Difference between revisions of "The Grand Chessboard"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:MacKinder theory.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Mackinder theory.]] | [[File:MacKinder theory.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Mackinder theory.]] | ||
'''The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives''' is a [[geopolitical]] manifesto published in 1997 by former [[National Security Advisor]] to [[President Jimmy Carter]] [[Zbigniew Brzezinski]]. The manifesto was intended to serve as a guide for American geostrategists who seek to keep the post-[[Cold War]] global order [[unipolar]] (in other words, have the US remain the sole [[superpower]] indefinitely). The manifesto is deemed to be highly influential in both [[Neoliberalism|neoliberal]] and [[Neoconservatism|neoconservative]] circles. | '''The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives''' is a [[geopolitical]] manifesto published in 1997 by former [[National Security Advisor]] to [[President Jimmy Carter]] [[Zbigniew Brzezinski]]. The manifesto was intended to serve as a guide for American geostrategists who seek to keep the post-[[Cold War]] global order [[unipolar]] (in other words, have the US remain the sole [[superpower]] indefinitely). The manifesto is deemed to be highly influential in both [[Neoliberalism|neoliberal]] and [[Neoconservatism|neoconservative]] circles. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The [[rhetoric]] can easily be used to describe [[neoliberal]] and [[neoconservative]] [[foreign policy]] "in a nutshell." It should also be noted that this rhetoric, which is the likely pretext for the present-day [[Russophobia]] coming from neoliberal and neoconservative [[activist]]s and [[politicians]], bears a comparable resemblance to [[National socialism|Nazi]]-era [[propaganda]] [[demonizing]] the peoples of that region as "subhumans". | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Eurasian Balkans== | ||
The manifesto is most notable for introducing Brzezinski's "Eurasian Balkans" theory, an updated version of the earlier "Eurasian Heartland" theory introduced by British geostrategist Halford Mackinder in his 1904 essay ''The Geographical Pivot of History''.<ref>https://www.iwp.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/20131016_MackinderTheGeographicalJournal.pdf</ref> Mackinder's version of this theory in turn played a significant role in the development of the [[foreign policy|foreign policies]] of the [[Third Reich]], [[Cold War]]-era [[United States of America|America]], and post-Cold War [[Russia]].<ref>https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2019/01/halford-mackinder-father-geopolitics</ref><ref>https://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2000/12/james-burnham-the-first-cold-warrior/</ref><ref>https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/27/geopolitics-russia-mackinder-eurasia-heartland-dugin-ukraine-eurasianism-manifest-destiny-putin/</ref> | The manifesto is most notable for introducing Brzezinski's "Eurasian Balkans" theory, an updated version of the earlier "Eurasian Heartland" theory introduced by British geostrategist Halford Mackinder in his 1904 essay ''The Geographical Pivot of History''.<ref>https://www.iwp.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/20131016_MackinderTheGeographicalJournal.pdf</ref> Mackinder's version of this theory in turn played a significant role in the development of the [[foreign policy|foreign policies]] of the [[Third Reich]], [[Cold War]]-era [[United States of America|America]], and post-Cold War [[Russia]].<ref>https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2019/01/halford-mackinder-father-geopolitics</ref><ref>https://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2000/12/james-burnham-the-first-cold-warrior/</ref><ref>https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/27/geopolitics-russia-mackinder-eurasia-heartland-dugin-ukraine-eurasianism-manifest-destiny-putin/</ref> | ||
| Line 7: | Line 11: | ||
"power void" consisting of the following countries: [[Afghanistan]], [[Armenia]], [[Azerbaijan]], [[Republic of Georgia|Georgia]], Kazakhstan, [[Kyrgyzstan]], [[Tajikistan]], [[Turkmenistan]], and [[Uzbekistan]]. In addition, [[Iran]] and [[Turkey]] are listed as possible additional countries belonging in this "power void," and the map detailing the extent of this "power void" also includes parts of Xinjiang and most of the [[Russia|Russian]] [[Caucasus]].<ref>Brzezinski 124-25.</ref> Furthermore, Brzezinski identifies seven countries as potential competitors to American geostrategy in the region; the primary ones being Iran, Russia, and Turkey and the secondary ones being [[China]], [[India]], [[Pakistan]], and [[Ukraine]].<ref>Brzezinski 124, 134-35.</ref> | "power void" consisting of the following countries: [[Afghanistan]], [[Armenia]], [[Azerbaijan]], [[Republic of Georgia|Georgia]], Kazakhstan, [[Kyrgyzstan]], [[Tajikistan]], [[Turkmenistan]], and [[Uzbekistan]]. In addition, [[Iran]] and [[Turkey]] are listed as possible additional countries belonging in this "power void," and the map detailing the extent of this "power void" also includes parts of Xinjiang and most of the [[Russia|Russian]] [[Caucasus]].<ref>Brzezinski 124-25.</ref> Furthermore, Brzezinski identifies seven countries as potential competitors to American geostrategy in the region; the primary ones being Iran, Russia, and Turkey and the secondary ones being [[China]], [[India]], [[Pakistan]], and [[Ukraine]].<ref>Brzezinski 124, 134-35.</ref> | ||
| − | Out of those seven potential "competitor" countries, Brzezinski identifies China, Iran, and Russia as being the most dangerous possible "anti-hegemonic" alliance combination.<ref>Brzezinski 55.</ref> It is likely that this particular statement is a central reason why those three countries are often cited together as being collectively responsible for the world's problems by both neoliberal and neoconservative media today. Brezinski forewarned, "A [[Sino-Russian Entente|grand coalition of China and Russia]] united not by [[ideology]] but by complementary grievances would pose the most dangerous scenario as far as threats to United States [[hegemony]] are concerned."<ref>[https://www.sott.net/article/404941-Americas-nightmare-The-Sino-Russian-entente America's nightmare: The Sino-Russian entente], John S. Van Oudenaren, Center for National Interest, 12 Jan 2019. www.sott.net</ref><ref>[https://strategic-culture.su/news/2023/01/29/other-america-or-three-missed-chances-to-avoid-world-war-iii/ The Other America (Or the Three Missed Chances to Avoid World War III)], Matthew Ehret, January 29, 2023. strategic-culture.su</ref> | + | Out of those seven potential "competitor" countries, Brzezinski identifies China, Iran, and Russia as being the most dangerous possible "anti-hegemonic" alliance combination.<ref>Brzezinski 55.</ref> It is likely that this particular statement is a central reason why those three countries are often cited together as being collectively responsible for the world's problems by both [[neoliberal]] and [[neoconservative]] media today. Brezinski forewarned, "A [[Sino-Russian Entente|grand coalition of China and Russia]] united not by [[ideology]] but by complementary grievances would pose the most dangerous scenario as far as threats to United States [[hegemony]] are concerned."<ref>[https://www.sott.net/article/404941-Americas-nightmare-The-Sino-Russian-entente America's nightmare: The Sino-Russian entente], John S. Van Oudenaren, Center for National Interest, 12 Jan 2019. www.sott.net</ref><ref>[https://strategic-culture.su/news/2023/01/29/other-america-or-three-missed-chances-to-avoid-world-war-iii/ The Other America (Or the Three Missed Chances to Avoid World War III)], Matthew Ehret, January 29, 2023. strategic-culture.su</ref> |
[[File:Brzezinski Taliban.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Brzezinski meets with the [[Mujahideen]] [[Taliban]], 1979.<ref>https://youtu.be/kYvO3qAlyTg</ref>]] | [[File:Brzezinski Taliban.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Brzezinski meets with the [[Mujahideen]] [[Taliban]], 1979.<ref>https://youtu.be/kYvO3qAlyTg</ref>]] | ||
Brzezinski also resorts to blatantly [[Racism|racist]] rhetoric when describing potential geopolitical opponents within the region within or surrounding the "Eurasian Balkans": | Brzezinski also resorts to blatantly [[Racism|racist]] rhetoric when describing potential geopolitical opponents within the region within or surrounding the "Eurasian Balkans": | ||
:''"In brief, for the [[United States]], [[Eurasia]]n geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into an increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient [[empire]]s, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent [[collusion]] and maintain security dependence among the [[vassal]]s, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the [[barbarian]]s from coming together."''<ref>Brzezinski 40.</ref> | :''"In brief, for the [[United States]], [[Eurasia]]n geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into an increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient [[empire]]s, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent [[collusion]] and maintain security dependence among the [[vassal]]s, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the [[barbarian]]s from coming together."''<ref>Brzezinski 40.</ref> | ||
| − | + | ==Criticism== | |
It is also possible to argue that ''The Grand Chessboard'' directly influenced the "Eurasianism" of geostrategists such as [[Andrew Korybko]] and [[Alexander Dugin]], the latter whom can be seen as a Russian equivalent to Brzezinski (right down to the publishing of his own influential manifesto, ''Foundations of Geopolitics''; and his own racist and [[Fascism|fascist]] rhetoric issued against those whom he deems to be Russia's enemies).<ref>https://orientalreview.org/2014/06/22/the-reverse-brzezinski-the-ultimate-eurasian-dilemma-i/</ref><ref>http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0902/pdf/H6V949.pdf</ref><ref>https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics</ref><ref>https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2516&context=etd</ref> | It is also possible to argue that ''The Grand Chessboard'' directly influenced the "Eurasianism" of geostrategists such as [[Andrew Korybko]] and [[Alexander Dugin]], the latter whom can be seen as a Russian equivalent to Brzezinski (right down to the publishing of his own influential manifesto, ''Foundations of Geopolitics''; and his own racist and [[Fascism|fascist]] rhetoric issued against those whom he deems to be Russia's enemies).<ref>https://orientalreview.org/2014/06/22/the-reverse-brzezinski-the-ultimate-eurasian-dilemma-i/</ref><ref>http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0902/pdf/H6V949.pdf</ref><ref>https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics</ref><ref>https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2516&context=etd</ref> | ||
Revision as of 03:31, January 11, 2025
The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives is a geopolitical manifesto published in 1997 by former National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter Zbigniew Brzezinski. The manifesto was intended to serve as a guide for American geostrategists who seek to keep the post-Cold War global order unipolar (in other words, have the US remain the sole superpower indefinitely). The manifesto is deemed to be highly influential in both neoliberal and neoconservative circles.
The rhetoric can easily be used to describe neoliberal and neoconservative foreign policy "in a nutshell." It should also be noted that this rhetoric, which is the likely pretext for the present-day Russophobia coming from neoliberal and neoconservative activists and politicians, bears a comparable resemblance to Nazi-era propaganda demonizing the peoples of that region as "subhumans".
Eurasian Balkans
The manifesto is most notable for introducing Brzezinski's "Eurasian Balkans" theory, an updated version of the earlier "Eurasian Heartland" theory introduced by British geostrategist Halford Mackinder in his 1904 essay The Geographical Pivot of History.[1] Mackinder's version of this theory in turn played a significant role in the development of the foreign policies of the Third Reich, Cold War-era America, and post-Cold War Russia.[2][3][4]
The "Eurasian Balkans" theory is elaborated upon primarily in the manifesto's second and fifth chapters. It emphasizes the existence of an "oblong" of instability stretching from northern Kazakhstan in the north; the Horn of Africa in the south; western Xinjiang in the east; and the southeastern Balkans in the west.[5] At the center of this "oblong" is a "power void" consisting of the following countries: Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. In addition, Iran and Turkey are listed as possible additional countries belonging in this "power void," and the map detailing the extent of this "power void" also includes parts of Xinjiang and most of the Russian Caucasus.[6] Furthermore, Brzezinski identifies seven countries as potential competitors to American geostrategy in the region; the primary ones being Iran, Russia, and Turkey and the secondary ones being China, India, Pakistan, and Ukraine.[7]
Out of those seven potential "competitor" countries, Brzezinski identifies China, Iran, and Russia as being the most dangerous possible "anti-hegemonic" alliance combination.[8] It is likely that this particular statement is a central reason why those three countries are often cited together as being collectively responsible for the world's problems by both neoliberal and neoconservative media today. Brezinski forewarned, "A grand coalition of China and Russia united not by ideology but by complementary grievances would pose the most dangerous scenario as far as threats to United States hegemony are concerned."[9][10]
Brzezinski also resorts to blatantly racist rhetoric when describing potential geopolitical opponents within the region within or surrounding the "Eurasian Balkans":
- "In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into an increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."[12]
Criticism
It is also possible to argue that The Grand Chessboard directly influenced the "Eurasianism" of geostrategists such as Andrew Korybko and Alexander Dugin, the latter whom can be seen as a Russian equivalent to Brzezinski (right down to the publishing of his own influential manifesto, Foundations of Geopolitics; and his own racist and fascist rhetoric issued against those whom he deems to be Russia's enemies).[13][14][15][16]
See also
References
- ↑ https://www.iwp.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/20131016_MackinderTheGeographicalJournal.pdf
- ↑ https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2019/01/halford-mackinder-father-geopolitics
- ↑ https://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2000/12/james-burnham-the-first-cold-warrior/
- ↑ https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/27/geopolitics-russia-mackinder-eurasia-heartland-dugin-ukraine-eurasianism-manifest-destiny-putin/
- ↑ Brzezinski 53, 124.
- ↑ Brzezinski 124-25.
- ↑ Brzezinski 124, 134-35.
- ↑ Brzezinski 55.
- ↑ America's nightmare: The Sino-Russian entente, John S. Van Oudenaren, Center for National Interest, 12 Jan 2019. www.sott.net
- ↑ The Other America (Or the Three Missed Chances to Avoid World War III), Matthew Ehret, January 29, 2023. strategic-culture.su
- ↑ https://youtu.be/kYvO3qAlyTg
- ↑ Brzezinski 40.
- ↑ https://orientalreview.org/2014/06/22/the-reverse-brzezinski-the-ultimate-eurasian-dilemma-i/
- ↑ http://www.universitypublications.net/ijas/0902/pdf/H6V949.pdf
- ↑ https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics
- ↑ https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2516&context=etd
External link
- ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI, THE GRAND CHESSBOARD American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, A Member of the Perseus Books Group, 1997. www.cia.gov