Prisoners of Geography

I have always thought map reading skill one of the critical ones to be taught at school level. Something to be discussed within family also. Children are always captivated by maps, and parents/teachers can engage them by providing context around those maps. Strategic thought can not be developed without developing full understanding of History + Geography.

And this masterpiece by Tim Marshall, a veteran Journalist (real one) is a good example of right mix of History and Geography.

Core idea of this book is the following question? Who wins when geography and ideology collide? Answer is clear; Geography has outlasted most of the ideologies. For example, "When the Soviet Union broke apart, it split into fifteen countries. Geography had its revenge on the ideology of the Soviets and a more logical picture reappeared on the map, one in which mountains, rivers, lakes and seas delineate where people live, are separated from each other and thus how they develop different languages and customs. The exceptions to this rule are the ‘Stans’, such as Tajikistan, whose borders were deliberately drawn by Stalin so as to weaken each state by ensuring it had large minorities of people from other states."

Tim talks about many important regions of the world, how Geography shaped their unique Geo-strategic vision over centuries. He says, "The land on which we live has always shaped us. It has shaped the wars, the power, politics and social development of the peoples that now inhabit nearly every part of the earth. Technology may seem to overcome the distances between us in both mental and physical space, but it is easy to forget that the land where we live, work and raise our children is hugely important, and that the choices of those who lead the seven billion inhabitants of this planet will to some degree always be shaped by the rivers, mountains, deserts, lakes and seas that constrain us all – as they always have........Geography is clearly a fundamental part of the ‘why’ as well as the ‘what’. It might not be the determining factor, but it is certainly the most overlooked."

Tim highlights creation of artificial states and predicts the following-
"The colonial powers drew artificial borders on paper, completely ignoring the physical realities of the region. Violent attempts are now being made to redraw them; these will continue for several years, after which the map of nation states will no longer look as it does now."

Future fault-lines and strategic imperatives:

Russia: 
1.NATO membership of any of these three (Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova) could spark a war. Georgia in 2008, Ukraine in 2014, Moldova???
2. Encroachment of Siberia by China:
"Although 75 per cent of its territory is in Asia, only 22 per cent of its population lives there...China may well eventually control parts of Siberia in the long-term future, but this would be through Russia’s declining birth rate and Chinese immigration moving north....Indeed, the recent Western sanctions against Russia due to the crisis in Ukraine have driven Russia into massive economic deals with China on terms which help keep Russia afloat, but are favourable to the Chinese. Russia is the junior partner in this relationship." Remarkable turnaround for China. India does not have the Economic muscle that China has over Russia, yet Russia can look forward to India for some manuvouring space. Modi understands this; he had a summit with Putin at Vladivostok last year.

China:
Its strategic vision mostly driven by the bargain between Party leadership and People of China, "The deal between the Party leaders and the people has been, for a generation now, ‘We’ll make you better off – you will follow our orders.’ So long as the economy keeps growing, that grand bargain may last. If it stops, or goes into reverse, the deal is off. The current level of demonstrations and anger against corruption and inefficiency are testament to what would happen if the deal breaks......From the South China Sea Chinese ships would still have problems, whether they headed towards the Pacific or the Indian Ocean – which is the world’s waterway for the gas and oil without which China would collapse......China must secure these routes, both for its goods to get to market, and for the items required to make those goods – oil, gas and precious metals among them – to get into China. It cannot afford to be blockaded. Diplomacy is one solution; the ever-growing navy is another; but the best guarantees are pipelines, roads and ports. China also intends to become a two-ocean power (Pacific and Indian). To achieve this China is investing in deep-water ports in Burma, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka – an investment which buys it good relations, the potential for its future navy to have friendly bases to visit or reside in, and trade links back home. The Indian Ocean and Bay of Bengal ports are part of an even bigger plan to secure China’s future. From Burma’s west coastline China has built natural gas and oil pipelines linking the Bay of Bengal up into south-west China – China’s way of reducing its nervous reliance on the Strait of Malacca, through which almost 80 per cent of its energy supplies pass."

So China will continue investing in building a blue-water navy to secure its trade , in turn its Economy, in turn the bargain with people , in turn party's survival.

USA:
1. Self-sufficiency in Energy will dictate many of its future engagements with the world. Whether and why would it have military presence in Middle-east? Tim does not think Iran to be major driver for military presence in Middle-east.
2. On Israel he say, "The close relationship with Israel may cool, albeit slowly, as the demographics of the USA change. The children of the Hispanic and Asian immigrants now arriving in the United States will be more interested in Latin America and the Far East than in a tiny country on the edge of a region no longer vital to American interests."

Western Europe
Some of the issues are not mentioned- Brexit?? Migration issues?? Demography?? Debate on relevance of European Union will continue to rage. In his words, "For the French this is a nightmare. They successfully helped tie Germany down inside the EU, only to find that after German reunification they became the junior partner in a twin-engine motor they had hoped to be driving. This poses Paris a problem it does not appear to be able to solve. Unless it quietly accepts that Berlin calls the European shots, it risks further weakening the Union. But if it accepts German leadership, then its own power is diminished.........Both France and Germany are currently working to keep the Union together: they see each other now as natural partners. But only Germany has a Plan B – Russia."

Middle-East
Reverse Sykes-Picot: Artificial states like Syria, Iraq, Lebanon might not survive. His words, "Sykes-Picot is breaking; putting it back together, even in a different shape, will be a long and bloody affair."

Ok what about India? Its borders are not secure; hence it will continue to remain a middle power for some time to come.

India's strategic though to be driven by History and Geography in coming decades unlike in the past?? Will India prepare for war in peace time like other great powers do? We are not sure. Though the current government seems to be aware of India's middle power status (good start).

Finally few words on kashmir- 
"The Kashmir issue is partially one of national pride, but it is also strategic. Full control of Kashmir would give India a window into Central Asia and a border with Afghanistan. It would also deny Pakistan a border with China and thus diminish the usefulness of a Chinese–Pakistani relationship."