuals.
Case study 8.1: persistent conflict in Jammu and Kashmir
Timeline
1752
Afghan warlord Ahmed Shah Durrani conquered Kashmir after the collapse of
Mughal power.
1819
Due to the bloody nature of the Afghan rule, the Muslim majority surrendered
all of their land to Punjabi Sikh King Ranjit Singh so that he could take over,
beginning 27 years of Sikh rule.
1820
Ranjit Singh makes Gulab Singh Raja of the state of Jammu (starting here and
continuing until the British takeover Gulab Singh begins to build a small empire,
1111
2
3
41
5
6
7
8
91
10
1
2
31111
4
5
6
7
8
9
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
30
1
2
3
4
51
6
7
8
9
40
1
2
3
4
5111
M E S S Y   G E O P O L I T I C S
197