Halford Mackinder

Resumo: O pensamento geopolítico clássico desenvolveu-se em torno de duas doutrinas antagônicas: a do poder marítimo e a do poder terrestre. Se os poderes marítimo e terrestre são antagônicos, então como um poder misto dos dois, o anfíbio, poderia se constituir? Teria ele uma fortaleza própria a partir do qual conquistaria o mundo, a exemplo do que o Heartland de Mackinder representa para o poder terrestre? Seria esse espaço o Rimland de Spykman? Ou em qualquer lugar do mundo uma potência anfíbia teria possibilidade de se desenvolver? Este trabalho tem como objetivo a compreensão da natureza do poder anfíbio. Para atingir este objetivo far-se-á uma análise comparativa das reflexões geopolíticas de Mackinder e Spykman.

Resumen: El pensamiento geopolítico clásico se desarrolló alrededor de dos doctrinas antagónicas: la del poder marítimo y la del poder terrestre. ¿Si los poderes marítimo y terrestre son antagónicos, entonces como un poder misto de los dos podría constituirse? ¿Tenería él una fortaleza propia a partir de lo cual conquistaría el mundo, a ejemplo lo que el Heartland de Mackinder representa para el poder terrestre? ¿Sería ese espacio el Rimland de Spykman? ¿O en cualquier ubicación del mundo una potencia anfibia tenería la posibilidad de desarrollarse? Este trabajo tiene como objetivo la comprensión de la naturaleza del poder anfibio. Para alcanzar este objetivo se hará un análisis comparativo de las reflexiones geopolíticas de Mackinder y Spykman.

De quoi allons nous parler ? De l’histoire du « géographisme », donc de l’évolution de la géographie comme idéologie politique au service du pouvoir militaire. Nous allons analyser les cartes, les projections, les logiques et les fantasmes de dictateurs. Pourquoi ? Parce que le géographisme se retrouve partout de nos jours, même si il ne possède pas de nom reconnu. Il s’agit en effet de ce type de géographie de la nécessité et du conflit que prônent les divers partisans de la seguridad nacional : les ultra-nationalistes, les militaristes, les revanchistes, les négationnistes, les anti-communistes, les fascistes, post- et néo-fascistes, mais aussi lesfondamentalistes religieux, les experts en anti-terrorisme, les néo-conservateurs, les journalistes en panne de sensationnel, etc.

This e-book is a collection of papers focussing on the discursive dimension of the 'eastern enlargement' of the European Union, relying on lessons from post-colonial scholarship, world-systems analysis and critical race studies. The empirical material comes from discourse of 'eastern enlargement' process in the late 1990s-early 2000s .

"The rise of violent non state actors and the role of mass media makes us wonder if Mackinder's classic Geopolitics is relevant today, when globalization and information society make possible to talk about a "world without distances" and "inmaterial battlefields". Geography and nation-states aren't relevant always.
Moreover, capabilities like those offered by SeaBasing contradict Mackinder view of a post-Columbian world where sea power isn't relevant anymore."

Questo studio, afferente all’ambito della Geopolitica, è diviso in due parti. Nella prima si prende in esame il pensiero del geografo Halford John Mackinder, seguendo un approccio diacronico e focalizzandosi soprattutto sulla teoria dell’ “Heartland”, di cui si evidenziano contenuti, sviluppo, evoluzione nonché legami con i grandi temi della storia del periodo, quali l’imperialismo e le due guerre mondiali. Nella seconda si cerca di dimostrare la validità di tale teoria anche nel mondo di oggi, mediante un’analisi della situazione geopolitica attuale attraverso le lenti del pensiero di Mackinder e di studiosi “mackinderiani” come Zbigniew Brzezinski e Colin Gray: si considerano in particolare le aree dell’Europa, dell’Africa, del Medio Oriente e dell’Asia-Pacifico, con l’utilizzo di fonti aggiornate.

Burna dešavanja na međunarodnoj sceni, koja su obeležila početak novog
milenijuma, dovela su do renasanse geopolitičke misli i buđenja interesovanja za
klasične geopolitičke teorije. Događaji i procesi poput terorističkog napada na Svetski
trgovinski centar, Globalnog rata protiv terorizma, američke intervencije u Avganistanu
i Iraku, ponovnog jačanja ruske moći, kineskog ekonomskog buma, Arapskog proleća
i sl. probudile su novo interesovanje za teorije Halforda Makindera (Halford Mackinder),
Nikolasa Spajkmena (Nicholas Spykman) i drugih klasičnih geopolitičara. S druge
strane, ovom uzletu neoklasične geopolitike prethodilo je rađanje kritičke škole geopolitičkog
mišljenja, koja je insistirala na denaturalizaciji geografije. Zagovornici kritičke
geopolitike, poput Džona Egnjua (John Agnew) i Džerarda Toala (Gearoid O Tuathail),
zastupaju stanovište prema kome uticaj geografskih faktora na svetsku politiku nije „prirodan”
i dat sam po sebi, već on prevashodno zavisi od načina na koji ga (geopolitički)
akteri shvataju. Aktuelna migrantska kriza, izazvana prilivom izbeglica i migranata iz
afričkih, bliskoistočnih i srednjeistočnih država, u države Zapadne Evrope, može poslužiti
kao snažan argument kritičkom tumačenju geopolitike. Masovne migracije sa
kojima se Evropa danas suočava predstavljaju veliki izazov za određena klasična geopolitička
shvatanja. Prevashodno ona koja tretiraju geografske datosti kao osnovne pokretače
međunarodnih dešavanja. Cilj rada je da pokaže na koji način trenutni migrantski
talas dovodi u pitanje jednu od ključnih postavki klasične geopolitike – Makenderovu
teoriju Hartlenda.

International relations theories act as the guiding lantern to provide a simple yet powerful description of international phenomena such as war, expansionism, alliances and cooperation. Thus, the primary objective of this article is to analyze international relations theories, their roles and influence on global politics hereby bridging the gap between the abstract world of theory and the real world of policy. The article utilizes the Grand Chess Board and Heartland theories on the regional geopolitical processes in Eurasia. The core argument of the article is that theoretical perception creates regional identities, and states use these emerged identities to influence geopolitical traditions. The Grand Chess Board theory of Brzezinski states that in order to sustain its position as a global hegemon, the US needs to control and manage Eurasia. Moreover, this article analyses American foreign policy in Eurasia under the umbrella of the Grand Chess Board theory. The Chinese strategy towards Eurasia through the prism of Mack-inder's Heartland theory is also explored. By analyzing initiatives such as One Belt One Road (OBOR), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the energy push in Central Asia, this article can serve as an examination into the Chinese taking up the mantle of the heartland to emerge as the land power of the 21 st century.

The paper aims at assessing the long duree of Russian geopolitics from the perspective of the Heartland model as envisaged by Sir Mackinder. This was modeled in order to give an alarmist view about the locational supremacy of Russia over the Eurasian Heartland. But, the Heartland model has had many arguments that pointed to the approach long-seated before Mackinder could deploy them for the West. The paper looks at the conceptualization of Eurasianism or Russian geopolitical thought as an ontological praxis of Heartland thesis. The ethno-religious base of Slavism and Russian Orthodoxy made a complex compromise with the Asian peoples in order to strike multiple balances both in the European theatre and the Euro-Asian realm at large. The Heartland signified a perennial contest between western democracies and the Asiatic authoritarianism. Russia inherited this geo-cultural repository and worked with China giving rise to bigger Heartland discourse.

Ο Αλέξανδρος Ντούγκιν (Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin), που γεννήθηκε στη Μόσχα το 1962, είναι ο εκφραστής των μεγάλης εμβέλειας τάσεων της σύγχρονης ρωσικής πολιτικής, που όμως θα ήτανε σφάλμα να θεωρηθεί ότι αφορούν και συναρπάζουν μόνο τους Ρώσους. Ο Ντούγκιν τώρα είναι ο επικεφαλής της έδρας της Κοινωνιολογίας των Διεθνών Σχέσεων στο πανεπιστήμιο της Μόσχας. Η θεωρία την οποία προβάλλει βασίζεται και σε διαπιστώσεις προσωπικοτήτων που έζησαν πριν από αυτόν. Μια ματιά στον χάρτη, πράγματι, είναι αρκετή για να καταλάβει κανείς ότι η διαίρεση «Ευρώπη-Ασία» είναι, στην ουσία τεχνητή. Και τούτο, διότι μία είναι η ήπειρος που «αρχίζει στο Βλαδιβοστόκ και τελειώνει στο Δουβλίνο»: η Ευρασία. Αυτή η «Ευρασιατική Θεωρία» αφορά άμεσα την Ελλάδα – και μάλιστα σε βαθμό μεγαλύτερο από όσο τις υπόλοιπες ευρωπαϊκές χώρες. Και τούτο, γιατί στην Πατρίδα μας, από παντού φεύγουν οι στεριές και μένουν οι θάλασσες, όπως γλαφυρώς διακήρυξε ο Γέρος μας του Μοριά. Ποιος, όμως, είναι ο ρόλος της Ελλάδας; Να αποτελεί μαχαίρι των θαλάσσιων Δυνάμεων (Βρεταννίας και Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών) στραμμένο προς την καρδιά της Ευρασίας ή, αντίθετα, εξέδρα και προέκταση στα νερά της Μεσογείου των ευρασιατικών Δυνάμεων; Με άλλα λόγια, η χώρα μας πρέπει να είναι υπό την αποκλειστική προστασία του αλλοπρόσαλλου Ποσειδώνα ή, αντίθετα, της σοφής Προμάχου Αθηνάς;

How can we explain that the Cold war is back, when the Soviet Union has disappeared? Since the change of regime in Moscow has not put an end to the tensions between Western countries and Russia, should we not question the current view that the cold war would have been an ideological confrontation between two competing social systems? In short, the "new Cold War" would not be the time to turn the page of the ideology of the Cold War?

Uluslararası ilişkilerin yakın tarihinde güç merkezleri daha çok Anglo-Amerikan, Avrupa ve Avrasya merkezli olarak şekillenmiş ve küresel
aktörler çıkarlarını siyasî coğrafyalar üzerinden hayata geçirmeye
başlamıştır. Sömürgecilik yarışının hız kazandığı 19. yüzyılın sonlarından
itibaren emperyalist güçler, dünya adasında daha fazla hâkimiyet için
coğrafyaları, siyasi çıkarları doğrultusunda yeniden yoruma tabi tutmuş
ve bu doğrultuda jeopolitik teoriler geliştirmişlerdir. İngiliz jeopolitikçi
John Mackinder’in Kara Hâkimiyeti Teorisi daha sonra Amerikalı
Nicholas J. Spykman tarafından Kenar Kuşak Teorisi’ne uyarlanmış ve
bu teori Amerika’nın güvenlik ve yayılma stratejisi olarak Soğuk Savaş
döneminin uluslararası siyasetine doğrudan yön vermiştir. Fakat Soğuk
Savaş sonrası değişen, dönüşen uluslararası konjonktür sebebiyle klasik
jeopolitik teoriler etkinliğini kaybetmiş ve yerini eleştirel, sosyal inşacı
ve post yapısal okumaların yönlendirdiği yeni jeopolitik kuramlara
bırakmıştır. Küresel hegemonya hedefini çağdaş jeopolitik kuramlar
üzerinden gerçekleştirmeye çalışan emperyalist güçlerin karşısına;
hedef aldıkları coğrafyalardaki bölgesel güçlerin yeni jeopolitik
teorileri çıkmaktadır. Buna göre çalışma, İran’ın jeopolitik algısından
hareketle Kara Hâkimiyeti Teorisi bağlamında kurgulanan “Yeni Pers
Hayat Sahası” teorisini ortaya koymakta ve bunu Yemen politikaları
örnekleminde incelemektedir.

Mackinder’ın Kara Hâkimiyeti Teorisi bağlamında İran’ın Yemen
politikasının incelendiği bu çalışmada, ilk aşamada kuramsal çerçeve
ortaya konulmuş ve İran’ın dış politikasını şekillendiren kimlik boyutu
tarihsel kodlar üzerinden açıklanmıştır. Bir sonraki bölümde İran dış
politikasında Yemen’in rolü yeni bir başlık altında incelenmiş, Yemen’in
jeopolitik ve stratejik önemi, iç savaşın tarafları ve aktörleri ele alınmıştır.
Aynı bölüm altında Yemen’deki İran destekli Husi Hareketi’nin yapısı, hedefleri, inancı ve Yemen hükümetiyle olan çatışmaları dönemleriyle birlikte açıklanmıştır. Daha sonra Yemen’in İran dış politikasındaki önemi ve İran’ın güvenlik politikalarındaki katkısına açıklık getirilmiştir. Nihayet İran’ın Yemen politikası doğrultusunda kullandığı hedef, yöntem, söylem ve araçlar ayrıntılı bir şekilde ele alınmış ve İran’ın yeni jeopolitik kuramının nasıl hayata geçirileceği irdelenmiştir. Bunun yanı sıra çalışmada İran’ın Yemen politikasının bölgesel güvenliğe olan etkileri ve olası gelişmeler değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışmanın son bölümünde ise taraflara önerilerde bulunulmuş ve elde edilen bulgular kapsamlı bir şekilde ortaya konulmuştur.

Il termine “geopolitica” è oggi molto inflazionato, spesso svuotato del suo contenuto e reso alla stregua di attualità della politica internazionale. Ciò non solo pone la geopolitica su un piano non scientifico e più giornalistico che accademico; ma soprattutto tradisce ciò che storicamente è stata, e attualmente può essere, la vera Geopolitica intesa come approccio scientifico a sé stante, ancorché necessariamente interdisciplinare. Un buon modo per recuperare l'originario afflato della Geopolitica, e ribadirlo, è quello di osservare come essa si estrinsecò nei suoi autori più rappresentativi, quelli che potremmo chiamare “i classici”.
In tale logica si inserisce il presente lavoro riassuntivo del pensiero di Halford John Mackinder (1861-1947), tra le figure chiave della geopolitica di inizio Novecento. Basata sulle opere edite di Mackinder e su alcuni documenti d'archivio con una costante attenzione per il coevo panorama scientifico e culturale in cui agiva il geografo britannico, questa ricerca eminentemente storiografica vuol essere di stimolo alla riflessione sulle potenzialità di una scienza geopolitica, sui suoi contenuti, metodi e finalità.

In the recent years, the concept of Indo-Pacific has been a ubiquitous theme in world politics. Quad, Belt and Road initiative, American naval warships and artificial islands made by China have been doing rounds in international studies circles. Explaining the management of China’s rise has drawn various analysts to this area. Most of the scholars in this area are still trying to figure out the ontology of Indo-Pacific and why some states are responding to China’s actions. In their attempt to define Indo-Pacific they also create constructs that have become instrumental in the study of Indo-Pacific. This book is also an attempt towards defining and understanding the new etymology of Indo-Pacific. Timothy Doyle and Denis Rumley, professors from Australian universities are deeply enmeshed in this process.

The dialectical contraposition between East and West is a topos of modern thought and the debate is still enraged. Is the dichotomy nowadays valid? Or are these concepts definitively obsolete? Is globalization blowing away this contraposition? Moreover, if East and West are fading away, is there the possibility of a Third? The dialogue between Ernst Jünger and Carl Schmitt, collected in The Gordian Knot, offers a precious insight and suggests the possibility of a different interpretation of the connection between East and West.

According to the thesis of professionalization of scientists, during the 19th century a well-defined social group of professional scientists emerged. That article tries out the professionalization thesis through a precise experience, that of Halford John Mackinder (1861-1947), British geographer, often considered  founder of the modern discipline in his country. Mackinder's life and career proved to be congruent with the professionalization thesis, and in particular with the scheme devised by G.H. Daniels which divides the process in four moment: preemption, institutionalization, legitimation and autonomy. In fact, H.J. Mackinder contributed to define Geography's content and boundaries (particularly respect to Geology and History), to establish the first geographical Readership and the first geographical Universitary School in England, to find its benefit for the society, and then tried to sustain himself by the profession of Geographer.

The Belt and Road Initiative represents bipolarity in the Mackinderian Heartland model. This is a response by Russia and China to resist unipolar world order as sought by the US. The signification of the Chinese presence in Heartland was called a ‘yellow peril’ by Mackinder. China has shown the other side of coin by leading an economic initiative in heartland geopolitics that is good enough to signify its presence as ‘blooming dandelions’. The role of BRI in linking Europe and Asia has both geopolitical and geoeconomics implications. Russia has been emerged as co-host to BRI geopolitics and is riding the initiative in creating its own long-term niche in European order. The pipeline geopolitics has preceded the BRI geopolitics and hence China has worked out its rules of engaging the West based on those experiences. The strategy adopted by Russia and China could be seen as defensive-offensive realism where China’s economic offensive and Russian defence against NATO advances are working in tandem. The US has tried to increase the cost ratio of this alliance by doing away several arms treaty that held the cold war détente. The geoeconomics of Heartland is being calibrated by Russia and China to reduce that cost ratio so that globally coplanar equilibrium with the West is maintained and peace becomes the dividend of heartland realism.

A review of Gerry Kerns' brilliant biography of Halford Mackinder. Kearns' work is essential reading for any student of geopolitics, political geography, or the U.K./U.S.A. "special relationship." The book is a masterclass- whether you agree or not with Kearns' proscriptions, it is a foundational text for geography in the twenty-first century.

Post-communist Ukraine is in the midst of implementing reforms which it missed for centuries. It gradually evolves into a unique geopolitical entity which, finally, acquires a fair chance to be consistent and self-sufficient. However, if the West takes a neutral stance today – as it frequently happened in history – a “decentralized” Ukraine will fall again under the centralized Russian assault.

Is there a connection between Russia’s unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine and the emerging new world order of cultural production? Yes there is, and it has to do with the fact that Russia is the biggest loser of the second wave of globalization. Part of what we are seeing now is Russia lashing out based on a faulty 19th century theory of geopolitics which sees land as the main source of power, rather than brands and the control of global value chains.

È passato più di un secolo da quando sir Halford Mackinder espose la sua teoria geopolitica sull'importanza dell'Heartland, il cuore della terra, per le relazioni internazionali, e la politica estera degli Stati Uniti, dal secondo dopoguerra ad oggi, si fonda proprio sull'obiettivo di evitare la formazione di una coalizione antiegemonica o di una superpotenza in Eurasia

В статье обсуждается книга американского политолога Роберта Каплана «Месть географии». Рецензент отмечает, что эта работа является манифестом американского политического «реализма», подвергающего сомнению уверенность либеральных интервенционистов в возможности принести народам свободу на крыльях бомбардировщиков. Ограниченность американской воздушной мощи, устойчивые географические структуры и исторически длительные временные протяженности кладут предел американской экспансии, ведущей лишь к хаосу. В конечном счете порядок важнее свободы, и не следует разрушать диктатуры без уверенности, что им на смену придет что-то лучшее, нежели кровавый хаос. Геополитическое содержание работы Каплана -это реставрация теорий классической геополитики - Маккиндера, Мэхена, Спайкмена. Рецензент отмечает, что основной пафос геополитических классиков - «сдерживание» российской экспансии к теплым морям. Однако практическая применимость этих теорий ограничена фундаментальной ошибкой Маккиндера - он квалифицировал русскую экспансию как сухопутную, а Хартленд определил как гидрологически изолированную территорию, в то время как русская экспансия была речной и арктической, а главное свойство «Хартленда» - теснейшее переплетение речных бассейнов. По наблюдению рецензента - Россия гораздо чаще обыгрывала Запад на океанских направлениях, нежели считают геополитики - в пример чего приводится геополитическое вторжение в самое средоточие американской мощи - в Карибское море, на Кубу. Регионоведческий очерк Каплана, посвященный России, рецензент оценивает как пример взгляда на Россию без русофобских очков. Каплан рассматривает русскую империю как вынужденно расширяющуюся из опасения нападения извне, а историю России - как циклический процесс «расширение - упадок - возрождение» и призывает никогда не сбрасывать Россию со счета.

The special relationship between the five Anglo-Saxon countries (USA, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand), established during the Second World War and still working nowadays (as the Datagate affair proves), has its ideological basis in a debate about the British Empire's constitution born in pre-independence North-American colonies in late 18th century and then continued in Great Britain during the 19th century. That debate, starting from whig constitutionalism, has subsequently embarked Romantic nationalism resulting in themes such as “Greater Britain” and “Imperial Federation”. By way of the Milnerite's Round Table, the original constitutional topic has come back in the US under a new guise of Anglo-Saxon nationalism.

***

La liaison spéciale entre les cinq pays anglo-saxons (Etats-Unis, Royaume Uni, Australie, Canada et Nouvelle Zélande), établie pendant la 2ème guerre mondiale et aujourd’hui encore vivante (comme l’affaire «Datagate» confirme), a ses bases idéologiques dans un débat sur la constitution de l’Empire Britannique né à la fin du 18ème dans le colonies nord-américaines pré-indépendance et continué en Grande Bretagne pendant le 19ème siècle. Ce débat, commençant du constitutionnalisme «whig», a par la suite entrepris le nationalisme Romantique avec le résultat de produire thématiques comme la «Greater Britain» ou la «Fédération Impériale». Par voie de la Table Ronde des milnerites, le sujet constitutionnel original est retourné dans les Etats-Unis sous une nouvelle guise de nationalisme anglo-saxon.

La ATCI es una propuesta en negociaciones entre la UE y EEUU para crear el más grande área de libre comercio internacional por extensión, población y volumen de intercambio comercial, de todas las existentes. A nuestro juicio, la ATCI sería la respuesta geoeconómica a los BRICS como espacio geopolítico, comercial y de cooperación en otros ámbitos como el militar en tanto que la ATCI reproduce a escala comercial la alianza político-militar ya existente entre buena parte de la UE y EEUU por la OTAN. En este artículo trataremos de exponer por qué la posible rivalidad ATCI vs. BRICS reproduciría en el siglo XXI los esquemas de “Guerra Fría” heredados del siglo XX, que a su vez reproducían los enfrentamientos geopolíticos derivados de la teoría del área pivote de Haltford McKinder y la tradicional contraposición entre imperialismos talasocráticos (gobierno sobre los mares y océanos) e imperialismos telurocráticos (gobierno sobre una extensísima porción de tierra emergida). Asímismo, trat...

Often unconsiously, strategists and statesmen all rely upon various geopolitical assumptions aboutthe world when developing theories or making long range plans. Though few today bother to tnvestigate its intellectual roots, the field of modern geopolitical study can be traced back almost a full century, Before exploring the history of geopolitical thought it will be useful to briefly explain a few of the tools and objectives of geopolitical theory. When used properly, geopolitical theory does not assign geography a strictly causal role in determining international. political change, Instead, geopolitical theorists seek to understand how relatively permanent geographical features of the globe condition or cQnstrain the impact of ever changing technological factors and political configurations on relations of power among states.1 The affect of geography on international politics can be conceptualized in terms of three primary factors: resource distribution, location, and movement or mobility,2, The resources available to a given state will affect its relative power potential. Factors such as climate, terrain, soil fertility, and extent of natural resources, etc. help determine whether a nation can sustain the sinews of modern industrial and military power, Location largely determines a state 9 s vulnerability to invasion and, conversely, its ability to project power outward. Location encompasses factors such as defensibility of borders, geographical relationship to surrounding states, and accessibility to rivers and oceans, These geographical limitations will bear on crucial strategic decisions including choice of allies, the size and character of a nation's armed forces, etc, On a global scale, the impact of geography on strategic interaction can largely be conceptualized in terms of movement or mobility. Geo

This article begins by reopening the Third Great Debate which established division lines between mainstream (realist/liberal/constructivist) and Critical (neo-Marxist/neo-Gramscian) theories of International Relations based on their different assumptions about the nature of the international system: anarchy and hierarchy, respectively. The first half of the article argues that adopting common definitions of these concepts makes the anarchy-hierarchy debate theoretically irresolvable and further demonstrates that mainstream and Critical theories do not share an understanding of these terms neither between, nor within, their own traditions. The second half of this article challenges and aims to correct the interpretation of three key political thinkers, Halford J. Mackinder, W. E. B. DuBois and Norman Angell as appropriated within the inter-paradigm debates of International Relations. It argues that the respective associations of these thinkers with early realism, critical theories and early liberalism are intellectually misguiding because their works exhibit a common understanding of the 'international' across macro-and micro-dimensions, which is uncharacteristic of '-isms'. This shows that popular interpretations of pre-1919 works through post-1919 paradigms can obscure more than they reveal. These findings do not seek to present new ideas but to produce a reflexive critique of IR which illuminates some, perhaps unintended, counter-productive systemic effects that inter-paradigm divisions can have on the discipline.

ABSTRACT
The British Isles are an archipelago formed mainly by the Island of Great Britain and the Island of Ireland. For more than eight centuries, disputes and con icts between the English and the Irish people have been intense, revealing a structural tension. The purpose of this paper is to analyze Anglo-Irish relations from a historical-geographical perspective. It begins with the geographic speci cities that characterize the British Isles in order to understand how these have shaped the relations between the island’s people.

RESUMO
As Ilhas Britânicas são um arquipélago formado sobretudo pelas Ilhas da Grã-Bretanha e da Irlanda. Há mais de oito séculos, as disputas entre ingleses e irlandeses têm sido intensas, revelando uma certa perenidade e uma tensão estrutural. O objetivo do presente trabalho é analisar as relações anglo-irlandesas com base numa concepção histórico-geográfica. Para tanto, parte-se das especificidades geográficas que caracterizam as Ilhas Britânicas a fim de se entender como estas têm moldado as relações entre os povos das Ilhas.

Resumen

La ATCI es una propuesta en negociaciones entre la UE y EEUU para crear el más grande área de libre comercio internacional por extensión, población y volumen de intercambio comercial, de todas las existentes. A nuestro juicio, la ATCI sería la respuesta geoeconómica a los BRICS como espacio geopolítico, comercial y de cooperación en otros ámbitos como el militar en tanto que la ATCI reproduce a escala comercial la alianza político-militar ya existente entre buena parte de la UE y EEUU por la OTAN. En este artículo trataremos de exponer por qué la posible rivalidad ATCI vs. BRICS reproduciría en el siglo XXI los esquemas de " Guerra Fría " heredados del siglo XX, que a su vez reproducían los enfrentamientos geopolíticos derivados de la teoría del área pivote de Haltford McKinder y la tradicional contraposición entre imperialismos talasocráticos (gobierno sobre los mares y océanos) e imperialismos telurocráticos (gobierno sobre una extensísima porción de tierra emergida). Asímismo, trataremos de mostrar por qué a nivel de dialéctica de Estados aquellas sociedades políticas más pobladas, más extensas territorialmente y con mayor cantidad de recursos serán las que tengan mayor capacidad para imponer un determinado modelo de relaciones internacionales y de hegemonía geopolítica a escala universal atendiendo a este viable enfrentamiento ATCI, más ATCE, vs. BRICS.

Abstract

The TTIP is a proposal on negotiations between the EU and the USA in order to create the largest free international trade area by extension, population and volume of trade of all existing ones. In our view, TTIP would be the geoeconomic answer to BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), as a comercial, geopolitical and cooperation space in other areas such as the military, in both that TTIP reproduce on a commercial scale the political and military alliance already existing between good part of the EU and USA by the NATO. In this paper we will try to explain why the possible rivalry between TTIP and BRICS would reproduce in the XXIst. Century the schemes of " Cold War " inherited from XXth. Century, that in turn reproduced the geopolitical confrontations arising from the theory of Haltford McKinder pivot area and the traditional opposition between thalassocratic imperialisms (government on the seas and oceans) and tellurocratic imperialisms (government on an enormous portion of emerged land). Likewise, we will try to show why, at a dialectic of States level, the most populated, territorially extensive and with greater amount of resources political societies will be those that have the greatest ability to impose a particular model of international relations and its geopolitical hegemony on a universal scale in response to this viable confrontation between TTIP, plus TTP, vs. BRICS.

The relationship between cartography and power has aroused much interest in recent years, stimulated by innovative critical approaches. The empiricist and neo-positivist paradigms, no longer satisfactory, have been abandoned, while the analysis has been extended to include not only state-sponsored, but also popular cartography. Regardless of the character of the map or its source, it continues to be inserted in the context of the modern territorial state, as it is perceived as a key instrument for conveying the state’s narrative. Seen in this light, cartography inevitably comes out on the subordinate end of this relationship, since it fully conforms to the orthodox state-centred world view that has dominated modernity. Overturning this mechanically deconstructionist approach, this paper proposes, instead, to apply a concept introduced by John Brian Harley, the father of critical cartography – that of the map’s internal power. This concept, usually considered a given and rarely tested in empirical studies, is evaluated here through an analysis of the border sign in a series of unorthodox maps (in the work of Reclus, Mackinder, Renner, Spykman, Horrabin, Radó, Ratzel, Kjèllen, Haushofer) which have received little scientific attention to date.

L’immenso complesso di catene montuose che si estende nel cuore dell’Eurasia, come le dita della mano di un dio o di un titano, ha potentemente stimolato l’immaginazione mitopoietica di tutti quei popoli che fin dalla preistoria ne hanno attraversati i passi e percorse le valli, rimanendo nomadi o stabilendosi definitivamente ai piedi delle sue fertili pendici. Qui la realtà naturale, più di qualunque altro luogo della terra, ha fortemente contribuito allo sviluppo di una geografia sacra, che da millenni si fonda sul culto reso a diverse montagne considerate di natura divina, e sul loro simbolismo. Un culto che si è solidamente strutturato e tramandato nei diversi territori tribali, soprattutto grazie all’identità tradizionalmente stabilita fra gli ‘dei della montagna’ e gli eroi capostipiti talvolta nati, secondo il mito, direttamente dalle montagne, dei re-sciamani fondatori dei primi clan e regni. Non è quindi un caso se il ‘Grande Gioco’ geopolitico si è acceso in due fasi, tra la fine del XIX secolo e oggi, proprio in quella parte del mondo dove, per dirla col titolo di un celebre racconto di Rudyard Kipling , molti uomini vorrebbero ancor oggi “farsi re”. L’area geografica che corrisponde all’odierno Afghanistan, è infatti grosso modo quasi la stessa di quel regno indo-greco, lo Yavanarajya che Alessandro si lasciò alle spalle ritirandosi dall’India, e i cui confini Inglesi e Russi vollero ridisegnare, nel vano tentativo di arginare le rispettive contrapposte ambizioni , sigillandole con la creazione di un fragile stato cuscinetto.

This paper investigates the topic of organised crime in the region of Western Balkans. Significantly, it focuses on the types and illicit activities of organised crime groups and their connection with public administration. Ominously, Wester Balkans, a region which had been out of the spotlight of conflicts, after the Yugoslav and Kosovo wars, and considered to be on a path towards reconciliation and prosperity is once again at stake. This can be attributed in part to the deficiency of the region – and its allies – to counter organised crime and corruption. In that respect, new challenges of security emerge that necessitate a collective response from the international community.