Introduction
In conventional studies, geopolitics seek to “comprehend connections involving political supremacy and geographical space as well as investigating tactical directions anchored in the relative significance of both sea and land power in history” (Kearns 28). Additionally, conventional geopolitics encompassed a number of constant alarms with geopolitical links of power in global politics, the recognition of global major sectors, in addition to the connection involving terrestrial and naval potentials. Rationally, the consideration of geopolitics assesses history, social disciplines, and geography with respect to spatial political affairs and outlines at different levels (Devetak et al. 34-35).
Moreover, geopolitical studies consider the concerns of the collection of associations involving welfare of global political performers, attentions concentrated to a particular space, region, geographical constituent, or techniques and affiliations that establish a geopolitical coordination. Geopolitics has numerous disciplines in scale and takes into account every factor of social disciplines, with special stress on political geography, global affiliations, the territorial factors of political disciplines, and international law. Geopolitics offers useful perspectives on the history of Europe with special regard to its politics.
Geography, weather and supplies all have an impact on affiliations amid countries, and could assist in shedding light on the intentions of individuals and governments. In conventional expressions, geographic aspects can as well form cultural and social advancements, which possess political effects. If properly comprehended, geopolitics acts as a helpful counteractive to the observation supported by campaigners of internationalization. In the affirmations, by campaigners, that expertise has triumphed over the limitations enacted by geography, whether in political or physical aspects.
The difficulty of employing geopolitics, nevertheless, rests in establishing the right point of view (Bonnett 320-324). The excellent comprehension of geopolitics emanates from embracing a historical perspective, assessing advancements on the ground with time instead of appearing at a picture that illustrates just a single instance. Comprehending the account of geopolitical perceptions in Europe as well assists in tackling the politically controversial question of describing Europe. This paper discusses geopolitics in Europe in depth with consideration of East and West politics.
The West
The present day notion of the west denotes more than just a geographical unit. The west is a political, social and ethnic description planned to induce those significances, progressions and individuals that are in different perspectives and designated as being amid these: capitalist, democrat, free, contemporary, industrial, Christian or white. In spite of the reality that the west is more than just a mere geographical unit, the issue of geopolitics majorly dwells on it as a geographical unit. Taking into consideration the function of naming categorization as well as issues of territory in terms of identity, the west denotes a naturalizing brand (Mattern 67-70).
The depiction of particular places as the west and others not could be a major concern in the establishment of geopolitical ideas, which validates the exertion and elimination of these places as well as the political performers that symbolize them in various coalitions, the involvement or hold back thus in particular places. Nevertheless, to examine the function of the West in geographical perspectives in geopolitics of chosen countries we require looking more keenly at the West as a geographical unit. Some inquiries that could result from this aspect include its locality and the way it became institutionalized as an area.
Unluckily, the West is a mainly indefinable geographical perception. In fact the West is an essentially an unsupportive geographical thought. On the contrary to the majority of geographical names, which are evidently connected to a particular territory, the West is recognized at various extents and stages. Even Europe, in spite of the dispute concerning it not having boundaries, possesses an apparent territorial outline, an unambiguous main region. The exact outline of a place could yield disputes: particularly along its boundaries where individuals may affirm being a section of it or not being a section of that region.
Moreover, others could otherwise challenge their right to be a section of it or stay away from it. For instance, the inclusion of neighborhoods into metropolitan government is commonly disagreed, marginal boundaries could be structured in dissimilar discussions with regard to various zones and a number of nations could be characterized as at the edge of dissimilar continents. The West is in a way dissimilar since it has different connotations of dissimilar (at times partially overlapping) regions. Additionally, it is employed at different extents (Westphal 44-46).
The East and West
Whereas some languages possibly encompass the East and West signifying the directions of rising and setting of the sun, East and West gained their technological implication at the time of industrial changes that came along with the navigation as well as with discoveries. The logic of the earth as a sphere to establish a good judgment of the West and the East at the international level and the comprehension that both eventually meets. Contrary to the dissimilarity between South and North, in fact heading towards the North can never take one to the South and the other way around (Browning 85-101). Just through concurrence a situation meridian may be selected to be the norm of West and East for quantification and announcement intentions (mapping). Europeans that had competing colonial goals and demands abroad failed to come to a consensus on a prime meridian, as every naval state wanted its own. It called for the involvement of Chester Arthur who was the American president at that time.
Arthur organized for an International Meridian Conference (IMC) in Washington DC to deliberate on a prime meridian. In this conference, 25 countries sent representatives. Sam Domingo casted their vote against the meridian while France and Brazil refrained. Nevertheless, Greenwich Meridian was eventually taken as the Prime Meridian (Devetak et al. 40-48). The selection of Greenwich Meridian was mainly for the fact that at that moment most maps and charts were utilizing it as such, because of the domination of the British Empire. However, it took the French many years to take up the choice of Greenwich Meridian. With the existence of a common Prime Meridian (PM), the Western Hemisphere (the West) and the Eastern hemisphere (the East) were thereby clearly defined, which went further to echo the previous and tightly institutionalized difference between the Sothern hemisphere and the Northern hemisphere.
Nevertheless, by that moment the Western Hemisphere was an appropriate name broadly employed by the Americas. Generally, the use of the name by the two largely intersected. The continent of America is the solitary continent located between the anti-Meridian of Greenwich and PM. Every one the other continents are located to the West of the anti-Meridian of Greenwich. Nevertheless, this aspect has given the chance to strange oppositions at a higher level. Technologically every location at the Western side of the Greenwich Meridian is taken to be in the Western Hemisphere (Kuus 1140-1155). Nonetheless, a lot of places in Britain, France and Spain just to mention a few are positioned at the Western side of the Prime Meridian but could still be viewed as section of the Eastern Hemisphere as they are a section of the Old World.
The West and East as vital concepts
A different difficulty exists concerning the perception that the West signifies to the East. In reference to a particular direction, the existence of the opposite direction is apparent. When discussing of a region in comparison to a location of exit, the proportion is already natural to a lesser degree. The locality of departure is actually east of the other locality, but suitable names are powerful representations that are mainly flexible (Westphal 64-62). Even at times when the second locality turns out to be more significant when judged against the initial one, the initial locality is not likely to be re-delineated and referred to as East of the second one, which is more significant.
Additionally, the originals names shall continue in application. At times when a suitable name referring to a given cardinal point is much instituted that it bears no relation to a particular region, no natural different one is disguised. There is not a single person that can expect an Eastminister as matching with the Westminister. Suitable names could even gainsay one another. For instance, Anatolia (Greek for East) while maintaining is a name that implies ‘sun rise’ is as well the West Asia (Hagen 489-515). Contrary to the East and West referring to directions, as suitable names there is a sense that these regions are different regions that are evidently separated. There is a great incompatibility between the West and the East. Apart from geographical direction, there exists a difference in culture, Western and Eastern cultures. The aforementioned cultures hail from incompatible and separate regions.
The West as advanced
Certainly the West in particular cultures could bear unconstructive aspects particularly associated with the connection of sunset and vanishing. However, in the Western cultures dissimilar determinations are established from the reality that the sun sets in the West and rises in the East, in any case under more pleasant scopes. From such a simple reality, a number of individuals are persuaded to consider that the past of humanity pursues a similar path. This manner of judgment could be referred to as heliotropism. The West and East are neither equivalent nor are they corresponding. Whereas the West signifies new and vibrant, the East signifies old and inert (Scott 429-454). While the West is facilitating, the East is a hindrance. In this regard, submitting to the West or to the East could be a manner of facilitating or hindering the objectives and strategies of particular performers, which is a reality on social grounds at different levels, from the personal extent (racial discrimination and injustice) to the global extent.
Hegel was in many instances referred to by the people who view Europe as the termination of history, the greatest level of advancement internationally, validating its colonial attempts and supremacy over the other parts of the world. This move was by the individuals positioned at the retardation of Asia in comparison to Europe and the individuals expecting further advancement in America (Churchill Para.10). The perception of advancement connected with the West is empowered by the idea of a new world (the West and at times encompassing Oceania) against the old world (the continents recognized by Europeans prior to their knowledge of America). Once more, the new is more sophisticated and superior to the old.
The major views of a universal West and their geographies
Universal records of the numerous connotations of the West adopt the meanings that follow.
The West considering Europe and the Mediterranean
Established divides encompass the Hellenic partition linking the Greeks, Persians and Romans. The Roman Empire comprised a Latin speaking part of the Empire and the Greek speaking, urbanized section. The urbanized section is to the East of the Empire. Such perceptions of the West are rarely associated with the conditions of the present day, with the exclusion of figurative application. While promoting the unique association between the United States and the United Kingdom, Harold Macmillan expected that the Britons would turn out to be Greeks in American Empire. Applicable up to now is the separation of Christianity involving the Byzantine leader and the Pope institutionalized via the great split between the Orthodox and Catholic churches.
Religious processes up to date demonstrate a split of Europe between Eastern Europe where the Orthodox Church has countless believers and the Western Europe where Protestants and Catholics prevail. The split of Europe is strengthened by the differences in political and economic advancements of the Eastern and Western Europe. Some of the strengthening advancements include capitalism, industrialization and civic versus racial (Churchill Para. 15). The aforementioned difference involving the East and West Europe establishes a dissimilarity of the extent between many and fewer Europeans, instead of a complete, unbridgeable dissimilarity.
Europe as the East versus the West
The West as a particular society in Europe described against Asia. The majority of European philosophers have differentiated civilization in Europe with Asia as Hegel mentions. This differentiation highlights the vitality of Europe as compared to the retardation of Asia as regards political and economic aspects (Bonnett 325-330). Asia was a wide grouping consisting of dissimilar cultures (for instance, Islam, Indian, Japanese and Chinese), linked jointly but all identified as exceeded by the European culture.
Sources of Geopolitics in Europe
Particular occasions and historical times describe the geopolitics of Europe as much as topography and climate. Recognizing the fundamental attributes of geopolitics in Europe with regard to what are believed to be its findings offer a deceptive insight. A useful historical perspective “cannot read modern views into the past with the intention of finding the origins” (Kearns 93). History offers major advancements in a context that poises modification with stability, in conjunction with technical and cultural aspects that formed the concepts of geography with consideration of its political significance. Cultural or technical resemblances can create distance, for instance, a greater or lesser significant aspect. The particular effect differs from time to time (Bonnett 331-335). Nevertheless, two subjects reappear in the geopolitics of Europe although in dissimilar types. These subjects include the political separation of Europe and the historic section involving the Western and the Eastern sections.
Greece acts as the basis of the culture of Europe and offers a model for comprehending its consequent history. The variations recorded by Herodotus between Persia and Greeks developed a duality of West versus East that endured. Greeks were indicted with ‘Medism’ for taking up Persian conduct and agreeing to Persian dominion of material benefit. A dense region partitioned by seas and mountains, Greece promoted the advancement of communities having individual uniqueness in close propinquity and displayed in the same attribute of geographic assortment in a constricted sphere that typified Europe in general. Political affiliations amid Greek city-nations were similar to the global system that appeared during the late Middle Age. Geography as well as inadequate resources compelled Greeks to focus past their immediate neighbors. Colonization and trade broadened the Greek region into the Mediterranean. The Peloponnesian Wars “involved the Athens and Sparta lead to the weakening of Greece and thus rendering it susceptible to Macedonia and Rome” (Bonnett 338).
On the contrary, Rome turned out to be the pattern for international empire in Europe. Following its defeat of Carthage, Europe encountered no severe enemies within the Mediterranean and weak forces from beyond it. As time went by and events unfolded, Rome forced the Mediterranean Sea and most of the Western Europe into a distinct economic, cultural and political unit. Sea and road transport systems were the common modes of transport at the time. Boundaries that existed along the Danube and Rhine set the territory of the empire and the barricade erected by these lines bore cultural influences on Europe following the diminution and fall of the Roman Empire. The Mediterranean Sea joined the regions in the North Africa and Middle East with Europe (Mattern 71-73). An argument by Mackinder affirmed that the Sahara outlined the southern border of Europe since the desert cut off regions in Africa beyond it from continued touch with the north.
The fall of the Western Roman Empire, attacks from primitive communities, and eventually the Arab Sweep across the North Africa and Middle East smashed the cohesive Mediterranean region that had been created by Rome. In this regard, the centre of gravity for Europe moved slightly north across the Alps resulting to the division between the East and the West, a separation that turned to be more intense as the two places spaced out. The distinction between the Greek speaking and the Latin Speaking sections had continued following the conquering of Greek world by Rome, with every one of its cultural connotations (Mattern 74-76). The division of the European Empire into the West and the East at the close of the 3rd century, headed from different capitals, strengthened this division. The establishment of Constantinople relocated supremacy from Rome as the East, later called Byzantine Empire turned out to be dominant. Distinctions between the Christianity of the East and West intensified the prevailing executive and cultural partition.
Consequently, the sections of Europe that had earlier been converted to Christianity by the Roman Catholic Church turned out into being incorporated into Western Christianity, whereas the Orthodox Church existing in Constantinople stretched out the Greek culture together with its description of the belief amid the slaves in Eastern Europe (Westphal 47-50). The reality that Bohemians and Poles, which were both Slavic individuals converted by Rome, regard themselves as a section of the West and describe their identity partially in opposition to Orthodox Russia, offers an evaluation of lasting influence of the Orthodox-Catholic separation. The dismissal of the Constantinople defined by the Orthodox authors as the grand disloyalty reinforced the West-East separation in Europe. A couple of European cultural fields appeared; however, the Latin Christendom turned out to be substitutable with Europe in a manner that eliminated the East from contributing in Europe.
Geopolitics of the 20th century
The clash of geopolitically raised autonomy with topography and political geography of past centuries formed the wars in Europe in the 20th century. Autonomy and the yearnings of individuals to achieve self-government in an independent nation resulted in determining European politics from the late 19th century. The merger of Italy and Germany presented a patterned that others emulated and the fall of Habsburg, Ottoman Empire and others encouraged the establishment of new nations. Unluckily, nationalities failed to exist suitably in divided societies, but combined in a manner that developed inconsistent allegations (Westphal 51-56). Nearly all countries detected some of its individuals outside political borders that encompassed significant minorities from other countries. Diplomacy approved demographic adjustments as Poland shifted into the earlier German terrain and relinquished lands alongside its eastern boundary to the Soviet Union to become a more culturally unified nation than ever before.
The Cold War formed the West and East Europe. This separation shifted most of the Central Europe into a new East. Unlike the East, the neutral West countries resisted Soviet supremacy and stayed out of the Cold War coalition scheme that tore Europe. However, they were exclusions demonstrating the law that determined geopolitics up to the fall of the Soviet bloc. The Cold War geopolitics led to the partnership involving the West and the US. European foundations offered a way of surpassing geopolitical aspects seen as the reason behind the different world wars. Even though approved by different observers, the shift to member-states from nation-states in Europe raises doubts. The description of Europe therefore continues to be a disputed concern in the 21st century (Devetak et al. 36-39).
Conclusion
Geographical knowledge creates awareness of representations, mostly in implied manner, and at times in a very clear way to neutralize a disagreement. Instances of the latter include the geopolitics of the East versus the West in accounts to westernize nations in Europe that were either at the Eastern section or neutral at the time of the Cold War. The major deliberation of this paper is that the West (Europe) is what performers are creating of it in excursive progressions. They can select the way to influence the West and the way to influence Europe, even though their excursive autonomy is largely limited by prevailing geographical thoughts and geopolitical interpretation (Kearns 46-59).
Therefore, there is no necessary analysis achievable of what the West really is or really will turn out to be in the future. On the contrary to affirmations that the West is nowhere or all over, the recognition of the optional ideas of the West as geographical units permits their comprehension as excursive resources for performers that wish to comprise or eliminate a particular country or performers from the West. The emancipation of Eastern part of Europe from the Soviet supremacy resulted into the reunion of Europe; the East and West lost precision in the European perspective. Therefore, the description of Europe remains a disputed concern in the 21st century.
Works Cited
Bonnett, Alastair. “From white to Western: “Racial decline” and the idea of the West in Britain, 1890–1930.” Journal of Historical Sociology 16.3 (2003): 320-348. Print.
Browning, Christopher. Remaking Europe in the margins: northern Europe after the enlargements, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005. Print.
Churchill, Winston. The sinews of peace, 1946. Web.
Devetak, Richard, Anthony Burke, and Jim George. An Introduction to International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Print.
Hagen, Joshua. “Redrawing the imagined map of Europe: the rise and fall of the center.” Political Geography 22.5 (2003): 489-517. Print.
Kearns, Gerry. Geopolitics and Empire, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.
Kuus, Merje. “Policy and geopolitics: bounding Europe in EUrope.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 101.5 (2011): 1140-1155. Print.
Mattern, Janice. Ordering international politics: Identity, crisis, and representational force, New York: Routledge, 2005. Print.
Scott, James. “The EU and ‘wider Europe’: toward an alternative geopolitics of regional cooperation?” Geopolitics 10.3 (2005): 429-454. Print.
Westphal, Kirsten. “Energy policy between multilateral governance and geopolitics: whither Europe?” Internationale politik und gesellschaft 4.2006 (2006): 44-62. Print.