Heartland theory
British political geographer Mackinder presented his paper 'The Geographical Pivot of History' in
1904 to elucidate the link between power struggle and geography. Mackinder's heartland theory
regards political history as a continuous struggle between land power and sea power with the
ultimate victory going to continental power.
Mackinder divided the world and call Europe, Asia and Africa as 'World Island' which has 2/3rd
of world land and 7/8th of population.
He arranged the landmass of the world in 3 tiers:
1. The Heartland: It is the huge area of inner Eurasia
east and north of river Volga surrounded by mountains on three sides (S-E-W) and by ice-bound
Arctic on the north. This was so called 'pivot area' that he later renamed as 'heartland'. The
distinguishing feature of heartland was that it was not accessible to sea powers and therefore it
was strategically secure like a fortress. This was resource rich area having agriculturally fertile
Russian grassland Steppes and coal fields.
2. Inner Crescent: The pivot area was surrounded by an 'inner' or 'marginal' crescent consisting
of an arch of coastland. It included rest of Europe, W. Asia, E. Asia, and S. Asia. This area was
characterised by drainage into navigable seas.
3. Outer or Insular Crescent: North America,
South America and Africa south of Sahara,
Oceana were put in outer crescent category.
Modifications
1919 modifications: By 1919, the world had already
seen the WW I, the defeat of Germany and rise of Russia under communist regime. Mackinder
redefined the boundary of pivot area and included the area which sea power can be refused
access under modern conditions. He included Black Sea, Baltic Sea, middle and lower Danube,
Asia Minor (Turkey), parts of Mongolia and Armenia. (Britain was defeated in Black Sea,
Germany was not able to enter in Baltic Sea in WW I)
In his 1919 modification, 'World Island' included the whole of Africa, unlike 1904 when only
Africa north of Sahara was included.
Mod.
1943 modification and concept of Midland Basin: In this modification Mackinder retained the
importance of heartland but tried reinterpreting the roles of the countries of inner and outer
crescent. He suggested that the power equation will undergo a change and was predicting rise
of Americas under USA. Mackinder observed the cultural and historical similarity between US &
Britain despite the Atlantic Ocean in between. He was able to foresee close economic and
political ties between the 2 nations. This grouping he called as 'Midland Basin' which included N.
America which was otherwise part of outer crescent.
Having predicted rise of Midland Basin as political power, Mackinder than predicted the future
geopolitics as power struggle between Heartland and Midland Basin. After WW II, this prediction
was fairly accurate because of the infamous superpower rivalry and cold war between US &
USSR.
Successes of the Heartland Theory
1. Strategic Importance of Eurasia
The theory accurately emphasized the strategic and resource value of Central Eurasia.
Both World Wars and the Cold War showed how control over Eastern Europe and Central Asia
could shift global power dynamics.
2. Cold War Relevance
Soviet Union's dominance over Eastern Europe and Central Asia after WWII gave the USSR
control over much of the Heartland.
The NATO vs. Warsaw Pact rivalry reflected Mackinder's vision of land-based
vs. sea-based powers.
3. Modern Geopolitics
Current geopolitical interests in Central Asia (eg, by China, Russia, the USA) echo Mackinder's
ideas.
Projects like China's Belt and Road Initiative align with the theory's emphasis on land power and
control over Eurasia.
Failures of the Heartland Theory
1. Underestimation of Sea Power and Air Power
The theory didn't account for the rise of air power or the dominance of naval forces (eg., the
U.S. Navy).
Sea powers like the United States and Britain maintained global dominance, contradicting
Mackinder's prediction.
2. Neglect of Technology and Globalization
Modern warfare, cyber capabilities, and interconnected economies have reduced the
importance of geographical determinism.
Global trade networks now depend more on economic and digital infrastructures than land
control.
3. Failure to Predict U.S. Dominance
Mackinder did not anticipate the rise of the United States as a global superpower, which is a
sea-based power far from the Heartland.
4. Overemphasis on Land-Locked Power
Heartland is landlocked and thus faces logistical disadvantages in global trade and military
projection compared to coastal nations.
