Introduction to Geopolitics

not
being addressed by contemporary geography (see Hubbard 
et al
., 2002 and
Johnston and Sidaway, 2004 to understand the history of geography and the variety of
its current content).
Geography and places
But still, some guiding definitions are available to introduce readers to the discipline, if
necessary, and also the content and purpose of geopolitics. Human geography may be
defined as: “Systematic study of what makes places unique and the connections and inter-
actions between places” (Knox and Marston, 1998, p. 3). In this definition, human geog-
raphers are seen to focus upon the study of particular neighbourhoods, towns, cities, or
countries (the meaning of place being broad here). In other words, geographers are viewed
as people who study the specifics of the world, not just where Pyongyang is but what
are its characteristics. “Characteristics” may include weather patterns, physical setting,
the shape of a city, the pattern of housing, or the transport system. Political geographers
are especially interested, among other things, in topics such as how the city of Pyongyang,
for example, is organized to allow for political control in a totalitarian country.
However, places (whether neighborhoods or countries) are not viewed as isolated
units that can only be understood through what happens within them. The first defini-
tion also highlights the need to understand places in relation to the rest of the world.
Are they magnets of in-migration or sources of out-migration? Are investors of global
capital seeking to put their money in a particular place, or are jobs being relocated to
other parts of the world? Is a place a site for drug production, such as areas of Afghan-
istan, or the venue for illegal drug use, such as suburban areas of the United States or
Europe? Understanding a place requires analyzing how its uniqueness is produced
through a combination of physical, social, economic, and political attributes—and how
those attributes are partially a product of connections to other places, near and far.
Geography and spaces
A further and complementary definition of human geography is: “The study of the spatial
organization of human activity” (Knox and Marston, 1998, p. 2). In this definition space
is emphasized rather than place. The term space is more abstract than place. It gives
greater weight to functional issues such as the control of territory, an inventory of objects
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
2

---

(towns or nuclear power stations for example) within particular areas, or hierarchies and
distances between objects. For example, a spatial analysis of drug production and
consumption would concentrate on quantifying and mapping the flows of the drug trade,
while an emphasis of place would integrate many influences to understand why drugs
are grown in some places and consumed in others.
The economic, political, and social relationships that we enjoy and suffer are medi-
ated by different roles for different spaces. Two banal examples: if you are going to
throw a huge and rowdy party, don’t do it in the library; as a student, when entering a
university lecture hall sit in one of the rows of seats rather than standing behind the
lecturer’s podium. The banality of these examples only goes to show that our under-
standing of how society is spatially organized is so embedded within our perceptions
that we act within sub-conscious geographical imaginations. In addition, these two
examples also show that the spatial organization of a society reflects its politics, or
relationships of power. Standing behind the lecturer’s podium would be more than an
invasion of her “personal space” but a challenge to her authority: it would challenge the
status quo of student-lecturer power relationships by disrupting the established spatial
organization of the classroom.
Compare the maps of Africa in Figure 1.1. The maps display two spatial organiza-
tions of power relations. The large map illustrates the spaces of independent countries
(or states) that were created after the decline of the colonial control imposed by European
powers in the nineteenth century. External powers defined parts of Africa as “theirs,”
and so allowed them to subjugate the native populations for perceived economic benefit
free of violent and costly competition with other European countries. These spaces were
a product of two sets of power relations: the ability of European countries to dominate
African nations and the relative power parity among the European countries. The map
of countries is a different spatial organization of power in Africa, the post-colonial estab-
lishment of independent African countries. This new spatial organization of power
reflects a relative decrease in the power of the European countries to dominate Africa,
though a hierarchy of power remains. However, focusing on the spaces of independent
countries across the continent obscures other power relations, especially those of gender,
race, and class relations 
within
the countries. As we shall see, the scale at which we
make our observations highlights some political relations and obscures others. The three
smaller maps depict the struggle of Africans to end white-rule of their countries after
the end of the colonial period. It shows the racialized spaces of political control, the
areas of Africa in which the descendants of European settlers were able to maintain
control, and how these spaces of white control have shrunk to nothing now given the
end of apartheid in South Africa.
Places and politics
First, let’s focus more closely on defining what we mean by place. From our earlier
definition of human geography we know that places are unique and interdependent. In
addition, “places provide the settings of people’s daily lives” (Knox and Marston, 1998,
p. 3). In other words, people’s daily experiences, whether it be dodging mortar rounds
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
A   F R A M E W O R K   F O R   U N D E R S T A N D I N G   G E O P O L I T I C S
3

---

in Baghdad or enjoying the wealthy trappings of up-scale housing in the gentrified
London docklands, are a reflection of where they live. Life-chances are still very much
determined by where one is born and grows up. Table 1.1 shows infant mortality rates
across the globe, but also how this varies within countries, the United States is used as
an example. The life expectancy in the state of Delaware, for example, is similar to the
national average in Chile. What we may do, what we are aware of, what we think and
“know” are a function of where we live. Places are the sites of employment, education,
and conversation. Since places are unique they will produce a mosaic of experiences
and understandings.
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
4
Figure 1.1
Africa: independent countries and the decline of white-rule.

---

To better understand how geographers think about place, we will use two different
authors. First, John Agnew’s (1987) definition suggests that places are the combination
of three related aspects: location, locale, and sense of place.