Thursday, April 23, 2020

Mackinder or Mahan Essay Example

Mackinder or Mahan Paper In the modern era, geopolitics is very similar to rotational thought, which is why these theorists, in particular Amman, are arguably still applicable to contemporary geopolitics. The ideologies that are held together by Mackenzie and his concept of the Heartland Theory are out-dated and irrelevant to contemporary geopolitics. His idea of a World Island as set geographical position that is highly inflexible, is opposite to what is expected of modern thought. Walters (1975) argued the Heartland Theory was one perspective of the globe, and stated, policy is made in the minds of men; its contours may not concur with a true map of the world. As contours are a minimal factor in Mans school of thought, he has become highly popular regarding sea power. His works on Naval influence is highly relevant to contemporary geopolitics. To cater for an increasingly globalizes world, that is heavily dependent on foreign resources and trade, sea power, and navies essentially, are key to ensure that a sustained level of growth and power is achieved. We will write a custom essay sample on Mackinder or Mahan specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Mackinder or Mahan specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Mackinder or Mahan specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer The United States of America is a clear example of a major power that uses its naval capacity to adhere to Mahayana logic, that reflects his tridents and six principle conditions that are still existent today. Mackenzie and the Heartland Theory was of high relevance in the 19th and 20th century. At that time, Eastern Europe was of a favorable strategic geographic area, lying on the brink of the western and eastern world. It had an abundance of rich resources key to state superiority. However, in the modern era, geographic importance is not as fundamental to a successful nation as Dally and Total (1998:16) quite clearly explain, our conveniently conventional geopolitical imagination, which envisions and maps the world in terms of spatial blocs, territorial presence and fixed identities, is no longer adequate in a world where pace appears to be left behind by pace, where territoriality is under eclipse by dialectically, and where simple settled identities are blurring into networks of complex unsettled hybrid. Mackenzie failed to recognize the importance that lies outside the heartland, which consists of the Riemann and Offshore Islands. To conform to Mackenzie, would be to say that the US is a mere island that is dependent on situations and outcomes that occur in Eastern Europe. In fact, it is the opposite scenario if applied contemporaries. Nicholas Sparkman, a strategies, argued against Mackenzie, by stating that the Americas have the resources and power in which to prevent states inside the heartland from achieving the traditionally adhered, world dominant status. Dally and Total (1998) elaborate further, arguing that if Mackenzie and the Heartland Theory were still prevalent, the US wouldnt be the super power it is today. They identified the outside inside approach, which redeploys the shape of heartland geopolitics in favor of the Americas. Woolworth (1999) states that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, a unpopular world has been dominated by US power, which generates an additional claim that Mackenzie really is irrelevant in contemporary geopolitics. Despite other elements are equal or even greater to sustain and improve national power, the Mahayana late 19th century logic of sea power, is still existent in contemporary power domination. Mahayana theory consists of two tridents, discussed by James R Holmes (2009). The first of his tridents, logic, governs strategic and geopolitical ideas relating to sea power. There is a tripartite element that consists commercially in the sense of obtaining wealth, politically for naming national power, and militarily for allowing access to these resources and maintaining these routes while upholding and reinforcing an authoritative stance, which is a clear purpose regarding the nation of the United States. His second trident, grammar, provides the rules of preparing for warfare and naval readiness. It consists martially and operational in nature, through production and overseas markets and bases. Holmes and Yeshiva (2010) come to appreciate the relevance of Mans logic, more than his grammar. The grammar of combat is out-dated, providing that the last fleet engagement was at the Elite Gulf in 1944. An extremely relevant question regarding the United States need for an immediate fleet is extremely relevant. An interesting discussion made by Holmes and Yeshiva (2010) addresses the questionable issue about the United States needing to have high-end ships and criticizes the mindset in which the nation has regarding contemporary geopolitics and outcomes for the future of naval warfare. Amman used six principles that primarily affect a nations ability to become a powerful sea power: geographical position, physical conformation, extent of territory, size of the population, character of the people, and character of the government. Parker (2003) stated these conditions were valid requirements for national power in the late 19th century, are valid requirements for national power in the 21st century, and will be valid requirements for national power for some time to come. The United States is a clear exemplification of how these principles are applied successful in order to maintain, and increase their unpopular dominance. The first principle, geographical position is supremely fundamental to the United States Navy. Because the countries contours consist of vast coastlines and occupy hundreds of military bases overseas, its position s essential to naval dominance. The concern Amman had in his time was that the United States didnt have any ports or trade centers close to the heartland. This concern has clearly been erased through the abundance of bases around Europe. By using the overseas military bases, such as the base in Bahrain, it creates assistance in trade through the Malice Straight, which is a huge chock point in the shipping industry and is favorable to piracy. To be militarily active in a position such as this, allows for United States integration into international assistance and gives the power to deter hostile forces at sea. By having the multitude of bases, it allows the US Navy to address any situation at any time, regardless of its geographical position. In this case, the United States addressed Mans concern, allowing for a greater geopolitical influence around the world. What Amman means when discussing his second principle of physical conformation, is the physical geography that determines if interaction with surrounding foreign areas is amplified or discouraged. In favor of the United States, the ports on the east, west and Gulf coats receive relatively good climates and are all generally rich in resources. This allows for easy access, which results in the high use of the capabilities and use of resources available to the nation. An example of how rich the resources are, consist of 323 million barrels of oil and 670 billion cubic feet of gas pockets still available off the west coast of the United States as discussed by Emerson et al (2012). From this accessibility and richness, the United States clearly adheres to the second principle Amman expects from a dominant sea power. What Mans third principle of extent of territory relates to is the irrelevance that the size of a nation has, but rather the length of the coastline elevate to its size. The coast of the United States is a staggering 20,000 kilometers on length, which allows Amman to use the United States Pacific coastline to emphasis its importance it has to assist militarily to other bordering regions such as Australia and Asia. It also uses its vast Atlantic coast to interact with the European and African continents. Mans appreciation for the extent of coastline can therefore relate to the ease in which the United States has with the geographic nature of the United States. The fourth principle of number of population is another major influence that determines a nations dominant sea power. Amman emphasizes that active military personnel are key to a nations ability to act when necessary, and therefore is a highly important factor. With the use of statistics from CNN (201 1), the United States population of 318 million people is a vital component of this principle, but a rather more significant one is the focus on the 1. 4 million active frontline and 850,000 active reserve personnel around the world in 150 different countries that support Mans (1890) concept of being, readily available for employment on ship-board and for the creation of naval material. The high amount of personnel on active duty, stresses the interest and importance the United States has around the world. Competing nations such as China and India, who have a much higher population than the United States are becoming increasingly threatening. However, the United States has one of the highest amounts of military expenditure, utilizing 4. 2% of its GAP (World Bank 2012). With this high amount of spending, it allows the United States to adhere to what Amman believed to be the most important factor regarding population. As long as the resources, equipment and training and personnel are maintained at a steady, acceptable rate that could act in a time of crisis, it will suffice to threats. This goes to show that the United States is a nation that understands futuristic implications that may arise, and is seen to be ready to address these threats from a Mahayana standpoint. National character was Mans interest with industry and trade, which made up his fifth principle. Parker (2003) uses an analogy to compare how England and Holland acted in the colonial era. The author looked at Mans work in addressing the character of these nations, which seemed to then manifest their administration of colonial conquest. The nations examined seemed to use not a sword, but labor to immigrate, as discussed by Amman (1890). This is similarly seen in the United States objectives of commercial interest in the liberations of international trade in the past century, and in years to come, which again, portrays Mans relevant ideologies. The character of government is Mans final principle. He addresses this idea by deciding whether a nation is at peace or war. In peacetime, the policies can either be in favor or against the industries related to naval capacity. In the midst of war, it is fundamental for government decision making o increase defensive spending compared to peacetime budgeting. It is safe to say, the current United States government addresses international affairs and situations that they are at all times, at war. Woolworth (1999) confirms with the diminishing notion of the unpopular world, a mindset like this is essential to survival.