Chapter one

1.1. Definitions: The Concept of Geopolitics, Geo-strategy, Security and National Security

A. The Concept of Geopolitics

The word geopolitics points to the interface between two distinct ontological realms and
scientific disciplines, geography, and politics. The first of these root words, “geography,” is not
necessarily restricted in this context to traditional geographic concerns like climate or the Earth’s
physical surface, but entails a much broader spatial perspective concerned with scale and
location, the size, shape, and boundaries of territories, and the processes by which territories are
socially defined. The other root word, “politics,” points toward subfields of political science like
international relations which are also focused on states and empires, borders and frontiers,
international alliances and polarizations, the balance and imbalance of global power, and war,
imperialism, and diplomacy (Burchill & Linklater 1996).

If geopolitics is delimited by the overlap between geography and politics, this definition does not
yet specify the nature of the relationship between the two realms. The founding decades of
geopolitical discussion saw an emphasis on geographical modes of explanation. Geopolitical
thinkers at the turn of the previous century emphasized the effects of physical geography and
spatial location on a state’s growth and decline and its military and foreign policies. The word
geopolitics was coined by the Swedish social scientist Rudolf Kjellén (1917: 46), who defined it
as “the doctrine of the state as a geographic organism or a spatial phenomenon: i.e., the state as
land, territory, region, or, most precisely, as a Reich [realm, empire].” Kjellén’ s thinking was
based largely on the work of German geographer Friedrich Ratzel, who founded the subfields of
political geography and anthropo-geography as the study of the geographical basis of the state’s
action (Ratzel 1882, 1897).

Contemporary treatments of geopolitics often contain repeats of these environmentally-

determinist origins. Heinz Brill defines geopolitics as the “doctrine of the influence of
geographic space on the politics of a state” (Brill 1998: 206). A recent dictionary of security
studies defines geopolitics as the “analysis of the influence of geographic conditions of a state on
its national and international policies” (Meier et al. 2005: 144). The Encyclopædia Britannica
(n.d.) still defines geopolitics as “analysis of the geographic influences on power relationships in

1|Page
international relations.” Even a Marxist geographer like David Harvey (2003) conjures up an
image of a conflict between one group of states trying to forge a Eurasian bloc versus an
American strategy of disrupting this alliance by cultivating allies in what geopolitical thinkers
used to call the East European “shatterbelt” (Trampler 1932) between Europe and Russia, with
the ultimate goal of preventing the first group of powers from securing a stranglehold on Middle
Eastern oil.

Generally, Geopolitics is the study of how geographic factors influence international politics and
relations. It considers elements such as location, resources, demographics, and physical terrain.
Geopolitical analysis often involves understanding power dynamics between nations and how
geographic positioning can affect political decisions and strategic interests. For instance,
countries with abundant natural resources may have more leverage/influence in international
negotiations.

Geopolitics is fundamentally the study of how geographic factors influence international politics
and relations. This field examines various elements, including location, natural resources,
demographics, climate, and physical terrain, to understand their impact on political power and
strategic interests among nations. Geopolitical analysis involves evaluating how these factors
shape interactions between states, influence foreign policy decisions, and affect the balance of
power in the international system (Lutz, 2017). One key aspect of geopolitics is the significance
of a country’s location. Geographically advantageous positions, such as proximity to key trade
routes or bordering powerful nations, can enhance a state's influence on the global stage. For
example, countries situated along major maritime routes, like Singapore and Panama, play
critical roles in international trade due to their strategic locations (Harris, 2019). Conversely,
nations located in politically unstable regions may face increased vulnerabilities, impacting their
security and foreign policy strategies. Natural resources are another vital component of
geopolitical analysis. Countries rich in resources such as oil, gas, and minerals often wield
considerable influence in international negotiations. For instance, nations in the Middle East,
with their vast oil reserves, have historically used this resource as leverage in geopolitical
discussions, significantly shaping global energy policies and economic alliances (Allison, 2020).
This dynamic illustrates how resource abundance can translate into political power, allowing
these nations to exert influence beyond their geographical borders.

2|Page
Demographics also play a crucial role in geopolitics. Population size, diversity, and distribution
can impact national strength and political stability. For instance, countries with large, youthful
populations may have significant economic potential and military capabilities, positioning them
favorably in global affairs. In contrast, aging populations in nations like Japan and several
European countries present challenges related to labor supply and economic growth, influencing
their geopolitical strategies (Mearsheimer, 2018).

Furthermore, the physical terrain can affect military strategy and political decisions.
Mountainous regions, deserts, and rivers can serve as natural barriers, influencing defense
strategies and territorial disputes. The Himalayas, for example, have been central to the
geopolitical tensions between India and China, affecting their military postures and diplomatic
relations (Snyder, 2019). Understanding these geographical features is essential for
comprehending the complexities of international conflicts and alliances.

B. Geo-strategy: Geo-strategy refers to the planning and execution of strategies based on

geopolitical considerations. It involves determining how a nation can use its geographic
advantages to achieve its political and military objectives. Geostrategic thinking includes
assessing alliances, military deployments, and economic relationships to enhance national
interests. An example of geo-strategy is a country's decision to establish military bases in
strategically important regions to project power and secure trade routes.

C. Security: Security encompasses measures taken to protect a nation's citizens, territory, and
interests from threats. This broad concept includes military, economic, environmental, and social
dimensions. Security can be seen as a state of being free from danger or threat, involving both
national and global aspects. For example, cyber-security is an increasingly important aspect of
security in the digital age. Security refers to the measures and strategies implemented to protect a
nation's citizens, territory, and interests from various threats. This broad concept encompasses
military, economic, environmental, and social dimensions, reflecting the multifaceted nature of
contemporary security challenges. Security can be understood as a state of being free from
danger or threat, involving both national and global aspects (Baldwin, 2020).

At its core, military security focuses on the protection of a nation from external aggression or
conflict. This aspect includes the maintenance of armed forces, defense strategies, and alliances
with other nations to deter potential threats. Countries invest in military capabilities to safeguard

3|Page
their sovereignty and respond to any hostile actions. For example, NATO serves as a collective
defense organization where member states commit to mutual defense in response to aggression
against any member (Mearsheimer, 2018).

Economic security is increasingly recognized as a critical component of overall national security.

It involves ensuring a stable and prosperous economy, which is vital for maintaining social order
and political stability. Economic security can be threatened by factors such as unemployment,
inflation, and resource scarcity. Additionally, nations must navigate global economic
interdependence, where financial crises or trade disputes in one country can have ripple effects
worldwide (Friedman, 2021). Policies that promote sustainable economic growth and resilience
against external shocks are essential for safeguarding economic security.

Environmental security highlights the intersection of environmental issues and national security.
Challenges such as climate change, resource depletion, and natural disasters can pose significant
threats to a nation’s stability and safety. For instance, rising sea levels and extreme weather
events can lead to displacement and conflict over resources, necessitating proactive measures to
address these challenges (Harris, 2019). Countries are increasingly recognizing that
environmental degradation can exacerbate existing vulnerabilities and create new security
dilemmas. Social security involves protecting the well-being of citizens and ensuring social
cohesion within a nation. This dimension encompasses issues such as public health, education,
and social welfare. A society that feels secure and has access to basic services is less likely to
experience unrest or conflict. Additionally, addressing inequalities and social injustices can
enhance national stability and security (Baldwin, 2020). For example, initiatives aimed at
improving healthcare access can mitigate the impacts of pandemics and enhance societal
resilience.

In the digital age, cyber-security has emerged as an increasingly vital aspect of national security.
The growing reliance on technology and the internet exposes nations to cyber threats, including
hacking, data breaches, and cyber warfare. Governments are investing in cyber-security
measures to protect critical infrastructure, safeguard sensitive information, and ensure the
integrity of their digital systems (Snyder, 2019). The interconnectivity of global networks means
that cyber threats can have far-reaching implications, making cyber-security a priority for both
national and global security agendas.

4|Page
D. National Security: National security specifically refers to the protection of a nation's
sovereignty, territorial integrity, and citizens from external and internal threats. It involves the
strategic use of military force, intelligence, diplomacy, and economic measures. National
security policies are often shaped by geopolitical considerations, as nations seek to protect their
interests against rival powers. For instance, a country may strengthen its military alliances in
response to perceived threats from neighboring nations.

National security specifically refers to the measures taken to protect a nation’s sovereignty,
territorial integrity, and citizens from both external and internal threats. It encompasses a range
of strategies and policies that utilize military force, intelligence, diplomacy, and economic
measures to safeguard a nation's interests (Baldwin, 2020). The concept of national security is
dynamic and evolves in response to changing geopolitical landscapes and emerging threats.
National security refers to the safeguarding of a nation's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and
interests against threats, whether external or internal. It encompasses a broad spectrum of issues,
including military defense, economic stability, political sovereignty, and social well-being. The
primary objective of national security is to protect citizens, maintain public order, and ensure the
functioning of government institutions.

2. Components of National Security

Human Security: In contemporary discussions, national security increasingly encompasses the

concept of human security, which prioritizes the safety and well-being of individuals. This
broader approach addresses issues such as poverty, health, and environmental degradation,
recognizing that true security extends beyond military concerns. It refers to a concept largely
developed at the United Nations after the end of the Cold War. It defines security broadly as
encompassing peoples’ safety from hunger, disease, and repression, including harmful
disruptions of daily life. Over time, the concept has expanded to include economic security,
environmental security, food security, health security, personal security, community security,
political security, and the protection of women and minorities. Its distinguishing characteristic is
to avoid or downplay national security as a military problem between nation-states, focusing
instead on social and economic causes and an assumed international “responsibility to protect”
peoples from violence. It is to be determined and administered by the United Nations.

5|Page
Political security refers to protecting the sovereignty of the government and political system and
the safety of society from unlawful internal threats and external threats or pressures. It involves
both national and homeland security and law enforcement.

Economic security involves not only protecting the capacity of the economy to provide for the
people, but also the degree to which the government and the people are free to control their
economic and financial decisions. It also entails the ability to protect a nation’s wealth and
economic freedom from outside threats and coercion. Thus, it comprises economic policy and
some law enforcement agencies but also international agreements on commerce, finance, and
trade. Recently, it has been defined by some in a human security context to mean eradicating
poverty and eliminating income inequality.

Energy and natural resources security is most often defined as the degree to which a nation or
people have access to such energy resources as oil, gas, water, and minerals. It would be more
accurate to describe it as access freely determined by the market without interference from other
nations or political or military entities for non- market, political purposes.

Cybersecurity refers to protection of the governments and the peoples’ computer and data
processing infrastructure and operating systems from harmful interference, whether from outside
or inside the country. It thus involves not only national defense and homeland security, but also
law enforcement.

Environmental security is an idea with multiple meanings. One is the more traditional concept
of responding to conflicts caused by environmental problems such as water shortages, energy
disruptions, or severe climate changes; it is assumed that these problems are “transnational” and
thus can cause conflict between nations. The other, more recent concept is that the environment
and the “climate” should be protected as ends in and of themselves; the assumption is that the
environmental degradation caused by man is a threat that must be addressed by treaties and
international governance as if it were the moral equivalent of a national security threat. In the
past, natural disasters were not considered threats to national security, but that presumption is
changing as the ideology of “climate change” and global warming takes hold in the national
security community.

6|Page
1. Significance of National Security

Protection of Sovereignty: National security is essential for maintaining a state's independence

and authority. It involves the defense against military threats, cyber-attacks, terrorism, and other
forms of aggression that could undermine a nation’s autonomy. A secure nation can pursue its
interests without external interference.

Stability and Order: Effective national security measures contribute to social stability and
public order. By addressing threats and crises, governments can foster an environment where
citizens feel safe and secure. This stability is crucial for economic growth, social cohesion, and
the overall well-being of society.

Economic Security: A strong national security framework supports economic prosperity by

protecting critical infrastructure, trade routes, and markets from disruptions. Economic stability
is often linked to national security, as a secure environment encourages investment, trade, and
innovation.

Response to Emerging Threats: The landscape of national security is continually evolving,

with new threats emerging from globalization, climate change, pandemics, and cyber warfare. A
robust national security strategy allows a nation to adapt to these challenges and mitigate risks
effectively.

International Relations: National security plays a vital role in shaping a country's foreign
policy and diplomatic relations. A nation perceived as secure is better positioned to engage in
international alliances, negotiate treaties, and participate in global governance.

Public Confidence: Citizens’ trust in their government often hinges on perceptions of national
security. When a government demonstrates a commitment to protecting its citizens and interests,
it fosters public confidence and support, which are essential for democratic governance.

1.2. The meaning and significance of Geopolitics

1.2.1. Significance of Geopolitics

As Geopolitics is the study of how geographical factors influence international politics and
power dynamics among nations. It examines the role of location, natural resources, climate, and
physical terrain in shaping political relationships and strategies (Lutz, 2017). This field is

7|Page
significant for several reasons. Firstly, it provides insight into international relations, helping to
explain why conflicts arise and how alliances are formed based on geographic considerations
(Snyder, 2019). Additionally, geopolitics is crucial for understanding resource management, as
nations often vie for control over vital resources like oil and water, leading to competition or
cooperation (Allison, 2020). Furthermore, geopolitical analysis informs security strategies, as
states assess threats and opportunities based on their geographical context, which ultimately
influences global security dynamics (Mearsheimer, 2018). In a modern context, the implications
of geopolitics extend to globalization, regional conflicts, and even climate change, as these
factors increasingly alter traditional power structures and affect migration and resource
availability (Friedman, 2021). So, geopolitics plays a crucial role in shaping the landscape of
international relations and influencing the behavior of states and non-state actors. Its significance
can be understood through several key dimensions

Geopolitics provides essential insights into the underlying factors that drive international
relations. By examining geographic considerations, scholars and policymakers can better
understand the roots of conflicts and the formation of alliances. For instance, geographical
proximity often dictates the nature of relationships between neighboring countries, as seen in the
case of border disputes or regional rivalries (Snyder, 2019). Understanding these dynamics helps
in predicting potential flashpoints for conflict and fostering diplomatic efforts aimed at conflict
resolution.

The control and management of natural resources are central to geopolitical considerations.
Nations compete for vital resources such as oil, gas, water, and minerals, which can lead to both
competition and cooperation. For example, the Middle East's oil reserves have been a focal point
of geopolitical strategy, influencing foreign policy decisions and military interventions (Allison,
2020). Additionally, water scarcity has become a pressing issue in regions like South Asia and
the Middle East, where transboundary water management is critical for maintaining peace and
cooperation among countries. Geopolitical analysis helps in understanding how resource
management can serve as a catalyst for conflict or as a basis for collaborative agreements.

Geopolitical analysis is instrumental in shaping national security strategies. States assess their
geographical context to identify potential threats and opportunities, informing their military and
diplomatic policies. For instance, countries located in conflict-prone regions may enhance their

8|Page
military capabilities or seek alliances for collective security. The strategic positioning of military
assets, such as bases in the Indo-Pacific region by the United States, reflects a geostrategic
response to the rising influence of China and the perceived threat it poses to regional stability
(Mearsheimer, 2018). This analysis of geographical factors is critical for effective security
planning and response. In the era of globalization, geopolitics has profound implications for
economic and political interactions among states. Global trade routes, supply chains, and
economic partnerships are influenced by geographic considerations. For example, the control of
maritime chokepoints, such as the Strait of Hormuz, is vital for global oil transportation, making
it a significant focus of geopolitical strategy (Friedman, 2021). As countries navigate the
complexities of globalization, understanding the geopolitical landscape is essential for
developing strategies that enhance economic security and mitigate risks associated with global
interdependence.

It extends to the analysis of regional conflicts and the impacts of climate change. Environmental
factors, such as rising sea levels, droughts, and natural disasters, can exacerbate existing tensions
and lead to new conflicts over resources and territory. For instance, in regions like the Sahel,
climate change has contributed to resource scarcity, fueling competition between communities
and leading to violence (Friedman, 2021). Geopolitical analysis is crucial for understanding these
complex interactions and developing adaptive strategies to address the security implications of
environmental changes. Therefore, the significance of geopolitics lies in its ability to illuminate
the intricate connections between geography and international relations. By providing insights
into conflicts, resource management, security strategies, globalization, and the impacts of climate
change, geopolitics serves as a vital framework for understanding the contemporary global
landscape.

1.3. The origin and development of geopolitical traditions

a. Early Foundations

The study of geopolitics has evolved over centuries, shaped by historical events, geographic
realities, and theoretical advancements. Understanding the origins and development of
geopolitical traditions provides insight into how geography influences political power and
international relations. Classical geopolitics, often associated with the late 19th and early 20th
centuries, focuses on the relationship between geography and political power. It emphasizes how

9|Page
physical terrain, resources, and location influence state behavior and international relations. Key
figures in this tradition include

1. Rudolf Kjellén

Geopolitical Definition and State as a Geographical Organism Rudolf Kjellén (1864–1922), a

Swedish political scientist and geographer, is credited with coining the term "geopolitics." He
defined geopolitics as the study of the state as a geographical organism, emphasizing the inherent
connection between geography and political power. Kjellén argued that the state’s strength and
stability are deeply influenced by its territorial attributes, including resources, location, and
climate (Kjellén, 1920). Territory and National Strength: Kjellén believed that a nation’s
territory is not merely a physical space but a vital component of its identity and power. He
posited that a strong state requires a well-defined territory that provides the necessary resources
and security to thrive. This perspective laid the groundwork for later expansionist policies in the
20th century, as it justified the pursuit of territorial integrity and expansion for national
development (Benton, 2000).

2. Friedrich Ratzel

Lebensraum and Territorial Expansion Friedrich Ratzel (1844–1904), a German geographer and
ethnographer, is best known for his concept of Lebensraum (living space). Ratzel argued that
nations require adequate space to grow and flourish, and he viewed the expansion of territory as
essential for a nation’s survival and prosperity. His ideas emerged during a period of intense
nationalism and imperialism in Europe, which influenced his views on statehood and
territoriality (Ratzel, 1897). Justification for Expansion: Ratzel’s concept of Lebensraum was
used to rationalize colonial and imperial ambitions. He suggested that just as organisms expand
to thrive in their environments, so too must nations seek new territories to secure their resources
and ensure their growth. This justification for expansion influenced geopolitical thinking,
particularly in the context of Germany’s imperial pursuits in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries (Murray, 2008).

3. Halford Mackinder

Heartland Theory and Global Dominance Halford Mackinder (1861–1947), a British geographer
and politician, is renowned for his formulation of the "Heartland Theory" in his 1904 paper, "The

10 | P a g e
Geographical Pivot of History." Mackinder argued that the control of the central region of
Eurasia—what he termed the "Heartland"—was essential for global dominance (Mackinder,
1904). Strategic Significance of Geographic Positioning, according to Mackinder, whoever
controls the Heartland controls the destiny of the world. He asserted that this region’s vast
resources and strategic location make it critical for any power seeking to achieve hegemony. His
theory underscored the importance of geography in shaping global power dynamics and
influenced military and foreign policy decisions, particularly during the World Wars and the Cold
War (Hoffman, 2011).

b. Contemporary (Critical) Geopolitics

Throughout history, the rise of any country will cast influence on global stability and geopolitical
structure (Hu et al., 2014). The rise to supremacy and decline of big powers are all subject to the
laws of geopolitics. Since the end of the Cold War, with the rapid development of China and
other emerging countries, the international power structure has been undergoing profound
restructuring; the peaceful development of China urgently needs to be supported by geopolitics,
geo-economics and other theories (Lu et al., 2013). Geography is the basis for research on
geopolitics and geo-economics. Therefore, Lu Dadao called for the geographers to keep up with
the pace of the times, accurately grasp the national interests, seize the opportunity to make a
contribution, especially submit the more forward-looking, holistic and speculative consultation
report to the State based on solid theoretical research, and demonstrate some opinions and
suggestions on worldwide problems put forward by the geographical community to the public.
However, at present, in the study on geopolitical theories made by the domestic geographical
circles, especially in the geo-strategic research, there may be a certain level of
misunderstandings, as called by Ratzel, Mackinder, Mahan, Speakman and other early classical
geo-strategic scholars, and guiding the China’s geo-strategic practice with the help of their
theories. In the application of classical geopolitical theory for guiding the geo-strategic practice,
we often ignore a background of theory builders, blindly following the “immutability of truth”
(Sun et al., 2006). Leslie Hepple clearly pointed out that, due to lack of criticism on the history
and philosophy of geopolitics, we would easily make the same mistake (Hepple, 1986).

Naturally, there still exist some disadvantages of China's geopolitical security situation analyzed
and geo-strategy proposed only according to the classical geopolitical theory (Zhang, 1996;

11 | P a g e
Wang, 2003; Du et al., 2012). Engels already clearly stated: “If a nation wants to stand at the
forefront of science, it must have the theoretical thinking all the time. However, the theoretical
thinking of every age is a kind of historical products, which has different forms and contents at
different times.” (Marx et al., 1971) Although there are differences in expression forms and
research contents of early classical geopolitical theories (national organism theory, sea power
theory, land power theory and edge district theory), every Geopolitical Theory proposed is one of
the theoretical products required by the historical background and national reality at that time.
Therefore, when learning from and making use of such classical geopolitical theories, we must
understand comprehensively the scientific, hypothetical and conceptual levels of geopolitical
theories, as any theory has its scientific aspect and its hypothetical aspect, and also is a natural
expression of political ideas put forward by theoretic advocates (Wang et al., 2003). Social
scientists cannot get rid of their social and historical identities. The social knowledge they have
proposed is always one-sided, has one viewpoint, and draws out the meanings of special moral
and ideology. Under the influence of postmodernism, especially the knowledge-power theory
proposed by Michel Foucault, scholars of geopolitics have critically reconstructed geopolitics,
thereby resulting in the birth of critical geopolitics (Chen et al., 2012). Through reflection on the
ontology, epistemology and intellectual history of traditional geopolitics, critical geopolitics can
carry out the doubt and criticism on some basic logics and hypotheses of traditional theory (Ge,
2010a). From the point of view of critical geopolitics, this paper intends to critically review and
reflect the construction process of classical geopolitical theories, and restore the historically,
sociality, situationally and inclusive power – knowledge structure of classical geopolitical
theories.

Contemporary geopolitics emerged in the late 20th century as a response to the limitations of
classical geopolitical theories. While traditional geopolitics often focused on state-centric power
dynamics and territorial control, contemporary approaches encompass a broader range of
influences, including social, cultural, and economic factors. This evolution reflects the
complexities of global interactions in an increasingly interconnected world.

1. Nicholas Spykman: Spykman developed the "Rimland Theory," which emphasized the
strategic significance of coastal areas surrounding Eurasia, countering Halford Mackinder's
focus on the Heartland. Spykman argued that control of the Rimland was essential for

12 | P a g e
 containing potential threats from the Heartland and maintaining global power dynamics. His
work highlighted the importance of maritime routes and regional alliances in geopolitical
strategy (Spykman, 1942).

2. John Agnew: Critique of State-Centric Focus: Agnew criticized traditional geopolitics for
its narrow focus on state actors and territoriality. He advocated for a more nuanced
understanding of global politics that incorporates non-state actors, transnational issues, and
localized perspectives. Agnew's work encourages scholars to consider how global
phenomena impact local contexts and vice versa, thus enriching geopolitical analysis
(Agnew, 2003).

3. Critical Geopolitics: Challenging Traditional Narratives: Critical geopolitics examines

how geopolitical narratives are constructed and maintained, focusing on the role of discourse,
identity, and ideology. This approach challenges the power dynamics often associated with
traditional geopolitics, emphasizing how representations of space and place influence public
perceptions and policy decisions. Scholars in this field analyze how media, political
discourse, and cultural narratives shape geopolitical realities (Dalby, 1997).

1.4. Security: National, Regional, International dimensions

1. Geopolitical Considerations of national security

National security policies are often shaped by geopolitical considerations. Nations assess their
security environment in relation to rival powers, regional dynamics, and global trends. For
example, a country may strengthen its military alliances in response to perceived threats from
neighboring nations or hostile entities. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) serves as
a prime example of how geopolitical factors drive collective defense arrangements among
member states (Mearsheimer, 2018).

Internal Security Threats

While much of national security focuses on external threats, internal security is equally
important. This includes threats from terrorism, organized crime, and civil unrest. Governments
implement various measures to maintain internal stability, such as law enforcement, counter-

13 | P a g e
terrorism initiatives, and public safety programs. The balance between ensuring security and
upholding civil liberties is a constant challenge for governments (Snyder, 2019).

Emerging Threats

The landscape of national security is continuously evolving, with new and complex threats
emerging in the 21st century. Cybersecurity threats, climate change, and pandemics represent
significant challenges that require a rethinking of traditional national security paradigms.
Cyberattacks can disrupt critical infrastructure, while environmental changes can exacerbate
resource conflicts and lead to mass migrations (Friedman, 2021).

2. Regional security perspective: Regional security focuses on threats that affect a specific
geographic area, involving cooperation among neighboring countries. Regional security
encompasses a broad range of threats and challenges that impact a specific geographic area,
necessitating cooperation and collaboration among neighboring countries. This perspective
recognizes that security issues are often interconnected, requiring a collective response to
effectively address them. For instance, regional security can include traditional military
threats, such as territorial disputes or armed conflicts, as well as non-traditional threats like
terrorism, organized crime, and environmental challenges. According to the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), “many security challenges are best addressed at the
regional level, where shared interests and mutual vulnerabilities create opportunities for
cooperation” (UNDP, 2014). Additionally, regional organizations—such as the African Union
(AU), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and the European Union (EU)
—play crucial roles in facilitating dialogue, enhancing military cooperation, and fostering
economic partnerships to ensure stability. The notion of regional security is further supported
by the idea of collective security, which posits that the security of one nation is inherently
linked to the security of its neighbors (Buzan, 1991). By promoting trust-building measures,
joint military exercises, and intelligence sharing, countries within a region can create a more
secure environment that mitigates risks and enhances resilience against external and internal
threats. Ultimately, a comprehensive regional security approach is essential for addressing
the complexities of contemporary security challenges in an increasingly interconnected
world.
3. International Security perspective

14 | P a g e
As indicated, “security” as a concept and as a phenomenon at the end of the cold war has taken
on new forms. There are new security agendas, new security manifestations, and new rules of the
game for security policy. How to explain and comprehend security as part of international
relations in the so-called new world order? Security is a highly contested concept. Is it at all
possible to use it as a scholarly concept? Security is a word in common use, used in relation to a
wide variety of personal and collective activities and conditions. One can distinguish between
security in normal daily activities (job, economy, sex, transport, food), security for positive,
desirable conditions (democracy, freedom, prosperity, development, a good life), and security
against negative conditions (war, pollution, crime, all kinds of threats). In a way we have three
different realms for the term “security.” First, the broad, day-today use of the word, referring to a
position aspired to: of being safe, secure, protected. Second, the political use of the word,
referring to political actions, processes, or structures that can secure the safety of a political unit.
In the political sphere the term “security” is used as a political tool, for example, to provide a
certain phenomenon with a specific priority by placing it in the realm of high politics. Finally,
“security” can be used as an analytical concept to identify, describe, understand, explain, or even
predict phenomena in the general social realm; phenomena such as “security policy,” “security
policy interaction,” or “security institutions and structures.” A significant change in the political
use of the term “security” was, however, the invention of the concept of security policy.

The United States, as the most important unit in the international system, was the initiator. In
1947 the US administration introduced the National Security Council, which became a model for
several countries around the world. This also involved the introduction of a new concept,
“security policy.” Now it became possible for states, in linguistic terms, to conduct or pursue a
security policy. Security policy was more than defense policy, more than military policy, more
than a policy aimed at being prepared for war. Security policy also aimed at avoiding war.
Security policy encompassed internal, domestic security, economic development policy, and
policy for influencing the international system so as to create a peaceful environment, regionally
as well as globally, including foreign aid to developing countries. A famous example is the
statement from Robert McNamara, the former US Secretary of Defense, that “security is
development.” Security policy became an important tool for individual nation states to further
their national interests by attempting to influence the international system. The pursuit of
international security policy was the task of the United Nations (UN), which lost much of its

15 | P a g e
influence due to the East–West confrontation. In this way, during the cold war, the political
notion of security was extended, from referring primarily to matters related to defense and the
military, such as the avoidance of military aggression, to dealing with economic, political, and
societal matters, domestic as well as international. The original, narrow UN conception of
international security was based on the fact that the UN was the continuation of the victorious
wartime alliance, which perceived aggression based on hyper-nationalism as the main reason for
the outbreak of the Second World War. The UN was to be the tool for avoiding any repetition.
The cold war, however, changed the international setting completely.

With the end of the cold war in 1989–91, confrontation disappeared and partnership took over:
bipolarity was replaced by unipolarity. This implied a new security agenda. On the global level
hard security remained, but internationally, major wars were now fought in an asymmetrical
manner, that is, between the only remaining superpower, the United States, supported by its
associates, partly on behalf of international society, against international lawbreakers like Iraq
and the Taliban regime. For the first time ever major wars (the Gulf War and the Afghanistan
anti-terror war) were fought by forces authorized by what could be called “international society,”
that is, the UN Security Council acting on behalf of all UN member states in matters of
“international peace and security.” The Kosovo War did not get international society’s full
support, but was tacitly accepted afterwards. On the global and regional level, the “old” extended
security agenda from the golden days of détente has returned; now, however, with the addition of
at least four important “new” issue areas of security. First, societal security, thanks to the
emergence of new or renewed political units based on nationalism or ethnicity, which may cause
waves of refugees. Second, individual security, due to renewed emphasis on human rights and
international crime. Third, security for the human body, against worldwide epidemics, pollution
of food, and the lack of food. Finally, “new technology security,” due to threats to the vulnerable
IT systems, important of course only for technologically-advanced countries. As a consequence
of the end of the cold war, geopolitics that refers to borders and proximity has returned; these
dimensions now matter more than they did during the cold war, when political identity was
related to the broad East–West division. At the same time a global cyberspace is at work.

So, in the new international system, with only one superpower, the security agenda has changed
dramatically. The old cold war security debate continues between the “narrower” and the

16 | P a g e
“wideners,” that is, those who see security as hard, military security, and those who claimed that
as all events were based on conflicting structures, everything is security, but is now less relevant.
Most scholars admit that the new international system and the new organization of world order
have given rise to a broadening of the security agenda, and to new analytical concepts to identify,
analyze, and explain the political impact of this agenda.

War and armed conflict have seriously affected the living conditions of a vast number of people
in a very negative fashion throughout history. The study of security was initiated as a way to
overcome or reduce the consequences of armed conflict. Thus, the importance of international
security and its study cannot be underestimated. If one is trying to improve the living conditions
of all the peoples of the earth, a very important aspect to consider is the prevention of conflict.

Even though the usage and the meaning of the term “international security” today is a relatively
new one, the term covers subjects that have been of importance with regards to the living
conditions of people throughout history. Stability in general and peace in particular have,
throughout history, been the aspirations of many. Unfortunately, this has for long periods of time
not been the case. War has always brought with it immense human suffering and seriously
deteriorated living conditions. Thus, focus on war and peace, or on international security, can be
said to be of great importance. International security is of great value as a quality that should
characterize the world we live in, and as such it plays an important role in connection to the
Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems. Because only the absence of armed conflict creates the
necessary precondition to pursue the policies that can facilitate the development and
enhancement of the other systems and mechanisms that facilitate life here on earth.

International security has taken new forms in the twenty-first century. The concept of
international security as security among states belongs to the twentieth century. Threats are no
longer primarily coming from states. Threats are coming from ethnic groups obsessed by hyper
nationalism, from criminal gangs, mafiosi governance, from epidemics, AIDS, terrorism,
dangerous food, from poverty, from economic mismanagement, from over-population, from
failed states, from flows of refugees, and, most importantly, from pollution and the effects of
pollution, the irrigation and destruction of nature, and the diversification of nature. The victims
of the new threats are primarily the single individual (individual or human security), society
(societal security), and the globe (global security). The physical and economic survival of the

17 | P a g e
individual is threatened. The survival of societies is threatened, as concern’s identity and
coherence. The survival of the world as we know it is threatened in the long-run. For the first
time in history there is a common, global awareness of the necessity of fighting for the
sustainability of the globe.

One important precondition is the fact that the world more than ever in history has become one.
The old slogan from the beginning of the cold war, “one world or none,” is now relevant in a
new, broad understanding taking in new dimensions: globalization, internationalization,
transnationalism, interdependence, and integration. This implies that a world dominated by
fragmentation, separatism, disintegration, hyper nationalism, religious or ethnic fanaticism,
isolationism, and self-sufficiency is threatening in itself. The only way to secure the world and
maintain the sustainability of the globe is to support and emphasize the notion: “One world or
none.” The good news is that the structural and political conditions for the realization of the one
world concept are better than ever. Never before in history has there been a common,
international acceptance by almost all the world’s countries of common, general global norms.
These norms are democracy, a market economy, human rights, and personal freedom. The
interpretation of these norms is different in different countries, and only few, often referred to as
the rogue states, are not in agreement. It is, however, a fact that officially almost all states adhere
to these international norms, and that they are inclined to follow them. Why is this so? They are
following not necessarily in the “believing” sense, but in the “copying” sense, meaning that
countries following these norms are often doing well in the international system. It simply pays –
internationally, as well as domestically – to follow these norms. The bad news, however, is that
the forces of anti-globalism, hyper nationalism, isolationism, and hyper religionism are still at
work.

International security encompasses global threats and the measures taken by states and
international organizations to ensure collective safety. International security encompasses a wide
array of global threats and the collaborative measures undertaken by states and international
organizations to safeguard collective safety. This perspective acknowledges that in an
increasingly interconnected world, threats such as terrorism, cyber warfare, climate change, and
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction transcend national borders, necessitating
coordinated international responses. The United Nations (UN) plays a pivotal role in promoting

18 | P a g e
international security through peacekeeping missions, conflict resolution initiatives, and the
establishment of norms and frameworks aimed at preventing armed conflict (United Nations,
2020). For instance, the UN Charter emphasizes the importance of collective security, where an
attack against one member is considered an attack against all, thereby fostering a sense of shared
responsibility among nations (UN Charter, Article 51). Furthermore, treaties such as the Treaty
on the Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapons (NPT) exemplify international efforts to curb the
spread of nuclear weapons and promote disarmament (NPT, 1968). The rise of non-state actors
and transnational issues complicates the international security landscape, as these entities often
operate outside the traditional frameworks of state-centric security (Krahmann, 2005).
Consequently, a comprehensive international security approach not only addresses military
threats but also emphasizes economic stability, human rights, and environmental sustainability,
recognizing that true security is multifaceted and interconnected.

1.5. The Relation Between Geopolitics and National Security

Geopolitics and national security are intricately linked concepts that influence how states
perceive and respond to threats in the international arena. Understanding their relationship is
crucial for analyzing a nation's strategies, policies, and overall security environment. Geopolitics
refers to the study of how geographic factors both human and physical affect international
politics and relations. This discipline encompasses various elements, including a nation’s
location, access to resources, demographic trends, and environmental conditions. Understanding
these factors is essential for analyzing how they shape power dynamics and influence security
threats faced by states.

Geopolitics plays a critical role in shaping the security threats that nations face. By examining
the interaction between geographic factors and international relations, we can gain insights into
how these dynamics influence security challenges. Here are some key aspects of how geopolitics
impacts security threats: The geographical location of a state can significantly influences its
security environment. Nations that are situated near conflict zones or in regions with historical
tensions often experience heightened security risks. For example, countries in proximity to
volatile borders may face threats from spillover violence, terrorist activities, or military
incursions. The strategic significance of a location can also makes it a target for foreign
intervention. As Halford Mackinder famously noted, "Whoever rules Eastern Europe commands

19 | P a g e
the Heartland; whoever rules the Heartland commands the World Island; whoever rules the
World commands the world" (Mackinder, 1904). This underscores the idea that geographic
positioning can determine a nation's security priorities.

Access to natural resources is a major factor that can exacerbate geopolitical tensions and lead to
security threats. Nation’s rich in resources, such as oil or rare minerals, may attract foreign
interest and intervention, leading to conflicts over control. Conversely, resource-scarce countries
may experience internal unrest due to competition for limited resources. For instance, the
competition for oil in the Middle East has historically driven geopolitical tensions and military
engagements (Klare, 2001). The struggle for resources often leads to the militarization of foreign
policy, as states seek to secure vital supplies.

Demographic trends can create security threats that are influenced by geopolitical factors. High
population densities, especially in urban areas, can lead to social unrest and increase the
likelihood of violent conflict. Additionally, migration caused by conflicts or environmental
changes can strain resources and provoke tensions in host countries. For example, the influx of
refugees from war-torn regions can create challenges for neighboring states, leading to potential
security risks (Goldstone, 2002). Environmental factors, particularly climate change, have
emerged as significant geopolitical concerns. Changes in climate can exacerbate resource
scarcity, leading to competition and conflict over essential resources like water and arable land.
As climate change progresses, regions that are already vulnerable—such as sub-Saharan Africa
—may experience increased instability and conflict over dwindling resources (Hsiang et al.,
2017). This environmental aspect highlights the interconnectedness of geopolitical factors and
security threats.

1.6. Risks and Opportunities of geopolitics

Geopolitical risks are defined as the potential political, economic, military, and social risks that
can emerge from a nation’s involvement in international affairs. Typically, they emerge whenever
there is a major shift in power, a conflict, or a crisis. These risks can have far-reaching
implications for both the country itself and the global community at large. There are many
factors that can contribute to geopolitical risks, such as a nation’s economic stability, its political
relations with other countries, and its military strength. In recent years, globalization has also

20 | P a g e
played a role in exacerbating these risks by increasing the interconnectedness of the world’s
economies and societies.

It is important to know here that the presence of a “risk” does not automatically mean that the
worst case will happen or that the resulting events will even be negative at all. The potential
consequences of geopolitical risk can be either positive or negative. On the one hand, a risk can
potentially led to economic and political instability, which can, in turn, lead to violence and
conflict. On the other hand, they can also spur innovation and creativity as countries attempt to
mitigate the risks. Geopolitical risks are often difficult to predict in this way because it depends
completely on how people respond to the risk. There are a number of ways that can help analysts
and decision-makers stay ahead of potential issues and get clarity on how the region may
respond.

Political risks can arise from a number of issues, including disputes over territory, resources, or
ideology. They can also be the result of a country’s foreign policy decisions, which can
unintentionally escalate tensions with other nations. In recent years, a number of geopolitical
hotspots have emerged around the world. These are regions where the risk of conflict is
particularly high and where tensions are constantly simmering below the surface. Some of the
most notable hotspots include the South China Sea, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe. We’ve
analyzed many of these issues and situations at length, and George himself had made successful
predictions, such as with the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which George predicted
nearly a decade before Putin sent troops across the border into Ukraine.

The global economy is deeply interconnected, and events in one part of the world can quickly
ripple out to other regions. As such, economic risks are an important consideration in geopolitics.
Commodities prices can be volatile, and disruptions to the supply of key resources can have a
major impact on the global economy. Trade is another important area to watch. Protectionist
measures by one country can lead to retaliation from others, and this can disrupt global trade
flows. The ongoing situation or geopolitical risk (as of 2022) between the United States, Taiwan,
and China, in part, may be an example of this. At the risk of oversimplifying what a long-
standing and complex situation is, the US and Taiwan have extensive trade agreements that are
currently at risk due to the long-standing conflict between China and Taiwan. For many years,

21 | P a g e
the US has worked to balance trade agreements with both entities, with varying degrees of
success.

There are a number of societal risks that can have an impact on geopolitics. These include
environmental risks, health risks, and safety risks. Environmental risks include things like
climate change and natural disasters. The concept of climate change is already having an impact
on global politics as countries grapple with the debate on how to respond to possible threats or
whether there might be potential opportunities in the future. Health risks can also have an impact
on geopolitics. For instance, the outbreak of the Ebola virus in West Africa caused a number of
countries to close their borders to the affected countries in an effort to prevent the spread of the
disease. Fast forward, and we see a similar story play out following the COVID outbreak, albeit
on a much larger scale. Global shutdowns, mandates, and general unease caused major shifts.

National security risks include things like terrorism and civil unrest. Terrorism can have a major
impact on geopolitics, as was seen after the 9/11 attacks in the United States when the U.S.
responded by going to war in Afghanistan and then Iraq. The attacks led to a significant increase
in security measures around the world, as well as a heightened focus on combating terrorism.
Likewise, civil unrest can also have an impact on geopolitics. For example, the Arab Spring
uprisings that took place across the Middle East and North Africa in 2010 and 2011 led to a
number of changes in government, as well as an increase in instability in the region.

One of the most significant geopolitical risks associated with the digital age is cybercrime. This
is a type of crime that involves using computers and other digital technologies to commit crimes
like fraud, identity theft, and espionage. Critical infrastructure with strong digital-tech
components, like electrical grids or pipeline pumping stations, are also high-value targets.
Cybercrime is a growing problem for businesses and individuals alike. According to the FBI,
cybercrime costs the US economy in the realm of billions of US dollars each year. And it’s not
just big businesses that are at risk—small businesses and even individuals can be victimized by
cybercriminals. Fortunately, there are steps businesses can take to protect themselves from
cybercrime. One of the most important is to have a strong security system in place. This includes
using firewalls, anti-virus software, and other security measures. Businesses should also make
sure their employees are aware of the dangers of cybercrime and how to protect themselves.
Another way businesses and individuals can protect themselves is to stay up-to-date on

22 | P a g e
geopolitical developments surrounding cybercrime activity. This includes keeping abreast of
news about cyber-attacks, geopolitical risks, and other threats. By knowing what’s happening in
the world, businesses can be better prepared to defend themselves against attacks.

1.6.1. Opportunities of geopolitics

Geopolitics presents various opportunities that can significantly impact economic, cultural, and
strategic landscapes. Economically, countries can leverage their geographical advantages to
enhance trade, access resources, and attract investments, ultimately driving growth (Friedman,
2005). Strategic alliances formed between nations can bolster security and foster collaboration
on global issues, allowing for a more cohesive international community (Kissinger, 2014).
Additionally, geopolitical interactions can promote cultural exchanges that enhance mutual
understanding, leading to stronger diplomatic ties (Rosenau, 1990). Moreover, the realm of
innovation is greatly influenced by geopolitics, as countries often collaborate on technological
advancements to address pressing challenges such as climate change and cybersecurity
(Graham, 2018). Businesses also benefit from shifting geopolitical dynamics, which can open
new markets for expansion and investment (Hout, 2018). Furthermore, effective resource
management, particularly regarding energy and environmental sustainability, is achievable
through strategic geopolitical initiatives (Le Billon, 2001).

In terms of security, nations can enhance regional stability through cooperative defense efforts
and counter-terrorism initiatives, promoting a safer global environment (Snyder, 2010). Strong
geopolitical positions also allow nations to influence international norms and policies, shaping
global governance and regulatory frameworks (Mearsheimer, 2001). Additionally, geopolitical
frameworks can facilitate coordinated humanitarian responses, enabling more effective aid
delivery during crises (Barnett, 2005). Lastly, improved international relations can boost
tourism, benefiting local economies and fostering cultural exchange (Govers & Go, 2005). By
strategically navigating these opportunities, nations can enhance their global standing and
contribute to a more interconnected world.

23 | P a g e