Theory of technologies of geographical determinism in international relations


Keywords: theory, technologies, international relations, geographical determinism, geopolitics, geoculture, geoeconomics, geofinance, imaginary geography, national interests, efficiency, security

Abstract

The rise of geographical determinism in the theory and practice of international relations has led to the emergence and сonstitution of a number of scientific spheres that determine decision-making of continental and world significance. The most well-known scientific knowledges in these areas are geopolitics, geoeconomics, and geostrategy. However, the significance of the constitutional role of geographical determinism in the understanding and structure of international relations is not limited only to these systems of knowledge. Due to the use of geographical determinism technologies, state actors get additional opportunities to win the competition for the priority implementation of national interests in the international arena. Therefore, the de- velopment of the theory of technologies of geographical determinism is an attempt, firstly, to integrate particular theories of international relations based on geographical determinism, within the framework of a broad perspective of a universalizing vision, and secondly, to rethink international relations simultaneously based on geographical determinism and a technological approach. Increasing responsibility in the field of decision-making on the world stage in the context of new security challenges gives special importance to the develop- ment of the theory of technologies of geographical determinism. This theory provides a large scale for critical theoretical and practical understanding of international relations in the modern world, rehabilitates geography as a factor context of social relations in political and economic dimensions on the world stage, allows you to think and act geographically and technologically, that is, contextually and effectively. Geographical determinism is as multifaceted as the spaces in which international relations operate are heterogeneous. Technologies can strengthen or weaken it. Each state seeks to use geographical determinism to its advantage with the help of technologies and at the same time neutralize its negative impact on the implementation of national interests on the world stage. Technologies enable states to act effectively to achieve their goals. However, only taking into account geographical determinism this strategy can be effec- tive and guarantee a secure future. Authors argue that Russia’s neoimperialist geoeconomic technologies with an emphasis on energy carriers and underestimation of the importance of geographical determinism by European governments have created unprecedented problems for European countries in the field of energy and economic security. The theory of technologies of geographical determinism in international relations allowed authors to identify a number of technologies that have shown their efficiency in various geographical dimensions. They distinguish these technologies based on the specifics of various types of spaces as environments for deploying effective activities to realize the national interests of states in the international arena. Physical space allowed to distinguish technologies of land, sea, air and space. These are telurocratic, thalassocratic, aerocratic, and astrocratic technologies. The political space allowed to highlight geopolitical technologies. The economic space has become the basis for identifying and understanding various geoeconomic and geofinancial technologies. The cultural space served as the basis for the analysis of geocultural technologies. The strategic space allowed to consider geostrategic technologies, defining the technology of allied binding as the leading one. The space of imaginary geographical space made it possible to understand geopolitical propaganda technologies.

Author Biographies

Oleksandr Y. Vysotskyi
Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine
Nataliia V. Deviatko
Communal Institution of Higher Education ‘Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education’ of Dnipropetrovsk Regional Council, Dnipro, Ukraine
Olha Y. Vysotska
Communal Institution of Higher Education ‘Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education’ of Dnipropetrovsk Regional Council, Dnipro, Ukraine

References

1. Acemoglu, D., Robinson, J. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. New York: Profile Books.
2. Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The grand chessboard: American primacy and its geostrategic imperatives. NY: Basic Books.
3. Casey, E.S. (2009). Getting Back Into Place: Towards a Re-newed Understanding of the Place-World. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
4. Cohen, A. (2009). Russia: the flawed energy superpower. Luft G, Korins A (eds) Energy security challenges for the 21st century: a reference handbook. ABC CLIO, Santa Barbara.
5. Cohen, S. B. (1990). The World Geopolitical System in Retrospect and Prospect. Journal of Geography, 89(1), 2–12. doi:10.1080/00221349008979817.
6. Congressional Record. (1945). Vol. 91, 79th Cong., 1st sess. Wash. D. C.: GPO, 3. (Congressional Record, 1981–1998, 2014. The Library of Congress). Retrieved from: http://thomas.loc.gov.
7. Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. W.W. Norton & Company.
8. Diamond, J. (2011). Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed. New York: Penguin Group.
9. Diamond, J. (2020). Geographic determinism. What does «geographic determinism» really mean? Retrieved from: http://www.jareddiamond.org/Jared_Diamond/ Geographic_determinism.html.
10. Doel, M. (1999). Poststructuralist Geographies, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
11. Dolman, E.C. (2005). The geographical pivot of outer space. Global geostrategy: Mackinder and the defence of the West / Brian W. Blouet. NY: Routlegde, 142-164.
12. Douhet, G. (1942). The command of the air. New York: Coward McCann.
13. Fulbright Act. Public Law 584, 79th Cong., 2nd sess., Au- gust 01. (1946). A Decade of American Foreign Policy. Basic Documents, 1941–1949. Washington: Dept. of State, 568–569.
14. Gilmartin, M. (2009). Colonialism/Imperialism. Key concepts in political geography. London: SAGE, 115–123.
15. Gray C.S. (1999). Inescapable Geography. Geopolitics, geography, and strategy / editors, Colin S. Gray, Geoffrey Sloan. London; NY: Routledge, 161-177.
16. Hong, S. (2010). Environmental and Geographic Determinism: Jared Diamond and His Ideas. Grand Theories and Ideologies in the Social Sciences. NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 141–158. DOI: 10.1057/9780230112612_9.
17. Johnson, W. & Colligan, F. (1965). The Fulbright Program: a History. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
18. Judkins, G., Smith, M., Keys, E. (2008). Determinism with- in human-environment research and the rediscovery of environmental causation, Geographical Journal, 174,1, рр.17-29, DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-4959.2008.00265.x.
19. Kelly, P. (2006).Acritique of critical geopolitics. Geopolitics. 11 (1), р.24–53. DOI: 10.1080/14650040500524053.
20. Kobayashi, A. (2017). Spatiality. D. Richardson (ed.) The International Encyclopedia of Geography Volume XIII, Chichester: Wiley, 6765– 6772.
21. Liuhto, K. (2010). Energy in Russia’s foreign policy, elec- tronic publications of Pan-European Institute 10/2010. Retrieved from: http://gpf-europe.com/upload/ iblock/397/energy_in_%20russias_%20foreign_poli- cy.pdf.
22. Luttwak, E. (1990). From Geopolitics to Geo-Economics: Logic of Conflict, Grammar of Commerce. The National Interest, 20, 17-23. Retrieved from: https:// www.jstor.org/stable/42894676.
23. Luttwak, E.1(994). The endangered American dream: how to stop the United States from becoming a Third-World country and how to win the geo-economic struggle for industrial supremacy. NY: TOUCHSTONE.
24. Mackinder, H.J. (1904). The Geographical Pivot of History. Geographical Journal, 23.
25. Marko, V. (2017). Toward a Demarcation of Forms of Determinism. Organon F 24(1), pp.54-84.
26. Marshall, T. (2015). Prisoners of geography: ten maps that tell you everything you need to know about global pol- itics. London: Elliott & Thompson.
27. McLuhan, M. & McLuhan, E. (2017). The Lost Tetrads of Marshall McLuhan. NY; London: OR Books.
28. McLuhan, M. (1987). Letters of Marshall McLuhan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29. Meilinger, Ph.S. (2000). The Paths Of Heaven: The Evolution Of Airpower Theory. New Delhi, India: Lancer Publishers.
30. Merriman, P. (2022). Space. NY: Routledge.
31. Peet, R. (1985). The social origins of environmental deter- minism. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 75, 309–333.
32. Said, E. (1979). Imaginative Geography and Its Represen- tations: Orientalizing the Oriental. Orientalism. NY: Vintage.
33. Savona, P., Jean C. (1996). Geoeconomia. Il dominio dello spazio economico Copertina flessibile. Milano: Franco Angeli.
34. Sharp, J.P. (2009). Geographies of Postcolonialism. London: Sage Publications.
35. Sluyter, A. (2003). Neo-Environmental Determinism, Intellectual Damage Control, and Nature/Society Science. Antipode, 35 (4), 813–817. DOI: 10.1046/j.1467- 8330.2003.00354.x.
36. Staden, van A. (2007). Between the Rule of Power and the Power of Rule: In Search of an Effective World Order. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
37. Stearn, G.E. (1967). McLuhan, hot & cool; a primer for the understanding of & a critical symposium with a rebuttal by McLuhan, edited by Gerald Emanuel Stearn. New York, Dial Press.
38. Stulberg, A.N. (2005). Moving beyond the Great Game: The geoeconomics of Russia’s influence in the Caspian energy bonanza. Geopolitics, 10(1), 1–25, DOI: 10.1080/14650040590907785.
39. Sullivan, R. (201)1. Environmental Determinism and Geopolitical Performance. Geography speaks: performa- tive aspects of geography. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing LTD, 123-150.
40. Toal, G. (1996). Critical geopolitics: the politics of writing global space. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
41. Todorova, M. N. (2009). Imagining the Balkans. NY: Oxford University Press.
42. Vysotskyi, O, Vysotska O. (2020). Technologies of Public Diplomacy: Methodological Principles and Practical Potential. Epistemological studies in philosophy, social and political sciences, 3, 1, 139-147. DOI: 10.15421/342015.
43. Wigell, M. (2016). Conceptualizing regional powers’ geo- economic strategies: neo-imperialism, neo-mercantilism, hegemony, and liberal institutionalism. Asia-Europe Journal, 14, 135–151, DOI: 10.1007/s10308-015- 0442-x.
Published
2022-09-26
How to Cite
Vysotskyi, O., Deviatko, N., & Vysotska, O. (2022). Theory of technologies of geographical determinism in international relations. Journal of Geology, Geography and Geoecology, 31(3), 554-565. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15421/112252