FROM (NEO)CLASSICAL TO POSTMODERN GEOPOLITICAL POSTULATES
FROM (NEO)CLASSICAL TO POSTMODERN GEOPOLITICAL POSTULATES

Summary/Abstract: The establishment of a unipolar order threatened geopolitics with a “final destruction”. Globalists thought that economic factors would have a crucial role in world affairs and that geopolitical rivalries would be replaced by geo-economic ones. However, reality confuted such predictions. The reaffirmation of geopolitics was already practically demonstrated in the case of the disintegration of Yugoslavia; soon it became clear that the process of world recomposition has a geopolitical basis. However, it is not possible to respond to postmodern challenges with (neo)classical geopolitics. It is therefore necessary for the traditional postulates of geopolitics to be placed in a new context and to view it in accordance with changed relations and expected trends. This means that modern geopolitics needs to encompass an expanded field of study, become more dispersed, use new methods, change its status of a scientific discipline and become a true science, with a more pronounced applicative value. Such geopolitics faces the following task: firstly, to rebut geonihilistic approaches and then to devote itself to a revaluation of earlier laws, instruments and conceptual postulates. Epochal and fundamental global changes require that attention must be paid to several key phenomena: to a new hierarchy of geopolitical actors, among which the influence of the United States is weakening, and China’s power is growing; to a recovered Russia and the Islamic factor; to the change of the former “axiom” of thalassocratic-tellurocratic antagonism, caused by the increasingly obvious shaping of an integral geopolitical identity and power; to the non-functionality of the traditional, Eurasian, and the establishment of a new, global Heartland–Rimland model; to the essence of the changes to the world order, which is gaining qualities of multipolarism in neobipolarism.

• Details
• Contents