Introduction to Geopolitics

New York
Times
(February 18, 2005) stressed these types of conflict. First, the front page of the
“Business Today” section spoke of the increased demand for oil from India and China
as their economies grow. The story reports that China’s oil imports grew by 31 percent
between 1994 and 2004, and India’s by 8 percent. Traditional suppliers to the United
States, such as Saudi Arabia, recognized the diversity of customers and have responded
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
208

---

by increasing their output. However, India and China are also aware that they are late-
comers to the world oil markets and have responded by tapping new areas of supply in
countries that are seen as geopolitically isolated, namely Sudan and Myanmar/Burma.
Referring back to the beginning of Chapter 4, it was Lenin’s belief that competition for
resources was the source of the twentieth century’s global wars. It is important to recog-
nize the geopolitics of the competition for the earth’s resources (especially oil and water),
and the conflicts between states that can result (Box 8.2).
Within our framework of the geopolitics of world leadership the second story is
clearly connected to the first. Interestingly, the 
New York Times
made no such connec-
tion. The story, on page A6, reports growing awareness by the US military of the
expansion of the Chinese navy and its ability to project power across the globe. Defense
Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is reported as saying, “They’re [the Chinese] increas-
ingly moving their navy further distances from their shores in various types of exercises
and activities. And that’s a reality.” In the report the increased strength of China’s navy
is linked to the potential conflict over Taiwan, but the increased geographic scope of
China’s navy may also be linked to its global pursuit of oil supplies. Furthermore, the
report notes US anger at the EU’s plan to sell weapon’s technology to China. Referring
back to Modelski’s model, the actions of the EU may be interpreted as delegitimation,
while the build up of China’s navy and the potential for fighting in the Taiwan Strait
and beyond points to the possibility of subsequent phases in the cycle: deconcentration
and global war.
The third story refers to developments in post-war Iraq, and especially the political
horse-trading that occurred after the elections of January 2005. The strong showing of
the Iraqi Kurds in the election, second behind a Shi’ite alliance put them in a very strong
position, as discussions were underway to put together a ruling coalition. The Kurds
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
209
Activity
Find a news magazine such as the
Economist
,
Atlantic Monthly
, the 
New Yorker
,
Time
, or one of the color supplements of the Sunday newspapers. These maga-
zines usually carry longer stories on current conflicts than the daily newspapers
and include interviews with the participants and victims. 
Explore an article of your choice and use the interviews and descriptions of the
participant’s circumstances to identify different structures and how they interact. 
Do the interviews show divisions within particular groups or agents, such as polit-
ical parties, ethnic groups, etc.? In other words, does the article exemplify how
geopolitical agents are not singular?
If you are in a class or other group setting, you could do this project with someone
else and explore the same conflict using different media sources. This will not only
help you in identifying more structures and types of agency, but you may also
consider how different media outlets emphasize different structures and types of
agency over others. For example, were political parties and state ministries or
departments emphasized in one source while protest groups, women’s groups, and
other social groups emphasized in another?

---

demands centered upon increased autonomy for the Kurdish area of northern Iraq.
However, the demands read as a manifesto for an independent Kurdistan and included:
ownership over the regions oil reserves and control of the revenues; authority to main-
tain a 100,000 strong armed militia; ministries that would parallel those in Baghdad;
and authority over fiscal policy. The dominant geopolitics in this case is that of nation-
alism, the pressure for an independent Kurdistan. Also, conflict over the structures of
the nation and state in this case are part of the broader struggle of the United States 
to achieve its goals in the Arab world. In what may also be interpreted as evidence of
delegitimation, as defined by Modelski’s model, the election results as a whole, the
hostility of segments of the Iraqi population, and the lack of acquiescence toward 
US goals by many others, suggest that both the coercive and integrative power of the
world leader are being challenged. In October 2005, by way of a referendum, the people
of Iraq approved a new constitution. However, the negotiations prior to the vote between
Iraqi parties over the form of the constitution show the potential for future conflict.
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
210
Box 8.2 Geopolitics of nature
Classic geopolitics was concerned with nature in a particular manner; access and
control to resources. Resources remain a central calculation in contemporary
geopolitics. Indeed, many recent publications are eager to point out the role of oil
in the current deployment of US troops in the Middle East and Central Asia.
Another way in which nature enters contemporary geopolitics is the definition
“failed states” given to countries that do not have stable governmental institutions
to facilitate the extraction of resources. These two approaches to nature illustrate
the feminist and Marxist critiques of the geopolitical vision: geopolitics is about
gaining access, control and domination through the division of territory.
In addition to questions over the control of natural resources, the awareness of
the fragility of the global ecosystem has also provoked transnational ecological
geopolitics. On the one hand, social movements such as the anti-globalization
movement discussed in Box 7.1 and NGOs such as Greenpeace are geopolitical
agents with their own agenda that is not limited to national interest. On the other
hand, negotiations between states over global warming, for example, reflect state
calculations about economic pros and cons, but within a context of growing aware-
ness of a common global problem.
The tension between interstate competition for natural resources and the
geopolitical agency of social movements illustrates the way in which very different
geopolitical agents combine to set agendas and make change.
For further reading about the geopolitics of resource control see Klare (2004).
For a selection of readings about the geopolitics of environmentalism see the
collection of essays on environmental geopolitics in