History of geopolitics. Geopolitics as a scientific discipline. Russian school of geopolitics

Geopolitics as a science arose in turn of XIX-XX centuries, but there is still no precise formulation of this concept. This characteristic all emerging sciences. Disputes about the object and subject of geopolitics have been going on for about a hundred years. As a rule, the concept of “geopolitics” is interpreted extremely broadly, which makes it difficult to determine the main features and range of problems inherent in this science, and therefore the boundaries of geopolitics turn out to be blurred, often moving into the field of other scientific disciplines, for example, philosophical, historical, economic, natural resource, environmental , international relations, foreign policy, etc.

The history and fate of geopolitics as a science is paradoxical. On the one hand, the concept itself seems to have become familiar and is actively used in modern politics. Geopolitical journals and institutes are multiplying. Texts by the founders of this discipline are published and republished, conferences and symposia are organized, and geopolitical committees and commissions are created.

There are three historical stages in the development of geopolitics as a science:

1. Prehistory of geopolitics: there is no separate geopolitical branch of knowledge, and all ideas are an integral part of philosophical teachings and historical research.

2. Classical geopolitics: the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries, when the main geopolitical theories and national schools of geopolitics were formed from individual ideas and concepts.

3. Modern geopolitics: after World War II (although some theories and strategies were formulated earlier, such as the military strategy of air superiority).

The idea of geopolitics (Greek ge - Earth, politike - the art of statecraft) existed already in ancient times. The interrelationship of soil and blood, space and power, geography and politics was noted by ancient scholars; ancient authors outlined the theory of the influence of environment on political history. The concept of geographic determinism is believed to be the most ancient source of geopolitical knowledge. Ideas about the influence of climate, soils, rivers, seas on history and people can be found in Hippocrates, Polybius, Thucydides, Aristotle, Cicero and others.

Ancient geopolitical thought was inherited by the Muslim East. It received its greatest development in the works of Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406). Of all geographical factors, he attached the greatest importance to climate. Only in countries with a temperate climate are people able to engage in cultural activities. Residents of the south have no incentive for this, since they do not need durable housing or clothing, and receive food from nature itself; residents of the north, on the contrary, live in extreme conditions and spend all their energy on obtaining food, building housing, and making clothes. They do not have time to engage in science, culture, or education. Moreover, in countries with a temperate climate, the most active force is the nomads, who have physical and moral superiority over settled peoples. Therefore, nomads periodically seize countries with settled populations and create empires. But after three or four generations, the descendants lose their positive qualities, then a new wave of nomads emerges from the steppes and history repeats itself.

The next stage in the development of geopolitical ideas was the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries and the Age of Enlightenment. The French scientist Jean Bodin (1530–1596) in his work “Six Books of the State” (1577) renewed interest in the concept of geographical determinism. He explained the differences and changes in the state structure by three reasons: Divine will, human arbitrariness, and the influence of nature. He gave the main place to geographical reasons, attaching particular importance to climate.

Charles Montesquieu (1689–1755) in his work “On the Spirit of Laws” (1748) formulated the credo of geographical determinism: “The power of climate is the first power on earth.”

Starting from the 19th century, the palm in the development of geographical determinism passed to German scientists - G.-W.-F. Hegel, K. Ritter, A. Humboldt. These researchers criticized vulgar geopolitical determinism, taking a more mature and balanced approach to the interpretation of natural factors and their influence on political history. Thus, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831) in a special section of the introduction to his lectures on the philosophy of history, entitled “Geographical Basis world history”, emphasized: “You should neither exaggerate nor diminish the importance of nature; the mild Ionian climate, of course, greatly contributed to the grace of Homer’s poems, but climate alone cannot give birth to Homers, and does not always give birth to them; no singers appeared under the rule of the Turks.”

Continental European school of geopolitics in late XIX– early 20th century served as the basis of geopolitics as a science. In the works of European geopoliticians of this period - F. Ratzel, R. Kjellen, F. Naumann and others, the main ideas of the continental school were developed: the theory of living space, the laws of territorial expansion, the idea of “Middle Europe”, the concept of the continental bloc.

It is generally accepted that geopolitical thought in the proper sense of the word begins with the German geographer Friedrich Ratzel (1844–1904). His main works include “Ethnic Studies” (1886–1888), “Laws of Spatial Growth of the State” (1896), “Political Geography” (1897), “The Sea as a Source of the Power of Nations” (1900), “Land and Life” (1901 –1902), which were of great importance for the formation of the German geopolitical school.

F. Ratzel put forward the “basic” laws of expansion, or spatial growth of the state:

coverage of politically sensitive places;

continuous change in the scale of political spaces;

competition with neighboring states, during which the winning state receives part of the territories of the losing states as a reward;

population growth and, as a consequence, the need for new lands outside the country.

A follower of F. Ratzel, professor of history and political science at Gothenburg (1901–1916) and Uppsala (1916–1922) universities, Rudolf Kjellen (1864–1922), in his work “The State as a Form of Life,” developing the ideas of Ratzel’s biological teachings, argued that, as and people, states are feeling and thinking beings16. Kjellen became famous in Europe and beyond thanks to the philosophical system he developed for the study of international relations, which he associated with the “natural laws” of international politics, when “states, developing within constant or changing borders, growing or dying, under any circumstances retain certain personal traits." He emphasized that, “like political science, geopolitics keeps in its field of view the unity of the state, thereby contributing to the understanding of its essence, while political geography studies the earth's surface as the habitat of mankind in its relation to other properties of the Earth.”

The scientific concepts of F. Ratzel and R. Kjellen caused a stream of geopolitical publications in Germany, which were united by the main idea: the state is a conscious organism fighting for living space.

The development of the geopolitical idea of expanding living space was continued by the German retired general, professor of geography Karl Haushofer (1869–1946), who, on the basis of existing theories, created a scientific geopolitical school and founded the Institute of Geopolitics at the University of Munich. Together with the geopolitician E. Obst, he founded the “journal of geopolitics” in 1924, turning it, in collaboration with like-minded people O. Maulle, H. Lautensach and S. Termer, into the central organ of German geopolitics.

It is important to note that in the first half of the 20th century. In German geopolitics, along with the nationalist one, the liberal-democratic direction also developed, whose representatives were I. Partch, F. Naumann, K. Schmitt and others. It originated during the period of the Napoleonic invasion, which buried the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation. Then the educated part of the Germans came to the conviction that the formation of the future political order and the future of Germany should depend on the influence and attitudes not of politicians, but of the intellectual elite of the state in the person of poets and writers, historians and philosophers.

The founder of the French school of geopolitics was the professional geographer Vidal de la Blanche (1845–1918), who headed the department of geography at the Sorbonne during the last 20 years of his life. He sharply criticized F. Ratzel for overestimating natural and spatial factors in the development of the state. Vidal de la Blanche's geopolitical concept was based on the “continuous relationship between soil and man.” He developed new approach to the assessment of geopolitical processes - possibilism (from the French possible - possible), according to which a geographical location can become a truly geopolitical factor, but this depends on the person living within a given space.

De la Blanche's followers and students were such famous French geopoliticians as Jacques Ancel (1882–1943) and Albert Demangeon (1872–1940), who, in accordance with the requirements of the time, put forward the concepts of border conventions and European integration, on which the geopolitical ideology of the European Union is based.

The founder of the American school of geopolitics is the naval theorist and historian, practitioner of naval strategy and active politician, Rear Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan (1840–1914). Almost simultaneously with the English naval theorist and historian Vice Admiral Philip Howard Colomb (1831–1899), he created the theory of so-called sea power, according to which dominance at sea is the main condition for victory in war.

In the 30s–40s. The greatest theorist of the new American politics of the 20th century was the geographer Nicholas Spykman (1893–1944), who headed the Institute of International Affairs at Yale University. He integrated Mahan's idea of sea power and Mackinder's Heartland theory from the perspective of US interests. He defined geopolitics as a scientific discipline that develops the foundations of a country's security.

Consigned to oblivion after 1945, blamed for the tragedy and misfortunes of the last century, geopolitics has been developed again only recently. Coming out of purgatory and oblivion, it was reborn in the modest guise of a science of the intentions and behavior of actors on the international stage over a long historical basis and in perspective.

At the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. geopolitics has freed itself from its former “pathology”. But the question arises: does it have the right to exist, being “sandwiched” between geography and history? The answer is clear: it certainly does. Geopolitics combined with economic and political geographies is not a simple addition to diplomatic history or military history.

Attitudes towards geopolitics in our country begin to change only in the late 80s of the last century. Significant changes that have occurred in the international arena have had an impact. The collapse of the USSR, the world socialist system, the unification of Germany, and the wave of “velvet” revolutions in Eastern European countries led to the complete destruction of the “two-bloc” structure of international relations. The balance of power in the world has changed. The influence of Russia was reduced, which in territorial terms was thrown back to the borders of the 17th century. In addition, Russia turned out to be ideologically disarmed. As T. A. Mikhailov rightly notes, at present in the country there is essentially no theoretical basis explanations of foreign policy, goals and identity of Russia, its future development.

The current stage of development of geopolitics is characterized by a significant change in the geopolitical structure of the world, a revision of the main classical theories of geopolitics, the formation of new geopolitical schools corresponding to new authors of modern geopolitics (American, European, Russian, New China, New Indian, etc.), new directions such as Atlanticism, mondialism , globalism, and new theories.

Significant differences between classical and modern geopolitics are dictated by technical and technological progress and the resulting changes in the economic and military power of states - the main players on the world geopolitical stage of the 21st century, changes in state, ethnic, religious and civilizational borders. Therefore, the classical paradigm of the continuation of Land and Sea was replaced by the paradigm of the development of new spaces - physical (air, underwater space, near and further space) and cultural (radio, television, Internet, film industry, literature, art).

Geopolitics is a science that studies and analyzes in unity geographical, historical, political and other interacting factors that influence the strategic potential of a state. The object of geopolitics as a science is the planetary space and the resources it possesses, geopolitical processes and phenomena in the world community as a system. The subject of geopolitics is the relationship between state policy and spatial characteristics of statehood, geopolitical interests and relations between subjects of world politics.

Virtually all thinkers ancient world thought about the influence of the surrounding geographical environment on human political life.

Aristotle in “Politics” noted that the inhabitants of cold countries are brave, but lack imagination and technical ingenuity, therefore, although they retain freedom longer than other peoples, they are not able to govern their neighbors and, therefore, need political leadership. Southern (Asian) peoples, on the contrary, are thoughtful and inventive, but not energetic, therefore slavery and subjugation are their “natural state.” The Greeks, living in the intermediate region, combine the best qualities of both. This was the beginning of the tradition of geographical determinism in political theory.

This approach was continued by Jean Woden, who came to the conclusion that the geographical environment affects human development through the psyche and character of peoples. During the Age of Enlightenment, this direction was developed by C. Montesquieu. In his treatise On the Spirit of Laws, he considered the influence of climate, space, soil, culture and economics as elements shaping history.

In the 11th century, the center of political and geographical research moved to Germany. K. Ritter (1779-1859), professor, head of the Berlin Geographical Society, developed a system of regional division of the world within a single global space. He divided the Earth into two hemispheres: water (sea) and land (continental). This difference, in his opinion, had a significant impact on the character of the peoples inhabiting these regions.

In the second half of the 19th century, the German researcher Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904) essentially formulated the main directions of the modern geopolitical view of the world. The foundation of his concept was the works “Anthropogeography” and “Political Geography”. Noting that “...the properties of the state turn out to be the properties of the people and the land,” he came to the conclusion that the state is made up of the territorial topography and their understanding by the people.

Based on these reflections, F. Ratzel formulated the following seven laws:

1. The space of states grows along with the growth of culture.

2. The growth of states is accompanied by other symptoms of development: ideas, trade, missionary work, increased activity.

3. The growth of states is carried out through the merger and absorption of small states.

4. The border is a peripheral organ of the state and as such serves as evidence of its growth, strength or weakness and changes in this organism.

5. In its growth, the state seeks to absorb the most valuable elements of the physical environment, coastlines, river beds, plains, and resource-rich areas.

6. The general tendency to merge, branching out, passes to primitive states from the outside, from higher civilizations.

Consequently, the state is born, grows, dies, like a living being, its spatial expansion and contraction are natural processes associated with its internal life cycle.

F. Ratzel's conclusion that geographic space can act as a political force formed the basis of a new science - geopolitics. He was also one of the first to develop the theory of the "oceanic cycle". In this theory, F. Ratzel substantiated the idea of the progressive movement of the strategic centers of the world from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic, and then to the Pacific Ocean.

Y.-R. Kjellen, who was the first to use the term “geopolitics,” considered the struggle for existence to be the essence of any “organism-state.” War, in his opinion, is a specific form of manifestation of the struggle for geographical space. Y.-R. Kjellen came close to creating a general geopolitical picture of the world.

Karl Haushofer (1869-1946) is considered the main popularizer and creator of the first geopolitical school. In a huge number of his articles and books, the category “living space” played a central role. It appeared in his concepts under the impression of the works of F. Malthus (1766-1834), who came to the conclusion that population growth obeys eternal biological laws and occurs faster (geometric progression) than the growth of food production. Therefore, wars are inevitable. Countries need to expand their “living space” to survive.

Introduction

The emergence of geopolitics as a science at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. is determined not only by the logic of the development of scientific knowledge, but primarily by the need to comprehend new political realities. This science appeared at a time when the world as a whole was divided between the main opposing centers. A new division of the world is essentially a “redivision of what has already been divided,” i.e. transition from one "owner" to another, and not from mismanagement to "owner". The redivisions of the world have led to a significant increase in the level of conflict in the world. This circumstance prompted scientific research aimed at improving the methods of struggle between the main geopolitical forces on the world stage. At the end of the 20th century. It was once again confirmed that the economic factor is one of the leading ones in the geopolitical balance of forces.

Geopolitics as a science

Until now, there is no clear and complete formulation of the concept of “geopolitics” in the scientific literature. This is a characteristic feature of all emerging sciences. Disputes about the object and subject of geopolitics have been going on for about a hundred years. The concept of “geopolitics” is most often interpreted extremely broadly. As a result, this science is deprived of its characteristic features, its boundaries become extremely blurred, turning into the subject of economic, political, military-strategic, natural resource, environmental and other disciplines, international relations, foreign policy, etc.

Many researchers see geopolitics as a science that studies a complex of geographical, historical, political and other factors that interact with each other and have a great influence on the strategic potential of the state.

The Swedish scientist Rudolf Kjellen (1864-1922) introduced the concept of “geopolitics” into scientific circulation. He defined the science acting under this name as “a doctrine that considers the state as a geographical organism or spatial phenomenon.”

A more detailed definition is given in the German magazine “Zeitschrift für Geopolitik”: “Geopolitics is the science of the relationship between the earth and political processes. It is based on the broad foundation of geography, especially political geography, which is the science of political organisms in space and their structure.” More "Moreover, geopolitics aims to provide an appropriate means of political action and give direction to political life as a whole. Thus, geopolitics becomes an art, namely the art of guiding practical politics. Geopolitics is the geographical mind of the state."

Geopolitics considers the state not statically - as a permanent, unchanging formation, but dynamically - as a living being. This approach was proposed by the German theorist Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904). Geopolitics studies the state mainly in its relation to its environment, primarily to space, and aims to solve problems arising from spatial relations. According to F. Ratzel, unlike political geography, geopolitics is not interested in such issues as the position, shape, size or borders of a state, its economy, trade, and culture. All this relates to a greater extent to the sphere of political geography, which is often limited to describing the static state of the state, although it can also comprehend the dynamics of its past development.

Geopolitics studies political phenomena in their spatial relationships, their impact on the Earth, and on cultural factors. It is a geographically interpreted policy, an intermediate science, without an independent field of study. More politically inclined, it focuses on political phenomena and seeks to provide a geographical interpretation and analysis of the geographical aspects of these phenomena.

Political scientist E.A. Pozdnyakov argues that geopolitics focuses its main attention on revealing and studying the possibilities of active use by politics of factors of the physical environment and influencing it in the interests of the military-political, economic and environmental security of the state. Practical geopolitics studies everything related to the territorial problems of a state, its borders, and the rational use and distribution of resources, including human resources.

So, we can formulate a brief definition: geopolitics is a science, a system of knowledge about control over space. Geopolitics considers space from the point of view of politics (the state). It is more dynamic compared to political geography.

Within the framework of this science, two directions are distinguished: prescriptive, or doctrinal-normative, geopolitics, and evaluative-conceptual geopolitics. The German school of Haushofer can be classified as the first movement, and the Anglo-American school (Mackinder, Spykman, Cohen) as the second, although it is very difficult to draw clear dividing lines between these schools.

Geopolitics is becoming increasingly enriched and filled with specific content, and is increasingly contributing to changes in the modern world. Of course, this becomes possible because it is based on the scientific basis of many disciplines. Geopolitics has become not only a real tool for changing the world, but increasingly serves as the key to predicting the policies of leading countries and continents.

By the end of the 19th century, when the “tasty colonial pie” was divided among the strongest powers, the young German Empire quickly burst onto the world stage, which, due to objective historical reasons, was late to the colonial division of the world. As a result, the policy of its ruling circles was determined by the program of strengthening the economic power of the country and preparing the army and navy for a war to redistribute the world and establish world domination. The program, supported by various sectors of German society, nevertheless needed ideological support during the imperial period and the years of the Nazi dictatorship. Colonial ideas and the ideology of the expansion of “pan-Germanism”, in fact, contributed to the fulfillment of the public order to create first a geopolitical concept, and then geopolitical science. It must be emphasized that in Germany, geopolitics as a science was called upon to justify the upcoming redivision of the world, to present it as a completely natural and progressive phenomenon in the development of civilization. By the way, starting from the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries, European states needed such justification for colonial conquests as a means of reducing the potential for internal contradictions.

In the Soviet Union, the term “geopolitics” was essentially not used, as it was compromised for a long time by its interpretation by Nazi ideologists. In many publications of the post-war period, geopolitics was interpreted as an American-fascist expansionist doctrine.

A balanced approach to geopolitics was first reflected in the Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary (1989), where geopolitics is defined as a Western political science concept, according to which “the policies of states, especially foreign ones, are mainly predetermined by geographical factors: spatial location, the presence or absence of certain natural resources, climate , population density and its growth rate, etc.”

Today geopolitics is one of the rapidly developing social sciences, its terminology has become firmly established in the speeches of politicians, military personnel, diplomats, and journalists.

Geopolitics considers space from the point of view of the policies of a state or a coalition of states, and the concept of space is constantly expanding. At first, space was considered as the space of land (land) and water (oceans and seas). Therefore, for geopolitics, the dichotomy “land – sea” is of fundamental importance, denoting two different types of development of territorial space. The first is connected with the land, the second with the sea. Hence the division of countries into maritime and continental. Then, with the advent of aviation and astronautics, space began to be perceived not only in the horizontal, but also in the vertical dimension: land (sea) space, air, space. There are also other types of space, for example information space.

As a science, geopolitics began to take shape at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, and took systematic form at the end of the 20th century. Today, that is, in the 21st century, the process of its formation is still far from complete.

At the end of the 19th century. geopolitics was understood as the spatial concept of a living organism rooted in space, within the natural framework of which its expansion and development took place, without which the state ultimately weakened and died (F. Ratzel).

In the first half of the 20th century. the ideas of the biological-organizational essence of F. Ratzel’s concept were developed in the works of R. Kjellen, K. Haushofer, O. Maul, K. Schmitt and others. They believed that the state’s struggle for space consists of conquest and subsequent colonization of the captured territories. Since the struggle for space is subject to the eternal laws of nature, its leading factor is the power of the state. With its help, it is able to unite weak ethnic groups around itself and thereby create a new economic space, the geographical center of which will be Germany.

As a result of the geopolitical compression of Russia at the end of the 20th century, which led to a geopolitical imbalance in the world, it became possible to redistribute its resource component using modern means of expansion. And states, rich in resources, but without economic or military power, in order to prevent the division of their wealth, began to strive to restore their geopolitical field by creating regional integration associations and unions.

Thus, if we build a historical transformation of the concept of “geopolitics,” we can conclude that throughout the history of mankind, in the course of the development of geospace, changes have occurred both in the composition of participants in international relations and in their interests. This accordingly changed the content of the concept of “geopolitics”, which directly influenced the formation and development of national geopolitical schools.

The term “geopolitics” was introduced into scientific circulation by the Swedish researcher R. Kjellen. Continuing to develop the doctrine of F. Ratzel about the “struggle of the state for space,” he formulated a definition of geopolitics as a science: “Geopolitics is the doctrine of the state as a geographical organism or phenomenon in space: as a land, territory, region, or, more meaningfully, a territorial form of power"1.

In the 20s XX century the author of the original geopolitical concept of the continental bloc, K. Haushofer, argued that “geopolitics serves to substantiate the right to soil, to land,” not only to land “located within the imperial borders (of Germany. - S.F.), but also to land in in a broader sense..."2.

In 1962, one of the authors of the concept of industrial society, French sociologist and theorist in the field of international relations Raymond Aron, came to the conclusion that “geopolitics combines geographical schematization of diplomatic-strategic relations with economic-geographical analysis of resources, with interpretation diplomatic relations, taking into account the way of life (sedentary, nomadic, agricultural, seafaring) and the habitat of these peoples”3.

Today, when the world has entered the era of globalization, there are many interpretations of the content of the concept of “geopolitics”. In the domestic popular encyclopedia “Geopolitics”, published in 2002, the following formulation is given: “Geopolitics is the theory and practice of modern international relations and prospects for their development, taking into account the large-scale systemic influence of geographical, political, economic, military, demographic, environmental, scientific technical and other factors”4.

In the conceptual context of the provisions of this textbook, it seems possible to define geopolitics as the science of the political features of the development of space and as the practice of control over it by subjects of world politics (L.O. Ternovaya, S.V. Fokin).

The categorical apparatus of modern geopolitics actively uses both concepts that came from military sciences - border, buffer zone, balance of power, bloc, and philosophical categories - national idea, civilization, national identity. The main concept in geopolitics is the concept of national interest, to which all other interests, including political ones, must be subordinated.

In geopolitics, the category “expansion” is often used, meaning territorial acquisitions or the establishment of military-political spheres of influence. Expansion can be not only military and forceful, but also economic, trade, ideological, informational, etc.

As geopolitical science developed, it introduced new specific geopolitical categories into circulation. These include, first of all, the category “geostrategy,” which denotes the full range of geopolitical analysis - analysis of the strength and importance of states in the international arena, the possibility of a strategic offensive, and readiness for strategic defense.

The next stage in the development of geopolitical ideas was the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries and the Age of Enlightenment. The French scientist Jean Bodin (1530–1596) in his work “Six Books of the State” (1577) reawakened interest in the concept of geographical determinism. He explained the differences and changes in the state structure by three reasons: Divine will, human arbitrariness, and the influence of nature. He gave the main place to geographical reasons, attaching particular importance to climate.

Charles Montesquieu (1689–1755) in his work “On the Spirit of Laws” (1748) formulated the credo of geographical determinism: “The power of climate is the first power on earth”5. He wrote: “The cowardice of the peoples of hot climates always led them to slavery, while the courage of the peoples of cold climates preserved their freedom.”6

Starting from the 19th century, the palm in the development of geographical determinism passed to German scientists - G.-W.-F. Hegel, K. Ritter, A. Humboldt. These researchers criticized vulgar geopolitical determinism, taking a more mature and balanced approach to the interpretation of natural factors and their influence on political history. Thus, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831), in a special section of the introduction to his lectures on the philosophy of history, entitled “The Geographical Basis of World History,” emphasized: “You should neither exaggerate nor diminish the importance of nature; the mild Ionian climate, of course, greatly contributed to the grace of Homer’s poems, but climate alone cannot give birth to Homers, and does not always give birth to them; no singers appeared under the rule of the Turks.”7

Continental European school of geopolitics at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th century. served as the basis of geopolitics as a science. In the works of European geopoliticians of this period - F. Ratzel, R. Kjellen, F. Naumann and others, the main ideas of the continental school were developed: the theory of living space, the laws of territorial expansion, the idea of “Middle Europe”, the concept of the continental bloc.

From the beginning of its formation, the Continental European school declared its commitment to the idea of a nation and national space. For European scientists, the space had cultural significance. The cultural centrism of European geopolitics was based on the idea of an inextricable connection between faith, soil and blood.

With all the diversity of European geopolitical constructions, the central concept for the European school is the concept of a continental block of states. At different stages it acquired specific concrete historical features: “Axis countries” (R. Kjellen), “Middle Europe” (F. Naumann), the “Berlin – Moscow – Tokyo” axis (K. Haushofer), “Europe from Dublin to Vladivostok” (J. Thiriard). In practice, the concept of a continental block in the 20th century. found its embodiment in the European Union.

In “Political Geography” F. Ratzel concluded that the state is a spiritual and moral organism connected with the earth. It, just like a biological organism, arises, grows and disappears. And since the development of the state requires vast continental territories, the people inhabiting the state must learn to move from the perception of a small territory to the perception of a larger territory. F. Ratzel put forward the “basic” laws of expansion, or spatial growth of the state:

Coverage of politically sensitive places;

Continuous change in the scale of political spaces;

Competition with neighboring states, during which the winning state receives part of the territories of the losing states as a reward;

Population growth and, as a consequence, the need for new lands outside the country.

In his next works, F. Ratzel brought the number of these laws to seven, including the border as a peripheral organ of the state as a sign of growth, strength or weakness and changes in his body and the desire to absorb the most valuable elements of the physical environment: coastlines, riverbeds rivers, resource-rich areas8.

F. Ratzel considered the territorial expansion of states “a general, universal trend. The development of contacts between people, exchange, trade is a prelude to the establishment of political control of the state over the new colonized territories”9. Taking this into account, he introduced the concepts of internal and external colonization into scientific circulation. It all starts with internal colonization. The external colonization that follows becomes decisive, and the new space into which a numerically growing people will “grow” will be a source from which it will draw new strength10.

F. Ratzel argued that “the struggle for existence... usually comes down to the struggle for the possession of space”11 and the geographical characteristics of the state are the main ones in the life of peoples, influencing their development and determining the course of world history. Everything that Ratzel argued applied primarily to Germany, because all its main economic and political problems, in his opinion, were associated with tight and unfair state borders, which served as an obstacle to the dynamic development of the country. Since “natural borders are an obstacle to the spread of organic forms... and border lines are often drawn completely arbitrarily”12, then “border areas - the areas of closest contact between states - turn out to be a natural arena of struggle”13. Therefore, “the establishment of correspondence between the territory and the ever-increasing number of people,” the scientist believed, is the highest goal of the state14.

Along with this, F. Ratzel emphasized that there are different types of peoples and states - weak and strong, dominant and subordinate, “leading peoples and executing peoples”15. In the German people, he naturally saw the traits of a leading people, with whom the future belongs.

A follower of F. Ratzel, professor of history and political science at Gothenburg (1901–1916) and Uppsala (1916–1922) universities, Rudolf Kjellen (1864–1922), in his work “The State as a Form of Life,” developing the ideas of Ratzel’s biological teachings, argued that, as and people, states are feeling and thinking beings16. Kjellen gained fame in Europe and beyond thanks to the philosophical system he developed for the study of international relations, which he associated with the “natural laws” of international politics, when “states, developing within constant or changing borders, growing or dying, under any circumstances retain certain personal traits”17. He emphasized that, “like political science, geopolitics keeps in its field of view the unity of the state, thereby contributing to the understanding of its essence, while political geography studies the earth’s surface as the habitat of humanity in its relation to other properties of the Earth”18.

In the course of scientific research, Kjellen came to the conclusion that, as in nature, for a state, which includes geographical space, people, economy, society and management, the struggle for its existence is a struggle for space: “Territory can expand through expansion, contraction due to external pressure, etc., but at each individual moment it determines the law of vital necessity, limiting the free will of the state in history”19.

In the Austrian journal “Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Staatswissenschaft” (Journal of General Science of State) No. 81 of 1925, in the article “Rudolf Kjellen and his significance for the German doctrine of state” it was emphasized that, in essence, geopolitics, according to Kjellen, is the science of “policy dealing with space”20.

The development of the geopolitical idea of expanding living space was continued by the German retired general, professor of geography Karl Haushofer (1869–1946), who, on the basis of existing theories, created a scientific geopolitical school and founded the Institute of Geopolitics at the University of Munich. Together with the geopolitician E. Obst, he founded the “Zeitschrift Geopolitik” (Journal of Geopolitics) in 1924, turning it, in collaboration with like-minded people O. Maulle, H. Lautensach and S. Termer, into the central organ of German geopolitics21.

Based on the ideas of F. Ratzel “about the state as a living being”, which, like a living organism, goes through its cycle of existence from birth to death, as well as on the views of the German philosopher O. Spengler “about independent cultures in the history of society” with their individual destinies and cycles per millennium, K. Haushofer scientifically substantiated his theory of the biogeographical essence of the border with its physical, biological and anthropogeographical boundaries and diverse border zones with transitional forms. His conclusions “about the sense of the psychology of the border” and that its implementation (“intensive development”) during the war by outstanding representatives of geography is a positive solution to the issue of “eliminating existing omissions”22, were associated with the substantiation of the idea of the overdue return of all German territories and colonies taken away according to the predatory Versailles Peace Treaty of 1919 from Germany, defeated in the First World War.

Haushofer argued that border lines have their own gradation according to political importance, size and value of space, which urgently requires “political-geographical forms of border transfer” and their implementation. This thesis was supposed to substantiate the important result for Germany obtained after the end of the conflicts and wars of the late 30s. XX century The feverish activity “to eliminate the thistle borders” will lead in the future to the fact that the Germans will lose almost nothing, but will return a lot23.

K. Haushofer’s conclusion about “space as a factor of strength” was used by the Hitlerite leadership to “awaken the brave people from their slumber” so that by “a just renewal of borders” they could finally “create a more stable structure of the future... not only in a peaceful, but and in wartime, not only with a pen or pencil, but also with weapons in the East and West”24.

K. Haushofer is the author of the concept of the continental block. The block (or axis) “Berlin – Moscow – Tokyo” was supposed to help Germany, which had entered into an alliance with Russia and Japan, to give a worthy response to the strategy of the sea powers. However, the National Socialist Hitler regime in its own way “corrected” Haushofer’s idea, creating instead of the Berlin-Moscow-Tokyo axis the Berlin-Rome axis, and with Tokyo concluding the Anti-Comintern Pact, to which Italy joined. The Haushofer school was considered the most fashionable in post-war Germany, and its fundamental thesis about the need to expand “living space” became a powerful incentive for preparing the German nation for revenge for defeat in the First World War.

K. Haushofer foresaw the orientation of the geopolitical aspirations of the United States along the “West-East” line and believed that this geopolitical expansion poses a serious threat to the world, since it could lead to the establishment of the dominance of the United States over the world. The geopolitical future of the planet, according to Haushofer, will depend on whether Anglo-American expansion along the parallels can suppress resistance to East Asian expansion along the meridians.

The formation of the concept of “Middle Europe” was started by the German poet and historian Ernst Moritz Arndt (1769–1860), who glorified the “Battle of the Nations” near Leipzig. He defined the German people as the heart of Europe; it is they who, by right of being the oldest and largest in the region, are called upon to become the educator of other peoples. Arndt emphasized: “...the passion of our people (German - S.F.) for honor, power and greatness is a historical process”25.

Many German scientists and politicians took part in the development of the concept of “Middle Europe”. Its scientific basis and structure were proposed to the German public by Breslau geography professor Joseph Partsch (1851–1925) and former pastor and future organizer of the German Democratic Party Friedrich Naumann (1860–1919) in publications in 1906 and 1915. books under one title - “Mitteleuropa” (Middle Europe).

The geopolitical idea of F. Naumann envisaged the revival of Germany within the borders of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation by creating a new subject of the world community - “Middle Europe”, where “for all large groups (population - S.F.) representing spiritual and material interests, The borders of the union states were blurred, as was partly already accomplished by establishing the community of banks, syndicates, trade unions, craft representative offices, agricultural chambers, unions of historians, doctors and many others”26. F. Naumann believed that to create this “state, economic and personal coexistence in the voluntary and organized fusion of one organism with another, in a community of ideas, culture, work, legal concepts and a thousand other great and small issues”27 it would take at least half a century.

According to Naumann's project for a European Union of States, Prague became a central European center, Hamburg remained a center of maritime trade, Berlin an exchange center, and Vienna a legal center28. This free integration interstate union was to be headed by Germany, which occupies a middle regional position, which was supposed to be able to unite the peoples of Central Europe into a single geopolitical and economic space. Naumann emphasized that “Middle Europe” should be German. For “world relations” it will use the German language, but at the same time “also take into account the national characteristics of the peoples included in it,” which will unite “into one whole in the pursuit of common economic goals,” and the basis for their internal communication will be a military alliance29.

At the same time, Naumann believed that the formation of “Middle Europe” would not end there. To provide it with raw materials and food, it is necessary to have adjacent agricultural areas and, as far as possible, “to expand its northern and southern coasts”30.

Professor of legal history, lawyer Carl Schmitt (1888–1950), in his book “The international legal order of the Greater Space with the prohibition of intervention by spatially alien forces” (Volkerrechtliche Grossraumordnung mit Interventionsverbot fur Raumfremde Machte), theoretically substantiated the geopolitical idea of the Greater Space (Grossraum). The core of this idea was the principle of “national life” put forward by the German state, based on the principle of “national respect”31. According to the principle of “national respect”, relations between large spaces should be built taking into account the new international law with its prevailing principle of non-interference in foreign policy and the principle of respect for every people and every nationality in domestic politics.

K. Schmitt criticized the geopolitical goal of the American government to establish US dominance over the world. He believed that post-war Germany would create its own “great space” in the center of Europe; its “recognizable and established territorial boundaries and limits” will become a barrier to the expansionist aspirations of the United States and will prevent this great power from interfering in the affairs of the European continent.

The founder of the French school of geopolitics was the professional geographer Vidal de la Blanche (1845–1918), who headed the department of geography at the Sorbonne during the last 20 years of his life. He sharply criticized F. Ratzel for overestimating natural and spatial factors in the development of the state. Vidal de la Blanche’s geopolitical concept was based on “the continuous relationship between soil and man”32. He developed a new approach to assessing geopolitical processes - possibilism (from the French possible - possible), according to which geographic location can become a truly geopolitical factor, but this depends on the person living within a given space.

From the very beginning, the Anglo-American school of geopolitics had a clearly applied character. Its important feature is the Atlanticist (or thalassocratic) orientation - the development of the concept of sea power, which is explained by the geographical position of the Anglo-American world, which dominates the seas and relies on the strength of the navy.

Sea power was considered by the Anglo-American school as an integral feature of civilization, most suitable for establishing world domination. That is why in this geopolitical tradition the concepts of world power, world domination, imperial geostrategy and a unipolar world have been most developed.

Concluding that “the possession or control and use of the sea are now and always have been great factors in the history of the world,”33 Mahan put forward the idea of the advantage of a maritime power over a continental one, as well as the idea of a constant confrontation between “the Latin race and the Slavic race.” According to his concept, the geographical position of a sea power “can not only favor the concentration of its forces, but also provide another strategic advantage - a central position and a good base for hostile operations against its probable enemies”34. The geographical position of a maritime power obliges it to have a powerful navy, for “if the belligerent party has a fleet that is significantly superior in strength to other fleets, then it can successfully insist on its demands”35. Mahan gave the correct forecast: “maritime destiny” will bring the United States to the level of a significant player in world politics and therefore the United States needs to begin building a powerful navy.

Mahan saw the main danger for “maritime civilization,” that is, for the United States, in the continental states of Eurasia, primarily in Russia and China, and secondly in Germany. Therefore, the fight against Russia, with this, in his words, “continuous continental mass,” is a long-term strategic task for the United States.

A. Mahan considered the most effective strategy to “strangle” the enemy, which was used by the American General McClellan during the period Civil War(1861–1865) between the 11 slave states of the South and the United States federal government. Its essence was to block enemy territories from the sea with high-speed ships, due to which all external communications of the southerners were blocked. As a result of the economic “strangulation” of the South, the North achieved victory.

A. T. Mahan defined “the main conditions influencing the sea power of nations”: 1) geographical location, 2) physical structure (here he included natural productivity and climate); 3) size of the territory; 4) population size; 5) the character of the people; 6) the nature of government (this included national institutions); later he added another important physical condition to them - the shape of the continent36.

Mahan's theoretical works - “The Influence of Sea Power on History: 1660–1783” (1890) and “America's Interest in Sea Power” (1897) influenced US policy and contributed to its transformation into one of the strongest naval powers in the world. His legacy was in demand not only in insular England, but also in continental Germany, which adopted on March 28, 1898 the draft of the Imperial Great Navy Law, as a result of which German fleet by 1913 it came in second place in the world after the British.

British geopolitics made a great contribution to the development of geopolitical thought. In terms of its longevity, the concept of the English geographer Halford Mackinder (1861–1947) occupies a worthy place in the general spectrum of achievements of geopolitical thought and its impact on international politics. For the first time, its main provisions on the “core area” of the global geopolitical system were set out in a report made by him on January 25, 1904 at the Royal geographical society and later published under the title “The Geographical Axis of History” in the English “Geographical Journal”37. To this day, Mackinder's concept is hotly debated. Nevertheless, in the 20th century. During the so-called interwar period, Mackinder's advice was heeded by all British government offices.

Mackinder was the first to give a complete geopolitical picture of the world of that time. He divided states from the point of view of their political system into two groups - northern and southern, emphasizing that world history shows continuous confrontation between continental and maritime powers38. His theory, later called the “heartland” theory, had a great influence on the formation of geopolitics in the English-speaking world, and, together with the theories of Ratzel and Kjellen, on further development German, and not only German geopolitics. It should be noted that if earlier geopolitical scientists thought in terms of a specific state, then Mackinder was one of the first to propose a global approach in scientific judgments about the Earth’s organism, about the geopolitical integrity of the world.

The Eurasian continent, according to Mackinder, is a “World Island” occupying a central place on planet Earth. In its center is the “heart of the world” (Heartland) - a region inaccessible to the armed forces of sea powers. Mackinder did not draw its exact boundaries; Moreover, he changed them from job to job (1904, 1919, 1943). But a significant part of Russia has always been located in the center of the “heartland” - from the White and Baltic Seas to the Caspian Sea, Lake Baikal and North-Eastern Siberia. “In the world as a whole,” Mackinder noted, “Russia occupies a central strategic position... It can strike in all directions, it can receive blows from all sides except the north... Not a single social revolution in Russia will change the geographical conditions of its existence”39 .

In Mackinder's model, on the mainland of Europe and Asia, the “heartland” is surrounded by an “inner crescent” (Germany, Austria, Turkey, India and China). It is these vast territories that serve as its protection that can become the object of expansion by sea powers. In turn, the “inner crescent” is surrounded by the “outer crescent”, which includes Britain, South Africa, the Americas, and Japan40.

The “world island” in Mackinder’s model, due to its geographical location, should become the main location of humanity on the planet. Consequently, the state that takes a dominant position on the “World Island” will dominate the world. The road to dominance over the “World Island” lies through mastering the “heartland”.

Based on his spatial-structural constructions, Mackinder derived three maxims:

Whoever controls Eastern Europe controls the “heartland”.

Whoever controls the “Heartland” commands the “World Island”.

Whoever controls the “World Island” commands the whole world.

In this regard, Mackinder emphasized, the dominant powers of the “inner crescent” need to maintain a balance between the Slavic world of the “heartland” and Germany, since their unification could undermine the dominance of the sea powers, and their open clash is fraught with dangerous consequences for the whole world41. The scientist emphasized that the balance of political forces is especially relevant, since it represents, on the one hand, a product of geographical conditions affecting the economy and strategy of states, and on the other, a product of the corresponding number, maturity, equipment and organization of competing peoples42.

In the 30s–40s. The greatest theorist of the new American politics of the 20th century was the geographer Nicholas Spykman (1893–1944), who headed the Institute of International Affairs at Yale University. He integrated Mahan's idea of sea power and Mackinder's “heartland” theory from the perspective of US interests. He defined geopolitics as a scientific discipline that develops the foundations of a country's security.

Spykman, having finally broken with the theory of traditional American isolationism, defended the idea of active US intervention in Eurasian affairs. He also determined the main directions of American geopolitical activity (1942 - “America's Strategy in World Politics”). It is characteristic that if Mackinder considered the “Heartland” to be the key zone of the world, Spykman considered the “Rimland” to be such a zone in Eurasia. In terms of geographical location, this zone corresponds to Mackinder’s “inner crescent”. It includes the coastal states of Eurasia. This “disputed belt,” or “buffer zone of conflict between continental and maritime powers,” was subject to “joint control,” since there was a confrontation between the oceanic hegemonic power (USA) and the owner of the “heartland” (USSR).

Spykman's model is called the “Heartland-Rimland”. In imitation of Mackinder, Spykman put forward his maxim: “He who rules the Rimland rules Eurasia, and he who rules Eurasia holds the fate of the world in his hands”43, that is, he controls the situation in the world.

Along with the development of geopolitics in England, France, Germany, and the USA, there was a process of developing geopolitical concepts and theories in other countries. Currently, geopolitics practically covers planetary and outer space and affects all spheres of human activity. In structural and functional terms, the world field includes political, economic, information, confessional, military-power and other types of space, within the boundaries of which the geo-interests of subjects of world politics are realized in practice. Therefore, taking into account the specifics of each type of space is important, and sometimes even decisive.

The emergence of geopolitics as a science at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. is determined not only by the logic of the development of scientific knowledge, but primarily by the need to comprehend new political realities. This science appeared at a time when the world as a whole was divided between the main opposing centers. The new division of the world is essentially a “redivision of what has already been divided,” i.e., a transition from one “owner” to another, and not from mismanagement to the “owner.” The redivisions of the world have led to a significant increase in the level of conflict in the world. This circumstance prompted scientific research aimed at improving the methods of struggle between the main geopolitical forces on the world stage. At the end of the 20th century. It was once again confirmed that the economic factor is one of the leading ones in the geopolitical balance of forces.

The emergence of the concept of “geopolitics” at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. is associated primarily with the increased compaction (in the demographic sense) of the earth's space. At this time, it became impossible for states to “throw out” the most active part of their population beyond their borders. A similar thing, for example, was carried out by Phenicia, which founded in the 9th century. BC. Carthage, Spain and Portugal in the 15th–16th centuries. during the period of their colonization of Central and South America, as well as England and France in the 17th–18th centuries, when they mastered North America. By this time, the earthly space turned out to be basically divided, and it became impossible for a number of states to make up for the lack of natural resources through annexations of countries and territories rich in this regard. To date, no generally accepted geopolitical doctrine has yet emerged. In particular, there are several interpretations of the essence of geopolitics. Kjellen believed that to create a strong state it is necessary to organically combine the following five elements: economic, demo-, socio-, political and geopolitics, i.e. geopolitics was defined as one of components politicians.

10. Reveal the essence of F. Ratzel’s geopolitical idea.
"Organic School" by Friedrich Ratzel
F. Ratzel's worldview and methodology were the ideas of evolutionism and Darwinism. In the system of views of the German scientist - the “father” of geopolitics - many of the ideas of the founder of sociology, the Frenchman Auguste Comte, are visible: evolutionism, recognition of the influence of the geographical environment on the development of the people, the state, the role of demographic and cosmic factors in the functioning of political systems, the life of ethnic groups and the state.
This influence of O. Comte is visible in the works of Ratzel: “Earth and Life. Comparative Geography", "Ethnic Studies" and in the fundamental book "Political Geography". Already in his work “Earth and Life”2 he considers the earth as a single whole: the solid, liquid and gaseous parts of the earth, as well as the life developing in them, are one whole, the elements of which are interconnected historically and are in continuous interaction. All this, writes F. Ratzel, “we call the organic understanding of the earth.” He considered water and air basins to be two seas, where the solid part of the earth was the bottom of these two seas. The scientist defines the first step of people to the sea as “the beginning of the world history of mankind.” Ethnic science is imperfect if it knows only farmers and cattle breeders, nomads and hunters. Sea peoples, according to Ratzel, form an original group: their distribution, dwellings, and activities are complete.
He considers the growth of states “a general, universal trend. The development of human contacts, exchange, trade is a prelude to the establishment of political state control over the new colonized territories. For him, trade and war are two forms, two stages in the process of the territorial state.”
Ratzel was one of the first to express the idea of the increasing importance of the sea for the development of civilization. The book “The Sea is the Source of the Power of Nations” (1900) contains all the basic ideas on which the science of geopolitics is still based. Each powerful power, the scientist rightly believes, must develop its naval forces, as this is required by the planetary scale of full-fledged expansion.

11. Describe the concept of “geopolitical eras”. List the eras.

Geopolitical eras.
1. Westphalia (1648-1815). Two blocs of European countries: Catholic. and Protestant. The 30 Years' War ended in 1648. Results: France is the strongest power in Europe, Holland is the strongest naval power. Opponents: weakened Spain and Austria. One of the great powers of Europe - Sweden, England is strengthening and challenging the positions of Holland and France. France created the “Eastern Barrier” against Austria, which does not allow Russia (Sweden, Poland, Turkey) into Europe.
Changes in the 18th century: Ross becomes a Great Power. Goll, Spain, Sweden are weakening and losing their status as Great Powers, Poland is losing its statehood. A new strong state emerges in Germany - Prussia. England fights with France with varying success and becomes the “mistress of the seas.” At the end of the 18th century, the Great French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, and defeats took place, which ended with the Congress of Vienna.
2. Vienna (1815-1918). At the beginning, Russia is a strong power on the continent. England, the strongest economic power (“workshop of the world”), creates a colonial empire, a policy of “brilliant isolation.” The essence of politics: there are no friends and allies, there are political interests. France is also creating a colonial empire. In the mid-19th century, new countries appeared: Italy and Germany. Russia is losing ground, but remains a great power. The United States is growing stronger in the New World. Doctrine: “We don’t care about the old world, but the old world shouldn’t care what happens to us.” On Far East strong Asian state - Japan. The First World War ends with the defeat of Germany and the Allies.
3. Versailles (1919-1946) The first social network appeared. state - the USSR, came under attack. The hegemon of Europe - France relies on the help of new small countries: Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, etc. Goal: Recreate the Eastern barrier in the rear of Germany so that it does not strengthen, and a barrier for the USSR. The United States assumes great importance; the president proclaims: give colonial countries freedom. In the 1920s, the USSR moved closer to Germany. Result: Second World War, the post-war world order was decided at the Potsdam Conference.
4. Potsdam (1945-1991) The collapse of colonial empires and the emergence of the 3rd world, the emergence of social. bloc around the USSR and the NATO bloc led by the USA and the former Great Powers England and France are “bending” under the USA.