IN THE INTERESTS OF GEOPOLITICS

Geopolitics is concerned with the interrelation of geographic factors and countries and regions on a global scale. In other words, geopolitics studies the mechanisms and forms of control over geographic space, the nature of global dominance, the laws of global leadership, and the geography of relations between centers of political power.The famous German scholar Karl Haushoferconsidered geopolitics to be the "geographic reasoning"of a state. The founding fathers of geopolitics as a science and the classical school of geopolitics state that the international and military-political power of a state or international alliance is closely related to geography.For this reason the foreign politics of a state are primarily concerned with widening its oikoumene(living space), the battle for resources, establishing control over territories, and the division or redivision of spheres of influence. In this regard a key role has always been played by large states, which is understandable. Most experts say that geopolitical concepts are an essential academic tool for substantiating geopolitical ambitions. Throughout human history the fight for control of territories and widening of one's lebensraum has been carried out through various means, depending on the international political environment. At the very beginning and in the era of great geographical discoveries they were carried out by direct military interventions and annexations, the absorption of small countries into larger states. A striking example of this would be the many wars, including the two world wars, which humanity has endured. With the beginning of globalization, centers of global power began to fight for expanded geopolitical influence by more refined methods, though direct expansionist policy was not completely forgotten. Experts have determined four geopolitical paradigms that categorize the methods of gaining control over territory: legal or nation-state-based, ideological, civilization-based, and geoeconomic- and information-based. Each of them highlights different points on the world's geopolitical map. 

It is worth notingthat after the end of the Cold War, which put an end to ideological confrontation and bipolar world order, thus making the United States the world leader, some Western academics announced the end of geopolitics. In their opinion, from now on the political priorities of nation-states and supranational organizations would be the prevention and solution of global problems confronting all of humanity (international terrorism, proliferation of nuclear weapons, food security and ecological issues, etc.) That is, the geopolitical ambitions of individual governments would no longer be the determining factor in world processes. Other experts, disagreeing with this position, put forward a model in which nation-states would grow weaker and future geopolitical confrontations and possible wars would be defined by the lines of existing civilizations (Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations theory). This means a fiercer geopolitical struggle on a larger scale, since religious and ethnic differences do not make for easy compromises. And, what's most important, in today's world a special role will belong to virtual information technologies, with whose help new forms of geopolitical struggle will develop. 

However, for some time now, especially in light of events in the Middle East and the Ukrainian crisis,some Western experts have begun to talk about the return of geopolitics. As they assert, due to revisionist powers - Russia, China, and Iran - geopolitical rivalry has moved back into the foreground, with old-fashioned power games returning to international relations. It seems that the best way of resolving this dispute is not only an evaluation of recent events, but also one of world processes that have taken place since the end of the Cold War. Without a doubt, since the early 1990s the West, especially the United States, has been able to bring together the world community to battle international terrorism. At the same time the West has had a policy of widening the EU and NATO as a means of strengthening its position in the former Soviet Union, which Moscow has traditionally considered to be its own exclusive zone of geopolitical influence. In theory the orange revolutions, initiated by the West in certain post-Soviet countries and leading to the coming to power of pro-Western forces, pursued the same objective.  Simultaneously during this period Washington wooed Moscow in every way possible so they could join their forces to neutralize China's geopolitical influencein the world arena. It's worth nothing that with the tense international standoff between Russia and the United States, Washington is already promising such an alliance to Beijing in order to block the growing political ambitions of Moscow. Even in the Middle East and Afghanistan US policy was dictated not only by the battle with international terrorism alone. Reality shows that by inspiring the Arab Spring in a few Middle Eastern countries, Washington was also seeking to minimize or completely eliminate the influence of Moscow and Iran in the region. In particular, if the West succeeded in Syria Russia would lose its naval base in Tartus and with it Moscow's only presence in the Mediterranean. In addition, by all accounts, Washingtonis to a certain extenthatching plans to reshape borders in the Middle East. 

In the context of a tense political struggle between the West and Russiathe situation in the Ukraine stands out especially. No matter what arguments Washington, Brussels, and Moscow give for their actions in the Ukraine, the geopolitics underlying these events are obvious to any rational person. At the dawn of the last century English academic Helford Mackinderdefined the exceptional importance ofthe Heartland (read: Eurasia) for the attainment of global dominance. American geopolitical strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski has also repeatedly noted the importance of the Ukraine in Russia's neo-imperial ambitions. It is these factors that lie behind the conflicting interests of Moscow and the West in the Ukraine. 

EspeciallysosinceinordertostrengthenitspositionintheformerSovietUnion, and, tobemoreexact, establish full geopolitical control over it, Moscow has in recent years been planning several quite ambitious projects. By the way, Moscow's continuing unwillingness to act as an objective moderator in the settling of interethnic conflicts in the former Soviet Union is explained by Russia's geopolitical interests. Othermoderatorsintheseprocesses, followingMoscow's bad example, often demonstrate a selective approach. 

That all the geopolitical paradigms are on display in the policies of the West and Russia (especially in their relation to the events in the Ukraine) deserves attention. 

First, the interests of the respective nation-states are being jealously asserted. Global or world-wide interests here are no longer taken into account, not to mention the interests and security of the Ukrainian state or Ukrainian people.

Second, there are elements of cultural, ideological, and civilizational disagreements. Russia, in this regard considering the Ukraine to be by its very essence not only one of the closest countries, but also practically a part of itself, is acting against the spread of Western neoliberal values, stressing that thesevaluesdonotalwayssetagoodexample. Third, we can also see that in this confrontation both sides are manipulating information - and in the most cynical way possible, such that sometimes even the most well-versed person is unable to tell fact from fiction. Fourth, the opposing sides are using the theory of controlled chaos on a large scale. 

Unfortunately, these realities yet again prove that Lord Palmerston, the 35th prime minister of Great Britain, was right when, as far back as the mid-19th century, he said that there are no eternal allies, no constant enemies - only constant and eternal interests. The sewords are still true today, and will be needed as long as humanity exists, because geopolitical processes are a constant, and geopolitical interests are unchanging. And it is these interests that move world events.