It appears to be useful history and not least a perspective from the early 20th century. Whether or not the theory holds water, for Russia it isn’t as though they can alter the geographic or economic situation. They are where they are and if they seek relevance or security (or any one of a number of conditions), they have little choice but to confront their Western and South Western borders.
The Russian central south is mountainous and dry and broadly inhospitable until it reaches the Indian subcontinent. They’ve played the Great Game in Afghanistan, Iran, etc to know pretty much what they’re facing there.
The Russian east and south east is Mongolia (broadly not supportive of large population) and China, another great civilization.
It is no big surprise that the Baltic states, Poland, etc rushed to join NATO and the EU. Belarus and Ukraine are the border countries that have to live the reality that any resurgence of Russia requires them to be subject to Russian rule simply because Russia has no meaningful alternative.
A Russian defeat is necessary for Europe. Anything else is nonsensical pandering for the time being. Putin has made it clear that his Russia cannot be satisfied by the status quo and any alternative to that status quo involves Russia holding on to, at a minimum, the border countries by force. Putin is clear that trade and global order are, at best, secondary considerations for Russia.
Mackinder was so 1904, invalidated by the Japanese victory in 1905.
The USA had achieved bicoastality in 1846, transcontinental rail in 1869, largest GDP and industry by 1890.
Russia was just completing transcontinental rail and had blissfully ignorant faith that it could dominate and develop Manchuria and even Korea. Russia also sent Ukrainians by steamship from Odessa via Suez to Vladivostok.
The Russian Far East was key for receiving American aid during WW2 but was a disappointment later and especially after 1991 as East Asia boomed.
Today the sea is the heart of the world economy, and inner Asia is the less accessible periphery.
2 comments
It appears to be useful history and not least a perspective from the early 20th century. Whether or not the theory holds water, for Russia it isn’t as though they can alter the geographic or economic situation. They are where they are and if they seek relevance or security (or any one of a number of conditions), they have little choice but to confront their Western and South Western borders.
The Russian central south is mountainous and dry and broadly inhospitable until it reaches the Indian subcontinent. They’ve played the Great Game in Afghanistan, Iran, etc to know pretty much what they’re facing there.
The Russian east and south east is Mongolia (broadly not supportive of large population) and China, another great civilization.
It is no big surprise that the Baltic states, Poland, etc rushed to join NATO and the EU. Belarus and Ukraine are the border countries that have to live the reality that any resurgence of Russia requires them to be subject to Russian rule simply because Russia has no meaningful alternative.
A Russian defeat is necessary for Europe. Anything else is nonsensical pandering for the time being. Putin has made it clear that his Russia cannot be satisfied by the status quo and any alternative to that status quo involves Russia holding on to, at a minimum, the border countries by force. Putin is clear that trade and global order are, at best, secondary considerations for Russia.
Mackinder was so 1904, invalidated by the Japanese victory in 1905.
The USA had achieved bicoastality in 1846, transcontinental rail in 1869, largest GDP and industry by 1890.
Russia was just completing transcontinental rail and had blissfully ignorant faith that it could dominate and develop Manchuria and even Korea. Russia also sent Ukrainians by steamship from Odessa via Suez to Vladivostok.
The Russian Far East was key for receiving American aid during WW2 but was a disappointment later and especially after 1991 as East Asia boomed.
Today the sea is the heart of the world economy, and inner Asia is the less accessible periphery.
Comments are closed.