Victorian geography is back in vogue. In The End of Poverty, Jeffrey Sachs blames
geography for poverty, while in Guns,
Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond says that the different shapes of Eurasia
and the Americas explain the course of global economic development. And now, in
"The Revenge of Geography," Robert Kaplan suggests that states have
had their day and that global society will dissolve into tribal conflicts over
dwindling resources. He commends British geographer Halford Mackinder for his
1904 essay, "The Geographical Pivot of History," and its analysis of the
geographical dynamics of the perennial struggle over Eurasia.For
Kaplan, the appeal of environmental determinism is evident. It reduces
otherwise complex theories of economic development or of international
relations to a stable set of factors (such as climate, physiography, and
location) and further suggests that
the primary causes of social, political, and economic inequality lie outside
the realm of human intervention. The revenge of geography centers on
environmental realities that never cease to frustrate the grand schemes of men
who would remake the world after their own ideals.
But
there are four problems with Mackinder's case, and ultimately Kaplan's
argument, as he builds upon it. First, the fact that today's conflicts are in
many of the same places as yesterday's is a testament not to the guiding hand
of Mother Nature, but to the pitiful legacy of those earlier wars --
colonialism, political instability, and economic exploitation. (The British
alone fought wars in Iraq during 1914-1918, 1920-1921, 1922-1924, 1943, and
1945, and in Afghanistan during 1839-1842, 1878-1880, and 1919, and of course
are again in both places.) Second, cultural identities are created as distinct
communities interact with one another, not through isolated communion with the
Earth. Third, rich and powerful countries' interests in the affairs of poorer countries
are driven as much by their economic needs as by the problems afflicting the
poorer countries. Finally, for all the U.N.'s flaws, international relations
are not solely structured around the threat of force; Wilsonian values are
credible pillars of international institutions and affairs. Ideas matter more
than Kaplan admits.
None of
these critiques is new and they were made by Mackinder's contemporaries. John
Hobson, the author of the famous work, Imperialism:
A Study (1902), wrote from a rich liberal tradition that was hostile to
warmongering and he criticized the colonial wars that Mackinder celebrated.
Élisée Reclus, who put together a monumental 19-volume survey of global
geography, likewise argued that colonialism had serious and continuing consequences.
In particular, Reclus showed that the commodification of land and resources
produced food insecurity throughout indigenous societies. Another of
Mackinder's contemporaries, geographer and anarchist Peter Kropótkin, insisted
that identity was neither biological nor environmental fate, but rather a
social creation enabling people to cultivate their higher natures.
Mackinder, by contrast, saw colonialism as
diffusing technology and civilized values to benighted savages. For him,
environment determined racial character and this in turn dictated people's
intellectual firepower and level of civilization. He saw a clear hierarchy of
civilizations -- the further from Anglo-Saxon values you were, the more
inferior your society.
If we
are to rehabilitate Victorian geography, as Kaplan attempts to do here, then,
we must also recall its contested nature, and against simplistic
environmentalism we must urge the relevance of a historical analysis that
emphasizes colonialism, an understanding of cultures as dynamic and
interdependent, and a recognition of the importance of cooperation, justice,
and multilateral institutions.
Not amazing, but an adequate definition
