Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
391400
I Introduction
II Geopolitics
move beyond deconstruction and wrestle with the ontological problems of creating
alternative spaces (Agnew, 2000a).
The task of deconstructing dominant tropes that structure our world-views and hide
power relations continues (Moisio, 1998; Tuathail, 1999; Sharp, 2000; Takagi, 1998;
Tuason, 1999), as does a discussion of the legacies of past geopolitical thought (Dodds
and Atkinson, 2000; Mayhew, 2000). Also, geopolitics, as the geographic expression of
power relations, is seen to extend into the realms of food supply (Boland, 2000), and
development and water policies (Brown, 2000; Kartin, 2000).
Agnews ontological critique requires a consideration of how the foundations laid by
critical geopolitics can lead to analyses that look at the construction of sites, tech-
nologies, power, and identities that are not simply textual (Agnew, 2000a: 98). Two
alternative, yet complementary, paths are suggested by Thrift (2000) and Taylor (2000a).
Following Billig (1995), Thrift calls for a consideration of how everyday practices
construct identity and forms of governance, though some would, perhaps, say that this
is what deconstruction does ( Tuathail, 1999; Sharp, 2000). Taylor (2000b) expands the
vision of geopolitics to alternative structures that will challenge the embedded statism
of geopolitical thought and practice. A combination of the views of Thrift and Taylor is
possible by the invigoration of a truly Braudellian world-systems analysis that is, a
study of the capitalist world economy that does not merely pay lip service to the insti-
tutions and practices of everyday life but promotes them as the focus of structural
analysis rather than abstract and macro trends and structures (Arrighi and Silver, 1999;
Taylor, 1999; Wallerstein, 1999).
A geopolitical perspective on identity and movement is a means to make the
transition to the analysis of new sites and means of political action called for by Agnew
(2000a). Globalization has required a change in military strategy by powerful countries
(Ek, 2000) and also a change in the way that wars are fought (Kaldor, 1999). Moreover,
it has created a geography of flows and relationships ( Tuathail, 1998; 2000) and
consequent political resistance (Gallaher, 2000). One important implication of this new
geography is the demise of embedded statism, and, hence, the taken-for-granted
primacy of national identity (Taylor, 2000a; 2000b). In a time of geopolitical instability,
geopolitical issues have greater saliency (Heffernan, 2000). Moreover, the negotiation of
a new metageography means that contemporary geopolitical thought will be strongly
tied to the defense of old, and the establishment of new, identities (Bradnock, 1998;
Goodman, 1998; Newman, 2000; Rumley, 1999; Smith, 1999).
III Identity
Geopolitics of flows have challenged the ability of state borders to define national
identity (Knippenburg and Markusse, 1999) and increased the importance of identities
operating at other scales (Herb and Kaplan, 1999). Challenges to national identity
require a consideration of its relationship to other identities, such as race and gender
(Radcliffe, 1999a; Tyner, 1999). The result is a concentration on the body (Harvey, 2000;
Simonsen, 2000), questions of femininity and masculinity, and the engendering of
citizenship (Dwyer, 2000; McEwan, 2000). In sum, the dualisms of otherness required
Colin Flint 393
IV Sovereignty
The issues of geopolitics, identity and metageographies come together in the study of
state sovereignty. Processes of globalization under the stewardship of American
hegemony (Eva, 1998; Slater, 1999) have disrupted the notion of the homogeneous
nation state and required analysis of the form and functions of states (Barton, 1999;
Hudson, 2000). Though there is evidence of the changing spatiality of power towards
the geographical expression of networks (Agnew, 1999), we must be careful of making
claims that are cavalier with history. Power was expressed through networks in the
medieval period (Jones, 1999), and, though networks of relationships are important in
defining contemporary geographies of investment (Yeung, 2000), states still play an
important role in mediating global flows (Dos, 1999; Lin, 2000).
The contribution political geographers are making lies in the detailed studies of
exactly how state sovereignty is changing, and the new spatialities of power negotiated
within the push and pull of centripetal globalizing forces and centrifugal forces of
regionalism, separatism and nationalism (Kavanagh, 1998). Case studies have
identified pseudo-, quasi- or trans-state entities (OLoughlin et al., 1998; Relyea, 1998;
394 Political geography
Sparke, 1998) and causal processes, such as the politics of ethnic identification
(Kolossov and OLoughlin, 1998) or the role of illegal flows and illicit forms of
governance (Luke and Toal, 1998).
V Borders
VI Governance
VII Voting
VIII Conclusion
How to make sense of the politics of globalization? On the one hand, it seems that
theoretical frameworks that are already in existence are still useful. The centripetal and
centrifugal forces of globalization may be interpreted using the Marxist notions of
equalization and differentiation (Harvey, 2000; Smith, 2000a; Swyngedouw, 2000).
However, Marxists do need to reintegrate class with issues of identity and cultural
politics (Smith, 2000b). A consideration of structure as a much deeper causative force
than recognized by structuraton theory is seen to be important by Dodgshon (1998),
perpetuating the relevance of world-systems theory to political geography (Shelley and
Flint, 2000). Perhaps though, a changing metageography requires new and innovative
theories? For example, actor network theory has been promoted as a way of investigat-
ing the translation of power through different institutional settings (Holloway, 2000).
Agreeing with Thrifts (2000) call for the study of the everyday and Taylors (2000a)
call for metageographies seems common sense, but requires theoretical creativity.
Potential avenues lie in the suggestion that human geography must be relational rather
than dualistic (Massey, 1999), requiring the study of networks in their totality (Taylor,
2000b) and emphasizing the role of power (Allen, 1999) and scale (Harvey, 2000;
Marston, 2000; Radcliffe, 1999b). The spatiality of global politics is again at the forefront
of debate, and so now is the time to create spatial theories of the transfer and commu-
nication of power (Allen, 1999). While discussions with political scientists and interna-
tional relations scholars often display a troubling lack of mutual understanding (Elazar,
1999; Murphy, 1999), the equalizing and differentiating nature of globalization suggests
that intradisciplinary and transnational connections may be more productive (Slater,
1999; 2000).
Finally, spatial theories of power are best developed in conjunction with an analytic
mode of inquiry which can remain eclectic while following the guidelines of
developing rigorous typologies and ideal-types of organizations and behaviors that are
396 Political geography
then put to use in classifying and analyzing real-world cases (Agnew, 2000b: 91). The
freedom to call for spatial typologies and ideal-types shows that political geography
has successfully acknowledged and learned from the classical geopolitical skeleton in
the cupboard and can, with confidence, investigate the spatiality of the many power
contests in the changing world.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Lorraine Dowler for her helpful comments.
References
Agnew, J. 1999: Mapping political power beyond in Zionist mythical geography. Transactions of
state boundaries: territory, identity, and the Institute of British Geographers NS 24, 10923.
movement in world politics. Millenium 28,
499521. Barton, J.R. 1999: Flags of convenience:
2000a: Global political geography beyond Geoeconomics and regulatory minimisation.
geopolitics. International Studies Review 2, 919. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie
2000b: Classics in human geography 90, 14255.
revisited. Progress in Human Geography 24, Beaverstock, J.V., Smith, R.G. and Taylor, P.J.
913. 2000a: Geographies of globalization: United
Albert, M. 1998: On boundaries, territory and States law firms in world cities. Urban
postmodernity: an international relations Geography 21, 95120.
perspective. Geopolitics 3(1), 5368. 2000b: World-city network: a new meta-
Alderman, D.H. 2000: A street fit for a King: geography? Annals of the Association of American
naming places and commemoration in the Geographers 90, 12334.
American South. Professional Geographer 52, Bennett, P. 2000: Environmental governance and
67284. private actions: enrolling insurers in interna-
Allen, P. 1999: Spatial assemblages of power: tional maritime regulation. Political Geography,
from domination to empowerment. In Massey, 19, 875900.
D., Allen, J. and Sarre, P., editors, Human Billig, M. 1995: Banal nationalism. London and
geography today, Cambridge: Polity Press, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
194218. Boland, A. 2000: Feeding fears: competing
Anderson, J. and ODowd, L. 1999a: Borders, discourses of interdependency, sovereignty,
border regions and territoriality: contradictory and Chinas food security. Political Geography
meanings, changing significance. Regional 19, 5576.
Studies 33, 593604. Bradnock, R.W . 1998: Regional geopolitics in a
1999b: Contested borders: globalization and globalizing world: Kashmir in geopolitical
ethno-national conflict in Ireland. Regional perspective. Geopolitics 3(2), 129.
Studies 33, 68196. Brown, E. 2000: Still their backyard? The US and
Anderson, K. 2000: Thinking postnationally: post-Mitch development strategies in
dialogue across multicultural, indigenous and Nicaragua. Political Geography 19, 54372.
settler spaces. Annals of the Association of Brunn, S. 1998: A treaty of silicon for the Treaty of
American Geographers 90, 38191. Westphalia? New territorial dimensions of
Arrighi, G. and Silver, B.J. 1999: Chaos and modern statehood. Geopolitics 3(1), 10631.
governance in the modern world system.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Church, A. and Reid, P. 1999: Cross-border
Azaryahu, M. 1999: McDonalds or Golani cooperation, institutionalization and political
Junction? A case of a contested place in Israel. space across the English Channel. Regional
Professional Geographer 51, 48192. Studies 33, 64355.
Azaryahu, M. and Kellerman, A. 1999: Symbolic Clem, R.S. and Craumer, P.R. 2000: Spatial
places of national history and revival: A study patterns of political choice in the post Yeltsin
Colin Flint 397
D., MacAllister, I. and Pattie, C. 2000: Locating spatial context. Antipode 32, 13551.
the altruistic voter: context, egocentric voting, Lin, G.C.S. 2000: State, capital, and space in
and support for the Conservative Party at the China in an age of volatile globalization.
1997 General Election in England and Wales. Environment and Planning A 32, 45571.
Environment and Planning A 32, 67394. Luke T.W . and Toal, G. 1998: The fraying
Jones, M. and MacLeod, G. 1999: Towards a modern map: failed states and contraband
regional renaissance? Reconfiguring and capitalism. Geopolitics 3(3), 1433.
rescaling Englands economic governance. Lustik, I.S. 1999: Geography and political
Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers science. Political Geography 18, 901904.
NS 24, 295313. Lynch, P. 1999: New Labour and the English
Jones, R. 1999: Mann and men in a medieval Regional Development Agencies: devolution as
state: the geographies of power in the Middle evolution. Regional Studies 33, 7378.
Ages. Transactions of the Institute of British
Geographers NS 24, 6578. MacKinnon, D. 2000: Managerialism, govern-
2000: Changing geographies of governance mentality and the state: a neo-Foucauldian
and group identities in the Middle Ages: The approach to local economic governance.
role of social interaction and conflict. Political Political Geography 19, 293314.
Geography 19, 90126. MacLeod, G. and Goodman, M. 1999: Space,
scale and state strategy: rethinking urban and
Kaldor, M. 1999: New and old wars: organized regional governance. Progress in Human
violence in a global era. Stanford, CA: Stanford Geography 23, 50327.
University Press. Mandaville, P.G. 1999: Territory and translocali-
Kaplan, D.H. 2000: Conflict and compromise ty: discrepant idioms of political identity.
among borderland identities in northern Italy. Millennium 28, 65373.
Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie Marston, S.A. 2000: The social construction of
91, 4460. scale. Progress in Human Geography 24, 21942.
Kartin, A. 2000: Factors inhibiting structural Massey, D. (with the collective) 1999: Issues and
changes in Israels water policy. Political debates. In Massey, D., Allen, J. and Sarre, P.,
Geography 19, 97130. editors, Human geography today, Cambridge:
Kavanagh, A. 1998: Postmodernity, globalisation Polity Press, 321.
and nationalist conflict in the former Mayhew, R. 2000: Halford Mackinders new
Yugoslavia. Geopolitics 3(3), 3452. political geography and the geographical
Knippenberg, H. and Markusse, J., editors 1999: tradition. Political Geography 19, 77191.
Nationalising and denationalising European border McEwan, C. 2000: Engendering citizenship:
regions, 18002000: Views from geography and gendered spaces of democracy in South Africa.
history. Dordrecht and Boston: Kluwer. Political Geography 19, 62751.
Kolossov, V. and OLoughlin, J. 1998: Pseudo- McNeill, D. 2000: McGuggenisation? National
states as harbingers of a new geopolitics: The identity and globalisation in the Basque
example of the Trans-Dniester Moldovian country. Political Geography 19, 47394.
Republic (TMR). Geopolitics 3(1), 15176. Mercer, D. 1999: Closing the gap: Australian-
Kolst, P. 1999: Territorialising diasporas: the Indonesian relations, the perilous moment
case of Russians in the former Soviet Republics. and the Maritime Boundary Zone. Tijdschrift
Millennium 28, 60731. voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 90, 6179.
Mohan, J., editor 1999: A United Kingdom?
Laguerre, M.S. 1999: State, diaspora, and Economic, social and political geographies.
transnational politics: Haiti reconceptualised. London: Arnold.
Millennium 28, 63351. Moisio, S. 1998: Finland, geopolitical image of
Lawson, V.A. 2000: Arguments within threat and the post-Cold War confusion.
geographies of movement: the theoretical Geopolitics 3(3), 10424.
potential of migrants stories. Progress in Murphy, A.B. 1999: Living together separately.
Human Geography 24, 17389. Thoughts on the relationship between political
Lemon, A. and Fox, R. 2000: Consolidating science and political geography. Political
democracy in South Africa: the second open Geography 18, 88794.
election. Area 32, 33744.
Lester, A., Nel, E. and Binns, T. 2000: South Nairn, T. 2000: After Britain: New Labour and the
Africas current transition in temporal and return of Scotland. London: Granta Books.
Colin Flint 399
Newman, D., editor 1999: Boundaries, territory and Polity Press, 21942.
postmodernity. London: Frank Cass. Raento, P. and Watson, C.J. 2000: Gernika,
2000: Citizenship, identity, and location: the Guernica, Guernica? Contested meanings of a
changing discourse of Israeli geopolitics. In Basque place. Political Geography 19, 70736.
Dodds, K. and Atkinson, D., editors, Relyea, S. 1998: Trans-state entities: postmodern
Geopolitical traditions: a century of geopolitical cracks in the great Westphalian dam. Geopolitics
thought, London and New York: Routledge, 3(2), 3061.
30231. Robbins, P. 2000: The rotten institution:
Newman, D. and Paasi, A. 1998: Fences and corruption in natural resource management.
neighbours in the postmodern world: Political Geography 19, 42343.
boundary narratives in political geography. Rumley, D. 1999: The geopolitics of Australias
Progress in Human Geography 22, 186207. regional relations. Dordrecht and Boston:
Kluwer.
OLoughlin J. and Bell, J.E. 1999: The political
geography of civic engagement in Ukraine. Sadler, D. 2000: Organizing European labour:
Post-Soviet Geography and Economics 40, 23366. governance, production, trade unions and the
OLoughlin, J., Kolossov, V. and Tchepalyga, A. question of scale. Transactions of the Institute of
1998: National construction, territorial British Geographers NS 25, 13552.
separatism, and post-Soviet geopolitics in the Scott, J.W. 1999: European and North American
Transdniester Moldovan Republic. Post-Soviet contexts for cross-border regionalism. Regional
Geography and Economics 39, 33258. Studies 33, 60517.
Tuathail, G. 1998: De-territorialised threats Sharp, J.P. 2000: Condensing the Cold War: Readers
and global dangers: geopolitics and risk Digest and American identity. Minneapolis:
society. Geopolitics 3(1), 1731. University of Minnesota Press.
1999: A strategic sign: the geopolitical signif- Shelley, F.M. and Flint, C. 2000: Geography,
icance of Bosnia in US foreign policy. place, and world-systems analysis. In Hall,
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space T.D., editor, A world-systems reader: new perspec-
17, 51533. tives on gender, urbanism, cultures, indigenous
2000: The postmodern geopolitical peoples, and ecology, Lanham, MD: Rowman and
condition: states, statecraft and security at the Littlefield.
millennium. Annals of the Association of Simonsen, K. 2000: Editorial: the body as
American Geographers 90, 16678. battlefield. Transactions of the Institute of British
Geographers NS 25, 79.
Paasi, A. 1998: Boundaries as social processes: Slater, D. 1999: Situating geopolitical representa-
territoriality in the world of flows. Geopolitics tions: inside/outside and the power of
3(1), 6988. imperial interventions. In Massey, D., Allen, J.
Pattie, C. and Johnston, R. 2000: People who talk and Sarre, P., editors, Human geography today,
together vote together : an exploration of Cambridge: Polity Press, 6284.
contextual effects in Great Britain. Annals of the 2000: The processes and prospect of political
Association of American Geographers 90, 4166. geography. Political Geography 19, 14.
Peckham, R.S. 2000: Map mania. Political Smith, G. 1999: The masks of Proteus: Russia,
Geography 19, 7796. geopolitical shift and the new Eurasianism.
Perkmann, M. 1999: Building governance institu- Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
tions across European borders. Regional Studies NS 24, 48194.
33, 65767. Smith, N. 2000a: Author s response. Progress in
Pringle, D.G. 1998: Globalisation, reterritorialisa- Human Geography 24, 27174.
tion and national identity. Geopolitics 3(3), 113. 2000b: What happened to class? Environment
and Planning A 32, 101132.
Radcliffe, S.A. 1999a: Embodying national Soguk, N. and Whitehall, G. 1999: Wandering
identities: mestizo men and white women in grounds: transversality, identity, territoriality
Ecuadorian racial-national imaginaries. and movement. Millennium 28, 67598.
Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers Sparke, M. 1998: From geopolitics to geoeconom-
NS 24, 21325. ics: transnational state effects in the
1999b: Popular and state discourses of borderlands. Geopolitics 3(2), 6298.
power. In Massey, D., Allen, J. and Sarre, P., Steinberg, P.E. 1999: Lines of division, lines of
editors, Human geography today, Cambridge: connection: stewardship in the world ocean.
400 Political geography