Transcript Popular Geopolitics and the 21st Century

Popular Geopolitics
st
and the 21 Century
GEOG220 - Geopolitics
• What is ‘popular geopolitics’?
• Moving from formal and popular geopolitics
to critical, anti, and alter geopolitics
Back to the Cold War
“I don’t believe there is a military solution. But that is
not the only tool available to us. Economic sanctions
on Russia are having an impact. Capital has flown out
of Russia, banks are short of finance, and the Russian
stock market and Rouble have fallen significantly.“But
the most important point is surely this. Russia’s actions
pose a grave danger to the rest of Europe. Here in this
building – with its history shaped by the Blitz – we
shouldn’t need to be reminded of the consequences of
turning a blind eye when big countries in Europe bully
smaller countries… Mikhail Gorbachev has warned that
we are on the brink of a new Cold War. That is not an
outcome we believe to be inevitable – and neither is it
one we seek. And I will make that clear to President
Putin this weekend. But I will also be clear that if Russia
continues on its current path then we will keep upping
the pressure and Russia's relationship with the rest of
the World will be radically different in future.”
British PM Cameron, Nov 2014
“Asked whether the accusatory rhetoric between Moscow and
Washington and a noticeable increase in Russian displays of
military strength near western countries points to a new cold
war, Putin said two rounds of NATO expansion in central and
eastern Europe had been “significant geopolitical game
changers” that forced Russia to respond.” The Guardian citing
German channel ARD in Vladivostok, Nov 2014
About Russia’s intervention in Crimea “We think that [the
West] tried to talk to us in the language of force, and we,
using the same logic, gave a reasonable answer. But I hope
that this will never, under any circumstances, happen again
anywhere,” … [Maidan coup] could have been followed by not
only acceptance [into NATO], but also deployment of assault
systems on the territory of Ukraine, including Crimea. If this
had happened, it would have had serious geopolitical
consequences for Russia; our country would have been forced
out from the Black Sea region, and Russia has been fighting
for centuries for the legitimate right to a presence
there.”Russia Today 24 May 2014.
2007
2009
“President Vladimir Putin's foreign policy can be characterized as a ‘new
realism’, repudiating some of the exaggerated ambitions of Yevgeny
Primakov's tenure as foreign minister in the late 1990s while asserting
Russia's distinctive identity in world politics. Rather than acting as a classic
‘balancing’ power prescribed by classic realist theory as the response to the
hegemonic power of a single state, Russia under Putin tended to
‘bandwagon’ and the country has been a vigorous ‘joiner’. Putin insisted
that Russia retains its ‘autonomy’ in international politics while moving
away from earlier ideas that Russia could constitute the kernel of an
alternative power bloc. However, the opportunity to integrate Russia into
the hegemonic international order may have been missed because of what
is seen in Moscow as the resolute hostility of groups in the West who
continue to pursue Cold War aims of isolating and containing Russia. The
Cold War was transcended in an asymmetrical manner, and this has given
rise to four major failures: political, strategic, intellectual and cultural. The
world faces the danger of the onset of a new era of great power bloc
politics, thus restoring a Cold War structure to the international system.
With none of the major strategic issues facing the international community
at the end of the Cold War yet resolved, we may be facing a new twenty
years’ crisis.” Richard Sakwa (2008) New Cold War’ or twenty years’ crisis?
Russia and international politics. International Affairs
“Washington stops abasing and encroaching on Russia, there is no "sovereign" reason why
[Russia] should not[exercise its potential influence more forcefully]. Certainly, nothing
Moscow has gotten from Washington since 1992, a Western security specialist emphasizes,
"compensates for the geopolitical harm the United States is doing to Russia."American
crusaders insist it is worth the risk in order to democratize Russia and other former Soviet
republics. In reality, their campaigns since 1992 have only discredited that cause in Russia.
Praising the despised Yeltsin and endorsing other unpopular figures as Russia's "democrats,"
while denouncing the popular Putin, has associated democracy with the social pain, chaos
and humiliation of the 1990s. Ostracizing Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko while
embracing tyrants in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan has related it to the thirst for oil. Linking
"democratic revolutions" in Ukraine and Georgia to NATO membership has equated them
with US expansionism. Focusing on the victimization of billionaire Mikhail Khodorkhovsky
and not on Russian poverty or ongoing mass protests against social injustices has suggested
democracy is only for oligarchs. And by insisting on their indispensable role, US crusaders
have all but said (wrongly) that Russians are incapable of democracy or resisting abuses of
power on their own… To overcome those towering obstacles to a new relationship,
Washington has to abandon the triumphalist conceits primarily responsible for the revived
cold war and its growing dangers. It means respecting Russia's sovereign right to determine
its course at home (including disposal of its energy resources). As the record plainly shows,
interfering in Moscow's internal affairs, whether on-site or from afar, only harms the chances
for political liberties and economic prosperity that still exist in that tormented nation.It also
means acknowledging Russia's legitimate security interests, especially in its own "near
abroad." In particular, the planned third expansion of NATO, intended to include Ukraine,
must not take place… Twenty years ago, when the world faced exceedingly grave cold war
perils, Gorbachev unexpectedly emerged from the orthodox and repressive Soviet political
class to offer a heretical way out. Is there an American leader today ready to retrieve that
missed opportunity?” Stephen F. Cohen (2006) The new american cold war, The Nation.
Some ‘big questions’
1. How to reframe the East / West relations?
2. Will China deliver broader development?
3. Can grassroots movements revive democracy?
4. What will be the moral compass of the 21st century?
“How to Reframe the East /West
relations?”
“Will China deliver broader development?”
Vice Premier Hui Liangyu called for further development on bilateral ties with Zambia in
the new period on the basis of mutual benefits while meeting with Zambian President
Rupiah Banda at the State House on Jan 10, 2011
“Can grassroots movements revive democracy?”
“What will be the moral compass of the 21st
century?”
• http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080
/09668130802362367?journalCode=ceas20#.
VHbHWShq7G4