Mackinder or Mahan Essay

Words: 2125
Pages: 9

Who is more useful for understanding contemporary Geopolitics: Mackinder or Mahan? Use a major power to illustrate your points.
In the current century that we live, the world is becoming a smaller place from the effects of technology and globalisation. In the 19th and 20th century, the theoretical works of Mahan and Mackinder were drivers of geopolitical thought. Both theorists’ have a similar framework where they studied political power, military strength and how they were affected by geographic space. In the modern era, geopolitics is very similar to traditional thought, which is why these theorists, in particular Mahan, are arguably still applicable to contemporary geopolitics.
The ideologies that are held together by Mackinder and
…show more content…
The first principle, ‘geographical position’ is supremely fundamental to the United States Navy. Because the countries contours consist of vast coastlines and occupy hundreds of military bases overseas, its position is essential to naval dominance. The concern Mahan had in his time was that the United States didn’t have any ports or trade centres close to the ‘heartland’. This concern has clearly been erased through the abundance of bases around Europe.
By using the overseas military bases, such as the base in Bahrain, it creates assistance in trade through the Malacca Straight, which is a huge chock point in the shipping industry and is favourable to piracy. To be militarily active in a position such as this, allows for United States integration into international assistance and gives the power to deter hostile forces at sea. By having the multitude of bases, it allows the US Navy to address any situation at any time, regardless of its geographical position. In this case, the United States addressed Mahan’s concern, allowing for a greater geopolitical influence around the world.
What Mahan means when discussing his second principle of ‘physical conformation’, is the physical geography that determines if interaction with surrounding foreign areas is amplified or discouraged. In favour of the United States, the ports on the