Analysis: The Book “The Revenge of Geography”

The book “The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the Battle Against Fate” was published in 2012 and is written by Robert D. Kaplan.

It is a book that discusses the impact of geography on the fate of societies and states; it is based on a concept that lies between two extreme, opposing theories: one theory argues that in this era countries have advanced technology and missiles that can reach continents, thus geography is not important, and the second theory is based on “Geographical Destiny,” which states that societies are bound by the environment they live in and cannot escape that destiny. Although Kaplan does not believe in geographical destiny, he believes that the priority of geography stands at all times, in both conflict and peace, and that the geographical boundary is the real divider of societies.

He argues that any boundary or division made within a society, which does not conform to the surface of the earth, will be obliterated if there is a desire for unity. He illustrates this point with the divisions made in the countries of Yemen, Vietnam, and Germany, which eventually unified (page 13).

Emphasizing the importance of geography, Kaplan attributes geography to historical events, including the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. He believes that the reason for that invasion was Russia wanting to reach warm waters, particularly the Indian Ocean.

Of course, Afghanistan is a landlocked country, lacking a sea, but the author's point is that after capturing Afghanistan, the Soviets wanted to invade Pakistan to access the Indian Ocean. This book The Revenge of Geography discusses

consists of three main chapters. In the first chapter, the author analyzes several writers who have written on this topic, such as Nicholas John Spykman, Halford Mackinder, Karl Haushofer, Strausz-Hupé, Alfred Mahan, and others.

While the second chapter specifically focuses on the geography of several countries including Russia, China, India, Iran, Turkey, and the continent of Europe; finally, the third chapter discusses the geography of the North American continent. In this article, we will summarize, at the beginning, the views of the experts in geopolitical science that the author Kaplan analyzes, then we will generally review the comments that Kaplan has made about countries around the world, and finally, we will generally evaluate the book.

The Early Experts on Geopolitics: The first scholar that Mr. Kaplan examines in this book is Spykman (1893–1943), who was a Dutch-American scholar and a political and strategic analyst during the time of World War II.

He also wrote several works including “America’s Strategy in World Politics” and “The Geography of the Peace”; and he believed that geography plays an important role in the foreign policy of countries. He has a famous saying that illustrates this point, which is: “Ministers come and go, dictators die, but the chains of mountains do not move… The Atlantic Ocean will always divide Europe and America…” (pages 50–51).

Mr. Spykman believed — unlike Mackinder's view — that countries located on the borders of the continents of Asia and Europe with coastlines are of greater importance than the countries located inland in those continents.

Also, he

believed that the power or country that controls those territories is the power that will govern the whole world. Among the writers that Kaplan extensively analyzes their theories is Halford Mackinder (1861–1947), who was a British scholar considered one of the founders of geopolitical science.

He believed that geography shapes the history of humanity, and he wrote in 1904 a famous scientific essay titled "The Geographical Pivot of History." Its essence is that the power or government that controls Eastern Europe is the one that governs the land located in the center of the continents of Asia and Europe, which he referred to as the Eurasian Heartland; thus, that power or country is the one that will govern the whole world. He opposed Spykman's theory.

The Heartland of Europe-Asia is where the tribes that destroyed the Abbasid Empires and other civilizations emerged, and it was where the ancient Chinese kingdoms feared, forcing them to build walls against those tribes. Mr.

Mackinder also believed that the government of Russia, which was expanding during his time, is the upcoming power of the world, as it is the one that controls the land he recognized as the most strategic. Mackinder also wrote in 1919 a book titled "Democratic Ideals and Reality"; among the theories he mentioned in that book was the creation of several small countries in Eastern Europe that would lie between Russia and Germany, which were competing in that area at the time.

On the other hand, Mr. Kaplan analyzed in this book, criticizing, a number of scholars who were part of the German Nazis, including Karl Haushofer (1869–1946), and he describes them as

The ideas of Mackinder and the entire field of geopolitical science have been distorted, as they seek legal justification for Hitler. He cites the ideas of Haushofer, who described the countries of Eastern Europe as being clusters, and cannot be referred to as full countries, a matter that sought legal justification for Hitler's invasion of those countries.

Again, he cites Haushofer, who stated in a book written in German, discussing borders, that only nations that are declining are those that strive to maintain and have secure borders, while free nations do not engage in borders, a matter that provides justification for the expansionism that Hitler was contemplating (pages 115–116). Among the scholars that Mr.

Kaplan deeply analyzes in this book is Strausz-Hupé (1903–2002), who was an American scholar but originally fled from Austria. He wrote in 1942 a book titled “Geopolitics: The Struggle for Space and Power.” The purpose of writing this book was to challenge the arguments of Haushofer and other Nazi scholars.

He also wanted to alert America to the importance of geopolitical science. Additionally, among the historians that Kaplan analyzes is Alfred Mahan (1840–1914), who was American by birth and the first to use the term “Middle East.” He specifically wrote about the effectiveness and impact of naval forces on human history, including one of his books titled “The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660–1783.” Mr.

Kaplan believes that Mahan's ideas influenced American presidents William McKinley and Franklin Roosevelt who were

the effort to build a strong naval force in the United States (page 140). Kaplan argues that today China and India — as the United States did before — are focused on implementing Mahan's ideas, and he notes that both are competing to build a high-quality naval force.

On the other hand, Europe conceptually believes that a strong naval force is not needed, and instead, a coast guard to protect the shores is required! How did Kaplan assess the countries?

Mr. Kaplan discusses several countries in this book, particularly in chapters 2 and 3, which he sees as countries that fall in strategic areas.

He highlights each country’s strengths and vulnerabilities; among the criteria he used to assess the countries are: the size of the country, the population, the seas and waterways it possesses, the climate of the country, proximity to global markets, and others. For example, he describes the United States as having the greatest opportunity to be committed to Europe-Asia, where the world's powers are concentrated.

Its northern, eastern, and western borders are secure, but the only risk it faces is its southern border with Mexico, which he describes as a country whose people are very active, and they believe that land is missing from the United States. He describes the immigration occurring at the southern border of the United States as one of the greatest dangers facing the United States.

Although China is not committed to the continent of Asia, the author believes — similar to the United States — that it is located in a strategic position, as it lies between two oceans that are crucial for global trade, and also has a warm climate that is

appropriate for civilization. However, the author believes that China is vulnerable at its borders, whether they be land or sea, and is surrounded by major powers such as Russia, Japan, India, and some central powers, some of which have territorial and maritime disputes with it.

On the other hand, the author describes Russia in various ways, stating that its greatest advantage is its territory, but it is vulnerable due to its smaller population compared to China and the United States. Similarly, the author notes that Russia is affected by its cold climate and its fragmented borders.

Mr. Kaplan believes that India is located in a strategic position, but it does not reach the level of China and the United States.

However, he believes that India, like Russia and China, is vulnerable at its borders, especially the borders it shares with Pakistan, China, and Bangladesh. In the Middle East, he describes it as a highly strategic region with a predominantly young population, and it holds most of the world's energy reserves, but its flaw is widespread division.

He believes that Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia are the most strategic countries in this region. If we focus on one by one, he describes Iran as being in a strategic location, occurring in the Arabian Gulf and the Caspian Sea, and connecting the Arabian Gulf to the countries of Central Asia, which is a geographical advantage.

Additionally, it has the flexible power to leverage its language, culture, and ideology that spread among the communities of Central Asia. On the other hand, Mr.

Kaplan describes Turkey as a country located in a strategic position,

is a bridge connecting Europe and Asia. Also, it is a country from which the Tigris and Euphrates rivers emerge, which is a geographical concern (page 364).

Finally, the author describes the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as being located in one of the most strategic areas of the Middle East, but vulnerable on its southern border with Yemen, attributing this to the large Yemeni population, the tribal society, and the presence of arms, which can always pose a threat to Saudi Arabia from that direction; it seems that the author has been given this prediction. However, the author, while referencing Spykman's ideas, describes both Africa and Latin America as geographically occurring in non-strategic areas.

Although Africa is five times closer to Europe, and also located at the heart of the world's trade routes, Kaplan and Spykman argue that Africa is geographically disadvantaged for several reasons, including: (a) it lacks coastlines with natural ports where trading ships can dock and rivers where trading ships can navigate; (b) the Sahara in the north of the continent and the forests in the center of the continent have hindered internal movement within the continent; (c) its climate is not conducive to civilization — this is their perspective! On the European side, Mr.

Kaplan, citing Spykman's ideas, describes the countries of Eastern Europe as geographically vulnerable, as they lack geographical barriers separating them from Russia, their primary enemy. He also points out that Germany is vulnerable on its eastern and western borders, being expansive and at risk of foreign invasion.

Finally, Kaplan believes

It is said that the English have benefited from their island status, and their borders are difficult to reach compared to other countries in the European continent. What did Kaplan say about Somalia?

The author mentioned "Somalia" in several paragraphs, most of which discussed issues related to the civil wars in Somalia, but there is one place where he positively spoke about Somalia, stating that in the future, gas and oil extracted from Somalia could be stored in China — God willing. However, the author did not provide a detailed geographical explanation of Somalia.

On the other hand, the author described the Indian Ocean, where Somalia is located, as one of the most strategic oceans in the world, serving as a link between East Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. If we look at Somalia through Kaplan's lens, it appears to be situated in a strategic location, with significant events and important routes, but it is vulnerable in terms of its land borders, especially the border it shares with Ethiopia, which is a country with territorial disputes, many people without access to the sea, yet yearning to reach the Red Sea, as Russia yearned to access warm waters.

Similarly, Somalia is vulnerable in terms of population compared to its neighbors Ethiopia and Kenya, although there is hope there as the Somali birth rate is high. Critiques of the Book Although this book opens the eyes of readers interested in geopolitical issues, it has flaws, including a tendency towards the West.

It indirectly and directly conveys colonial perspectives, such as the notion that European colonizers were teachers who taught many societies governance and administration, while on the other hand, there were governments that were not colonized, such as

Niibaal, who took a golden opportunity to learn from the colonialist government! (page 323).

Also, the author directly supports Israel as the modern colonizer, while on the other hand, he describes the Palestinians as being engaged in chaos, instead of focusing on their governance. Furthermore, the author believes that his country, the United States, rules the Caribbean Sea, and that Latin America is the backyard of his country.

He criticizes Hugo Chávez for inviting hostile countries to his country's backyard, referring to Russia and Iran. Another weak argument mentioned in this book is that the climates of the continents of Africa and Latin America are warm climates and that civilizations do not flourish there!

Conversely, the world today is in great need of warm climates to generate clean energy, as oil is dwindling, and countries located in the equatorial region are seen as having golden opportunities. Another criticism the book has is that it expresses fear of Muslims.

For example, when he points out the dangers faced by Russia, he adds the danger of the increasing Muslim population in Russia, stating that these Muslims lean towards separatism and are also vulnerable to terrorism (page 229). Elsewhere, he describes the Islamic community in Malaysia as becoming more radicalized, which he claims poses a threat to the unity of Malaysian society composed of various ethnicities (page 270).

He also discusses Pakistan in a negative light, suggesting that the author has a grievance against that country. Elsewhere, he describes Turks, Iranians, and Arabs as all being Muslims, uniting against Israel and the West.

(page 386). Islamophobia has led the author to oppose even democracy.

For example, he states on page 400 that democracy could produce a regime in Saudi Arabia that is contrary to Western interests. Again, he points out that Turkey's democracy strengthens Islamists, a statement that seems to be a warning directed at the West!

Similarly, the book demonizes China, describing it as having a colonial and exploitative vision. For instance, on page 278, the author quotes a statement by Krepinevich that China has acted to make East Asia like Finland (a poor country that no one can ignore).

On some pages, he mentions that China is plundering the minerals of African countries south of the Sahara, and that is true. However, the author completely overlooks the plunder by the United States of oil in the Southern Hemisphere.

All in all, geography affects the thinking of governments just as history affects the thinking of societies, and its importance cannot be denied. Countries, united by religion, language, and culture, can be differentiated by geography in terms of their foreign policy priorities.

Mr. Kaplan is correct to argue in this book against those who claim that geography is of little importance in this era.

Indeed, every ambitious country needs a geographer to guide it, just as Haushofer guided the Nazi regime, or as Spykman and Mackinder guided the United States, and how today Chinese experts are guiding their country. In conclusion, Mr.

Kaplan is an author who used to write columns for newspapers named

In the United States, and it is Jewish, as acknowledged in its book, it is clear where it leans. However, this book The Revenge of Geography deeply explains to the reader the areas where the powers are competing and the places where future conflicts will erupt, whether it is a maritime boundary dispute, such as in the South China Sea, or a land boundary dispute, such as the ongoing tensions in the Indian subcontinent, Eastern Europe, and other places.

Note: The copy I read from the pages I referenced in this article is an Arabic version translated by the Hindawi Foundation. Author: Cabdirisaaq Cabdiraxmaan Cabdullaahi “Ookiyaalle”.

Lawyer

The book “The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the Battle Against Fate” was published in 2012 and is written by Robert D. Kaplan.

It is a book that discusses the impact of geography on the fate of societies and states; it is based on a concept that lies between two extreme, opposing views: one view argues that in this era countries have advanced technology and missiles that can reach continents, thus geography is not important, and the second view emphasizes the “Fate of Geography,” which is that societies are bound by the environment they live in and cannot escape that fate.

Although Kaplan does not believe in the fate of geography, he believes that the priority of geography stands at all times, in both war and peace, and that geographical boundaries are the real divisions that separate communities. He holds that any boundary or division made within a society, which does not align with the surface of the earth, will be obliterated if there is a desire for unity. He illustrated this point by referencing the divisions made in the countries of Yemen, Vietnam, and Germany, which ultimately unified (page 13).

Emphasizing the importance of geography, Kaplan attributed historical events to geography, notably the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. He believes that the reason for that invasion was Russia's desire to reach warm waters, particularly the Indian Ocean. Of course, Afghanistan is a landlocked country, lacking a coastline, but the author's point is that after capturing Afghanistan, the Soviets aimed to invade Pakistan to access the Indian Ocean.

This book, The Geopolitics of Revenge, consists of three main chapters. Chapter 1 analyzes several authors who have written on this topic, such as Nicholas John Spykman, Halford Mackinder, Karl Haushofer, Strausz-Hupé, Alfred Mahan, and others. Meanwhile, Chapter 2 specifically focuses on the geography of several countries including Russia, China, India, Iran, Turkey, and the continent of Europe; finally, Chapter 3 discusses the geography of North America.

In this article, I will summarize, at the beginning, the perspectives of experts in geopolitical science that the author Kaplan analyzes, then I will generally outline the comments that Kaplan made about countries around the world, and finally, I will generally evaluate the book.

Previous Experts on Geopolitics:

The first scholar that Mr. Kaplan examines in this book is Spykman (1893–1943), who was an American-Dutch scholar and a political and strategic analyst during the time of World War II.

He also wrote several works including “America’s Strategy in World Politics” and “The Geography of the Peace”; and he believed that geography plays an important role in the foreign policy of countries. He has a famous quote that illustrates this point, which is: “Ministers come and go, dictators die, but the chains of mountains move not...

The Atlantic Ocean will forever divide Europe and America...” (pages 50–51).