The world is now at a turning point, and there are many different opinions on what is happening. What we will discuss and emphasize here is the latest view on geopolitics. In general, geopolitics is a means and method of managing politics, as well as understanding individuals, organizations, and group based on geographical factors such as spatial distributions. Currently used for military, diplomatic and other strategic analysis due to its basis on geography, geopolitics is also used to analyze the economy, society, military, history, and politics as well. The prefix geo- here comes from the Greek word for earth, and in simplest term geopolitics refers to the study of the effects of geography on politics. When analyzing the political, economic, social, military, and diplomatic aspects of a certain place, we often have to consider the geographical reasons. Here, geography provides a basic framework for analyzing and understanding problems, and various theories have formed out of such understanding.
Wherever there is a theory, there will be controversies and the same theory will grow into several branches. Geopolitics and geo-economics are the results of this. Geo-economics broadly refers to the study of economics and resources in space, time, and politics. The formation of geo-economics as a geopolitical branch is usually attributed to the American economist Edward Luttwak, the French economist and political scientist Pascal Lorot, and the Azerbaijani economist Vusal Gasimli.
Geopolitics scholars generally believe that geopolitical science originates from political geography. The roots of geopolitical theory can be traced back to the concept of Lebensraum, or the "living space" theory mentioned by the German geographer Friedrich Ratzel. The term "geopolitics" on the other hand, is derived from the works of the Swedish scholar Rudolf Kjellén. Kjellén further developed Ratzel 's theory and used geography to explain political phenomena.
Geopolitics has a huge influence on the changes in the global situation. This is also the reason why geopolitics has often been considered to be vital by empires, kings, and presidents alike since ancient times. Ratzel's concept of Lebensraum refers to the geographical region in which living organisms live, and this concept is generally regarded as the foundational theory for the aggression and expansion of Nazi Germany in World War II. It is for this reason that Ratzel has long been unrecognized by the world of geopolitical theory and has been cast into oblivion a long time. Ratzel's actual theory has its value and cannot be ignored in geopolitical theory, as it is a crucial entry point of geopolitical theory.
Ratzel's discussion of Lebensraum involves topics such as borders, space boundaries, and the formation of new living spaces, which continue to be the subject of concern for contemporary political geography. His works are actually quite neutral and objective, unlike how he was portrayed to be in the later time. Furthermore, he established and used the original system concept in the theoretical system. Although his idea of Lebensraum has been widely criticized, Ratzel actually used the concept to describe the laws of political space of human society. He understood the country as a living organism that has biogeographic attributes and struggles for living space. In other words, Ratzel's idea is largely based on Social Darwinism, and his discussion about space still has real value and significance today.
There are not many studies on geopolitics and Ratzel's theory in China. Some scholars have begun to try to use geopolitical theory to explain reality based on complex situation changes. For instance, Zhang Wenmu who published a long article to express his thought that geopolitics should be understood as a way to maintain the health of a nation and as a pursuit of world peace with purpose. He believes that it is essentially a branch of knowledge to correctly understand the compatibility and contradictions between national goals and resources in specific geo-space. His understanding of geopolitics and his definition of direction is acceptable, even though there is a micro-strategic tendency in his thought.
Chan Kung believes that the key to the problem lies in the progress, development, and change of civilization from the geography to space. This is a change in the real world that Ratzel's theory has not faced in the past. There are many kinds of doctrines about geopolitics and as many theoretical and ideological views on in-depth research and discussion of geopolitical issues. However, the core problem that remains unchanged is how to understand geography. The understanding and definition of geography determine how we understand the nature, direction, and differences of the various geo-systems. The concept of "geo-" encompasses a wide range of aspects from material to immaterial, from materialization to virtual, from resources to finance, hence it is an extension of the changes of the key concept from land-based to space. Even if the academic jargon "geopolitics" is still used, today's geopolitics reflects more comprehensive spatial politics, and its connotation has been greatly different from the past.
Therefore, the term "geography" in the modern sense is actually "space", and geopolitics is to use various resources, including economy, industry, military, law, diplomacy, mineral resources, energy, finance, population, and politics, to compete, integrate and balance the space system comprehensively with the fundamental goal of spatial superiority. Why is the concept of space so important in this modern world? The answer lies in the capital itself and the demand for it. Capital is actually a function of the space; it needs space to consume, and once the capital left space, it would be a major crisis that razes most of the wealth of civilization. At that time, the "Crisis Triangle" of urbanization - capital surplus - the economic crisis will be fulfilled. Therefore, modern geopolitics is actually geo-capitalism, and there is a strong monetary and financial motivation behind the space. Economic crisis originates from the capital, and the driving force of spatial superiority competition also originates from the capital, while the ability to dominate or control market space is actually the hard foundation of money and finance.
Based on such theoretical understanding, it should be pointed out that the dealing between fairness and equality is actually a moral illusion under the conditions of modern geo-capitalism, and the definition of rules and establishment of the order have reflected the hard-core reality of geo-capitalism. Even if there were renewed forces in the world, the voice to modify order and rule would be based on the same geopolitical predominance, with little room for pure morality. With this in mind, it is clear that Huawei's problems today and the more complex financial problems that may arise against China in the future are no accident. The same is true for the suppression and interference of China's "Belt and Road Initiative". This is true of all issues involving geography and space and this is a competition for spatial superiority. The market is only a component of space, and it is bound to be restricted by this.
Therefore, in the future, China will indeed face the problem of living space. As Ratzel pointed out in 1901, the changing boundary of space will bring great challenges to the world. If the major policies of any country are not based on the cognition of these theories, they will certainly face various unexpected crises and risks. On occasion, blind and hasty responses are inevitable.
