Vol. 14 No. 4 (2023):
Research Article

Modelling neoclassical geopolitics: An alternative theoretical tradition for geopolitical culture and literacy

PDF
Nuno Morgado
Department of Geography and Planning, Corvinus University of Budapest, Hungary
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.n.mor.14.4.013.021
Categories

Published 2023-10-24

Keywords

  • Power,
  • Potential,
  • Perceptions,
  • Geography,
  • Culture,
  • Space,
  • Neoclassical Geopolitics
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Morgado, Nuno. 2023. “Modelling Neoclassical Geopolitics: An Alternative Theoretical Tradition for Geopolitical Culture and Literacy”. European Journal of Geography 14 (4):13-21. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.n.mor.14.4.013.021.

Copyright (c) 2023 Nuno Morgado

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Received 2023-07-15
Accepted 2023-10-24
Published 2023-10-24

Abstract

This paper offers a conceptual and theoretical alternative to geopolitical reasoning. It accepts certain concepts, factors, and variables from classical geopolitics with tested scientific validity and adds to them the awareness and focus on agents contributed, to some extent, by critical geopolitics. Without leaving a soft positivist sphere in which the procedures of the scientific method prevail, the innovative model of neoclassical geopolitics presented here constitutes a two-level approach in which the structural variable of systemic stimuli runs through the dual intervening variable of the geopolitical agent’s perceptions and capacities, shaping the state’s behavior as the dependent variable. In other words, it is innovatively claimed that examining geopolitical agents’ perceptions and capacities often provides valuable input for explaining political outcomes as an object of study in geopolitical research. Through both systemic stimuli and geopolitical agents’ perceptions and capacities, geography remains omnipresent with its concepts and approaches. Hence, one of the main objectives of the article is to contribute to the thriving of geopolitical culture and the literacy of decision-makers and the general public.

Highlights:

  • Geopolitical agents (i.e., individual decision-makers) are important in geopolitical analyses
  • Innovative concepts for geopolitical reasoning (i.e., geomisguidance)
  • Geography understood as a set of factors affecting a state’s potential and a determinant of systemic constraints
  • Joint approach containing geographical and psychological element
PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Agnew, J., Mitchell, K. and Toal, G. (eds.) (2003). A Companion to Political Geography. New York: Wiley.
  2. Aristotle (2006). Metaphysics: Book Θ (translated with an Introduction and Commentary by Stephen Makin). New York: Oxford University Press.
  3. Barnett, M. and Duvall, R. (2005). Power in International Politics. International Organization 59 (1), 39-75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818305050010
  4. Backheuser, E. (1948). Curso de Geopolítica Geral e do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca do Exército.
  5. Bessa, A.M. (2012). O Olhar de Leviatã – Uma Introdução à Política Externa dos Estados Modernos. Lisboa: Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa.
  6. Brill, H. (1994). Geopolitik Heute – Deutschlands Chance? Frankfurt-am-Main: Ullstein.
  7. Brill, H. (2008). Geopolitische Analysen – Beiträge zur deutschen und internationalen Sicherheitspolitik 1974-2008. Bissendorf: Biblio-Verlag.
  8. Carvalho, O.de (2018). “Aula 1”. Curso Política e Cultura no Brasil, Seminário de Filosofia, viewed February 20, 2018, http://www.seminariodefilosofia.org/politica-e-cultura-ao-vivo/
  9. Castro, T. de (1999). Geopolítica – Princípios, Meios e Fins. Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca do Exército.
  10. Castro, T. de (1994). Nossa América: Geopolítica Comparada. Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca do Exército.
  11. Chauprade, A. (2007). Géopolitique: Constantes et Changements dans l’Histoire. Paris: Éllipses.
  12. Chauprade, A. and Thual, F. (1998). Dictionaire de Géopolitique – États, Concepts, Auteurs. Paris: Ellipses.
  13. Christensen, T.J. (1996). Useful Adversaries: Grand Strategy, Domestic Mobilization, and Sino-American Conflict, 1947-1958. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  14. Cline, R. (1977). World power assessment: A calculus of strategic drift. Boulder: Westview Press.
  15. Cohen, S. (2009). Geopolitics – The Geography of International Relations. Lanham: Rowan & Littlefield.
  16. Couper, P. (2015). A Student’s Introduction to Geographical Thought – theories, philosophies, methodologies. London: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473910775
  17. Couto, A.C. (1986). Elementos de Estratégia, Vol. I. Lisboa: Instituto Altos Estudos Militares.
  18. Couto e Silva, G. do (1980). Conjuntura Política Nacional, o Poder Executivo & Geopolítica do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Livraria José Olympio editora.
  19. Dalby, S. (2008). Imperialism, Domination, Culture: The Continued Relevance of Critical Geopolitics. Geopolitics 13 (3), 413–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650040802203679
  20. Dalby, S. (2002). Security and Ecology in the Age of Globalization. In Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (ed.), Environmental Change and Security Project Report 8, 95–108. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/publication/Report_8_Dalby.pdf
  21. Dodds, K. (2014). Geopolitics: A Very Short Introduction. London: Oxford University Press.
  22. Fiammenghi, D. et al. (2018) Correspondence: Neoclassical Realism and Its Critics. International Security 43 (2), 193-203. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_c_00332
  23. Flint, C. (2006). Introduction to Geopolitics. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203503768
  24. Frankl, V. (2006). Man’s Search for Meaning. Boston: Beacon Press.
  25. Friedman, G. (2010). The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century. ‎ New York: Anchor.
  26. Fucks, W. (1965). Formeln zur Macht – Prognosen über Völker, Wirtschaft, Pontentiale. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.
  27. George, A. (1969). The ‘Operational Code’: A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision-Making. International Studies Quarterly 13 (2), 190-222.
  28. Haverluk, T. W., Beauchemin, K., Brandon, M. and Mueller, A. (2014). The Three Critical Flaws of Critical Geopolitics: Towards a Neo-Classical Geopolitics. Geopolitics 19 (1), 19-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2013.803192
  29. Isaacson, W. (1992). Kissinger: a Biography. New York: Faber & Faber.
  30. Kelly, P. (2016). Classical Geopolitics: A new Analytical Model. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  31. Kelly, P. (2006) A Critique of Critical Geopolitics. Geopolitics 11 (1), 24-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650040500524053
  32. Kelly, P. (1997). Checkerboards and Shatterbelts: The Geopolitics of South America. Austin: University of Texas Press.
  33. Kelly, P. (1986). Escalation of regional conflict: testing the shatterbelt concept. Political Geography Quarterly 5 (2): 161-180.
  34. Klotz A. and Prakash, D. (eds.) (2009). Qualitative Methods in International Relations – A Pluralist Guide. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  35. Lobell, S.E., Ripsman, N.M. and Taliaferro, J.W. (2009). Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  36. Mahan, A. (1890). The influence of sea power upon History 1660-1783. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
  37. Margariti, M. (2022). Literary Geography: Applying Geocriticism in "The Mermaid Madonna" by Stratis Myrivilis. European Journal of Geography 13 (5), 15-26. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.m.mar.13.5.15.26
  38. Mattos, C.M. (1975). Brasil – Geopolítica e Destino. Rio de Janeiro: José Olympio Editora.
  39. Meibauer, G. et al. (2021). Forum: Rethinking Neoclassical Realism at Theory’s End. International Studies Review 23 (1), 268-295. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viaa018
  40. Meibauer, G. (2020). Interests, ideas, and the study of state behaviour in neoclassical realism. Review of International Studies 46 (1), 20-36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210519000214
  41. Morgado, N. (2022). How can Geopolitical Agents restrain an Emerging Power’s Global and Regional Leadership? Evidence from Brazil. Geopoli-tics Quarterly 18 (68), 268–298. https://journal.iag.ir/article_141464.html#:~:text=20.1001.1.17354331.1401.18.68.12.4
  42. Morgado, N. (2021). Portugal as an old Sea Power: exploring the EU Membership as Geopolitical Design. Journal of Territorial and Maritime Stud-ies 8 (2), 59–73. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48617341
  43. Morgado, N. (2020). Neoclassical Geopolitics: Preliminary Theoretical Principles and Methodological Guidelines. International Problems 72 (1), 129-157. https://doi.org/10.2298/MEDJP2001129M
  44. Morgado, N. (2017). Towards the New World Order? A Geopolitical Study of Neo-Eurasianism and Meridionalism. Ph.D. Thesis, Charles Universi-ty in Prague, CZ.
  45. Morgado, N. (2016). “Geopolitical Design and the ‘Sense of Space’ – methodological cores in Geopolitical Studies.” In: 3rd International Multidis-ciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences & Arts, SGEM 2016, Book 2, Volume I, 169-174. Sofia. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42984503
  46. Morgenthau, H.J. (1948). Politics among Nations: the struggle for power and peace. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
  47. Nye, J.S. (2004). Soft Power – The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: PublicAffairs.
  48. O’Reilly, G. (ed.) (2020). Places of Memory and Legacies in an Age of Insecurities and Globalization. Europe: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60982-5
  49. O’Reilly, G. (2019). Aligning Geopolitics, Humanitarian Action and Geography in Times of Conflict. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11398-8
  50. O’Reilly, G. (2017). Preparing Critically & Globally Conscious Teachers. In: Jean-Luc Gilles (ed.), Linking Research and Training in Internationaliza-tion of Teacher Education with the PEERS Program: Issues, Case Studies and Perspectives (pp.57-71). Bern: Peter Lang.
  51. Ripsman N, Taliaferro J.W. and Lobell, S.E. (2016). Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
  52. Rose, G. (1998). Review Article – Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy. World Politics 51 (1), 144-172.
  53. Russell B (2004). Power: A New Social Analysis. New York: Routledge.
  54. Sack, R.D. (1986). Human Territoriality – Its Theory and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  55. Schweller, R.L. (2004). Unanswered Threats: A Neoclassical Realist Theory of Underbalancing. International Security 29 (2), 159-201. https://doi.org/10.1162/0162288042879913
  56. Shoorcheh, M. (2021). Spatial Causalities in Geographies of Scientific Knowledge. European Journal of Geography 12 (3), 130-145. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.m.sho.12.3.129.145
  57. Sicker, M. (2010). Geography and Politics Among Nations: an Introduction to Geopolitics. New York: iUniverse, Inc.
  58. Snyder, G. (1996). Process variables in Neorealist Theory. Security Studies 5 (3), 167-192.
  59. Spykman, N.J. (1938). Geography and Foreign Policy. The American Political Science Review 32 (1), 28-50.
  60. Sukhorukov, V.D, Gladkiy, Y.N. and Suslov, V.G. (2021). Axiological contexts of geographical cognition. European Journal of Geography 12 (3), 103-112. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.v.suk.12.3.102.112
  61. Taliaferro, J.W. (2006). State Building for Future Wars: Neoclassical Realism and the Resource- Extractive State. Security Studies 15 (3), 464-495. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410601028370
  62. Taliaferro, J.W. (2004). Balancing Risks – Great Power Intervention in the Periphery. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
  63. Tannenwald, N. (2005). Ideas and Explanation: Advancing the Theoretical Agenda. Journal of Cold War Studies, 7 (2), 13-42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26925808
  64. Thual, F. (1996). Méthodes de la géopolitique – apprendre à déchiffrer l’actualité. Paris: Éllipses.
  65. Torkameh, A., Hafeznia, M., Roumina, E., Ahmadypoor, Z. (2022). A Critical Realist Reading of Critical Geopolitics. Geopolitics Quarterly 18 (65), 1-43. https://journal.iag.ir/article_113025.html
  66. Tuathail, G. Ó, Dalby, S. and Routledge, P. (2006). The Geopolitics Reader. New York: Routledge.
  67. Tuathail, G. Ó (1996). Critical Geopolitics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  68. Varjas, J. (2022). The Presence of Sustainability in Hungarian Geography Textbooks. European Journal of Geography 13 (1), 22-46. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.j.var.13.1.22.46
  69. Vives, J.V. (1972). Tratado General de Geopolitica: El factor geográfico y el proceso histórico. Barcelona: editorial vicens-vives.
  70. Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
  71. Wohlforth, W.C. (1993). The Elusive Balance: Power and Perceptions during the Cold War. New York: Cornell University Press.
  72. Zakaria, F. (1998). From Wealth to Power: The Unusual Origins of America’s World Role Princeton: Princeton University Press.