EURASIA, GEOPOLITICS, AND AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY
Abstract
Eurasia, a geopolitical conceptual construct of the 20th century, has been analyzed from diverse perspectives. Many distinguished scholars have contributed to this effort. Such analytical exercises inevitably call for further study and commentary on complex dynamics of Eurasian political and economic processes. This global corner currently attracts substantial international attention from great powers and small players alike. Global geopolitical corners have historically been defined by great powers involved in theatrics of international struggle. International politics cannot avoid clashes of interests among participants; such is the nature of the internation-al system composed of nation-states. Currently, the Russian Federation and the United States of America vying to have their vision of regional order prevail in Eurasia. Fortunately, their competition lacks drama of the Cold War, but is no less important, especially for the Eurasian countries directly affected by potential outcomes. To a considerable extent, Moscow and Washington continue espousing incompatible ways of doing global politics. The Russians still see the world divided among discrete spheres of influence, resembling the divisions of the Cold War. Such perceptions of the divided world are no longer global in scope, and not necessarily as rigid as they used to be, but ultimately Moscow’s conception of great power rests on controlled access to geo-graphic space they could call solely their own. On the other hand, the Americans continue to be com-mitted to the ideas of the open world, free markets, and economic exchange unimpeded by political roadblocks. Washington has been largely married to such a vision since the 1940s, and American foreign policy makers have consistently and deliberately pursued policies that encourage maximum openness and interdependency in the world. Clash between these two visions largely determines the boundaries of Eurasia as a geopolitical construct, and its outcomes will be paramount for the overall direction of its many political processes.
Downloads
References
See: E. Ismailov, “Central Eurasia: Its Geopolitical Function in the 21st Century,” Central Asia and the Caucasus,No. 2 (50), 2008, pp. 7-29.
Ibid., p. 29.
Ibid., p. 27.
See: V. Papava, “‘Central Caucasasia’ Instead of ‘Central Eurasia’,” Central Asia and the Caucasus, No. 2 (50),2008, pp. 30-42.
Ibid., p. 40.
For a lengthy discussions of the new Eurasianism, see: A. Dugin, Osnovy geopolitiki, ARKTOGEIA-tsentr, Mos-cow, 1999.
Frolovskiy contributed to the original Eurasian volume, Exodus to the East, published in Sofia, Bulgaria, in 1921.
e soon distanced himself from Eurasians, especially after his ordination to priesthood, as late in the 1920s the group was infiltrated and manipulated by the Soviet intelligence services.
The founder of morphophonology, Trubetskoi worked in Vienna from 1922. In 1938, he died of a heart attack trig-gered by persecution by Nazi authorities who were irritated by Trubetskoi’s criticism of Hitler’s lunatic theories.
In 1927, Vernadskiy accepted a job at Yale University, and moved to the United States, where he remained until his death in 1973. He was son of Vladimir Vernadskiy, a groundbreaking geochemist and mineralogist, who remained in Russia after the 1917 revolution, and died in 1945.
A close friend of Trubetskoi’s, Iakobson (sometimes spelled Jakobson) pioneered the development of structural analysis of language, poetry, and art. He championed Trubetskoi’s ideas after his friend’s premature death. Iakobson fled to the United States with Nazi advances to various parts of Europe, and worked at Harvard University, and the Massachu-setts Institute of Technology.
Chkheidze wrote about the Bolshevik party and “Russian geopolitics” (see, for instance: C. Chkheidze, “Iz oblasti Russkoi geopolitiki,” in: Tridsatye gody, ed. by N.N. Alekseev, et. al., Izdanie Evraziitsev, Prague, 1930).
See: R.O. Iakobson, “Doklad: O fonologicheskikh iazikovikh soiuzakh,” in: R.O. Iakobson, P.N. Savitskiy, Evraziia v svete iazikoznaniia, Izdanie Evraziitsev, Prague, 1931.
Lenin’s famed theory of imperialism was largely based on Hobson’s 1902 book Imperialism, which also influenced Trotsky, and many other Marxists.
Margaret Macmillan’s Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World is perhaps the best analysis of the post-World War I peace conference and its results (Random House, 2003).
Sir H.J. Mackinder, Democratic Ideals and Reality: A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction, New York, Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1942, p. 150.
Lenin addresses his disagreements with Kautsky in Chapter VII entitled “Imperialism as a Special Stage of Capi-talism” of his Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism.
Ibidem.
The book was published in German: R. Kjellén, Der Staat als Lebensform, S. Hirzel, Leipzig, 1917.
According to Kjellén, “die Geopolitik ist die Lehre über den Staat als geographischem Organismus oder Erschei-nung im Raum” (R. Kjellén, op. cit., p. 46).
Mackinder was also influenced by German political geographer Friedrich Ratzel, another champion of Charles Darwin’s ideas in social science, but his ideas about international relations were rather more sophisticated than those of Kjellén.
The Bretton Woods financial system ended in 1971, when President Nixon removed the U.S. from this post-war arrangement, and world currencies, by default became floated.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2008 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
