In a ´theoretical´ geopolitical exercise aimed at slowing down or stalling Euro-Asian development and integration by imposing roadblocks to trade, development and intra-state economic activities, several key countries and regions could be targeted.
Is such hypothetical scenario purely speculative or grounded in real-world policies and intentions? Nonetheless, here are some potential targets that could disrupt Euro-Asian development and overview of major export countries in the region.
These are major surplus countries on Euro-Asia and weakened states.
Lines represent what I call since 2014 "Mackinder roadblocks":
How can Euro-Asian development and integration be slowed/stopped?
known also as One Belt One Road (OBOR) trade corridors
Trade and development is stopped or slowed down by imposing roadblocks on these following International Trade corridors and by weakening security in the region:
International transport corridors in Ukraine
Ukraine: Control over Ukraine's territory, particularly its eastern regions and ports such as Odessa, could disrupt trade routes between Europe and Asia, particularly maritime trade in the Black Sea region and train corridor. As a transit country between Russia and the European Union, Ukraine plays a significant role in facilitating trade flows between Eastern and Western Europe. New Eurasian Land Bridge corridor also called the Second or New Eurasian Continental Bridge was derailed and investment shifted from Russian-Ukrainian route into
Turkey: Control over the Turkish Straits (Bosporus and Dardanelles) could allow for the blocking or regulation of maritime traffic between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, impacting trade between Europe and Asia. Disruption of this trade would be impossible at the moment as Bulgaria, Romania, and Turkey are NATO states and Turkey holds the key to this trade bottleneck in form of 1936 The Montreux Treaty.
Caucasus
Azerbaijan: Located on the western shores of the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan serves as a transit country for goods moving between Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Europe. The country's ports, such as Baku, are important hubs for maritime trade in the Caspian region.
Georgia: Situated in the Caucasus region, Georgia serves as a key transit route for goods moving between Europe and Asia, particularly via the Caucasus corridor. The country's ports, such as Batumi and Poti, are important hubs for maritime trade in the Black Sea region. Control over Georgia's territory and its ports on the Black Sea could disrupt maritime trade routes in the Caucasus region, impacting trade between Europe and Asia.
Armenia: Despite its small size, Armenia occupies a strategic position in the South Caucasus and serves as a transit country for goods moving between Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia.
Syria:
Syria's geographic location historically played a significant role in trade along the ancient Silk Road routes, particularly as a connecting point between the Mediterranean Sea and the rest of the Eurasian landmass. T
he ongoing conflict and political instability in Syria have severely disrupted trade and economic activity in the region. Overland trade between the Middle East and Europe through this route is more or less stalled.
Iraq: Situated at the crossroads of the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, Iraq has long been a vital link for trade between these regions. This Iraq's geographic location has historically positioned it as a crucial trade hub along the ancient Silk Road routes. However, due to various factors such as conflict, political instability, and infrastructure challenges, Iraq's role as a trade bottleneck on the old Silk Road has been diminished in recent times. Instability on land routes connecting to Turkey and Syria has disrupt trade flows between the Middle East and Europe.
Iran: Positioned at the crossroads of the Middle East, Central Asia, and South Asia, Iran plays a crucial role in trade between Europe and Asia, particularly for goods moving by land or sea. Disruptions to maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, controlled by Iran, could impact trade flows between the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, affecting global energy markets and trade routes between Europe and Asia.
Afghanistan: Control over Afghanistan's territory and its major transportation routes, such as the Khyber Pass and other border crossings, could disrupt overland trade between South Asia and Central Asia, as well as between Central Asia and the Middle East.
Pakistan: Control over Pakistan's territory, particularly its ports on the Arabian Sea and land routes connecting to Central Asia and China, could impact trade flows between South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East.
Russia:
With its vast landmass spanning both Europe and Asia, Russia plays a pivotal role in transcontinental trade. Key transportation routes, such as the Trans-Siberian Railway and various highways, pass through Russia, making it a critical bottleneck for goods moving between Asia and Europe. Important Northern corridor, North-South transport corridor.
Kazakhstan: As the largest landlocked country in the world, Kazakhstan occupies a strategic position in Eurasia. It serves as a transit country for goods moving between China and Europe, with key transportation routes like the Eurasian Land Bridge passing through its territory. CCAWEC provides an alternative land route route between China and Europe which avoids Russian territory.
North Korea: Disruptions to maritime traffic and trade flows in Northeast Asia, particularly through control over ports and coastlines, is impacting trade between East Asia and the rest of the world, including Europe. The frozen conflict is a roadblock for NE Asian progress and development in the region.
Taiwan: Control over Taiwan's territory and its ports could disrupt maritime trade routes in the East China Sea and South China Sea, impacting trade flows between East Asia and the rest of the world, including Europe.
SUMMARY:
Large countries on Euro-Asia:Russia, China, Iran and India are impossible to control. These sovereign countries pursuit their own sovereign interests and can not be controlled in medium to long term directly.
Several countries in Eurasia serve as significant trade route bottlenecks due to their strategic geographic location and due to the level of their transportation infrastructure.
These countries act as crucial nodes in the Eurasian trade network, and any disruptions or congestion in their transportation infrastructure can have significant implications for regional and global trade flows.
Several smaller states were lately purposefully destabilized, weakened. The maintenance of infrastructure was neglected, investments were prevented.
These ARTIFICIALLY created bottlenecks impact the flow of goods and commerce between Europe and Asia. They prevent or limit trade between surplus regions:
MACKINDER ROADBLOCKS (Artificially wakened states on old Silk Roads)
Uncovering the truth took over two years of self-funded, tireless investigation.
I decided to open it for free, no paywall, despite huge investment. Because the truth matters. Please consider supporting my work with a donation. Every bit helps keep this mission alive!
Exploring my 2014 framed
"Mackinder Roadblocks Hypothesis"
in connection to Nordstream affair
SUMMARY:
The author presents the "Mackinder Roadblocks" theory positing that conflicts across Eurasia, such as those in Afghanistan or Ukraine, are engineered by external forces to obstruct the integration of substantial economic regions and the emergence of a formidable Euro-Asian bloc.
This dynamic ultimately hampers the progress of the Belt and Road Initiative.
The main observation is that the trend is unstoppable and inevitable, that roadblocks in terms of failed states, blocked infrastructure projects or intra-state security issues are being solved and development of the Euro-Asia is gaining avalanche style traction regardless of attempts to stop or slow it down.
KEY TAKEAWAYS:
The author reinterprets Mackinder's Heartland theory, emphasizing the prevention of surplus economic area integration in Eurasia.
Proposed conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Ukraine are characterized as "Mackinder roadblocks," strategically created to thwart Euro-Asian integration.
External meddling, particularly from the US and UK (Anglo-Saxons), is identified as a key instigator of these conflicts.
The theory argues that the US and UK (Sea-Island powers) seek to control critical maritime chokepoints to inhibit the rise of a unified Euro-Asian economic power.
The sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline is referenced as a pertinent example of such interference, aiming to drive a wedge between the EU and Russia.
The author anticipates the eventual dismantling of these roadblocks and the ascendance of a powerful Euro-Asian economic entity.
Over the last 10 years, world evets served as testing of the hypothesis validity and this theory has provided unexpectedly remarkable prediction power.
This hypothesis has not yet been published do to other important thigs to do ;o)
PREFACE/ISSUE
What do you get if you mix old Mackinder Heartland theory, Spykman, old Silk Roads, Chinese OBOR, replace Heartland and Rimland by Surplus Economic Areas and position in between Roadblocks on land chokepoints?
1. THEORETICAL PART:
1.2 What is the difference between Mackinder and Spykman?
In Mackinder there is one pattern of conflict in history - that between SeaPower and Heartland.
In Spykman, however, there are two—that between SeaPower and Heartland, and that between an independent Centre of power in the Rimlandwith both Seapower and Heartland allied against it.
Spykman was concerned with the balance of power, he arguing that isolationism, which relied on the oceans to protect the United States ("hemispheric" or "quarter defence"), was bound to fail. His aim was to prevent another US retreat, as had happened after the First World War.
Spykman argued that it was in the America's interest to keep Germany
strong after the Second World War to counter the power of Russia...
There are issues with his theory and critiques are written about it, and rightfully so. Spykman also does not explain all present observations.
1.2 What we are now experiencing is something different:
One Belt One Road / Belt and Road initiative (OBOR/BRI)
Is growing land trade problem for Sea Powers US, UK, Japan? Yes, and they all created their own strategies
how to counter this development.
1.3 Merging Ancient Theories with Contemporary Geopolitics
Nicholas J Spykman stated that “Geography is the most fundamental factor in the foreign policy of states because it is the most permanent.”
What IF we replace the "Heartland" with "Integrated cooperative surplus EA economic areas" as the main Objective#Iand forget Heartland, Rimland, Pivot area? What if we build Hypothesis around it?
5 E-A economic centres are surplus areas
The new "Mackinder Roadblocks theory against Euro-Asian integration" which I verbalised long before 2015 is based on observations thatall conflicts in the region have created roadblocks to integration, namely in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and now Ukraine.
These conflicts show remarkable similarities such as weakened state structures, fragmented political spectrum leading to instability, minimal investment in new infrastructure project, neglected existing infrastructure, emphasis on fighting insurrection, sanctions, corruption, small cross-border trade.
Cordon sanitaire:
From China to Mediterranean Sea there is a Belt of Instability.
EU-RU-CN-IN-ME economic Surplus Giants are kept apart.
1.4 Are latest conflicts on Euro-Asian continent external artificial interferences?
It does not appear that geographical, cultural, political, local rivalry or economic differences, but external interference in the stability of the region is behind the slower rate of development. Or is in a Large portion behind it.
Note that all these conflicts are not just local, they all involve global players.
The biggest geopolitical shifts are happening right now in Euro-Asia.
The 'Mackinder roadblock against Euro-Asian integration' theory is a concept in geopolitics which suggests that there is no inherent geographical barrier to the integration of the European and Asian landmasses and that integration into Large Super-surplus economical entity is ongoing, such that includes fragmented Surplus Giants.
The theory is based on the work of the British geographer and politician Sir Halford Mackinder, who argued that the "Heartland" of Eurasia - the vast, resource-rich area stretching from eastern Europe to central Asia - was a geopolitical pivot that would determine the balance of power in the world.
According to Mackinder's theory, whoever controlled the heartland would be able to dominate the rest of the world. He argued that Europe's coastal position made it vulnerable to attack from both east and west, and that the vast, landlocked heartland was the key to achieving geopolitical dominance.
Mackinder believed that a single landmass stretching from Europe to Asia would be too powerful and difficult to control, and that it was in the interests of the dominant powers to keep the heartland divided and fragmented.
Mortymer's new "Mackinder Roadblock against Euro - Asian Integration" theory, or rather the modified and fused old one, the latest modern iteration, is just another name for theantithesis to OBOR played by interfering foreign state actors and a way to prevent the rise of a united Euro-Asia.
2. POSTULATES - SUPPORTING EVIDENCE:
Economics trumps politics (in medium to long time)
The world economy is growing constantly, key areas on Euro Asian landmass are underdeveloped yet there is a slow progress
All major surplus economies are located on Euro-Asia (...)
Once these connect through landmass there will be the largest economical power for centuries to go.
The EU with educated workforce, is great economical area
The Russia with its natural resources, plenty of energy
The China with largest workforce, the factory of the world
India, the rising economy
Gulf energy exporters
There are 2 "Mackinder islands" traders/gates to EuroAsia ()
For US it is important that these both island states on E and W are allies or it would be harder to access EuroAsia without them
Note that after WW2 USA swapped ally China to old enemy Japan and established itself in South Korea enabling access to the East EuroAsia.
Note that Taiwan falls under the same category.
They both are "dying" economically, politically, militarily, their influence is diminishing.
The are the outside "Island/naval power", needs to control seas, control of naval choke-points.
The old Mackinder theory predicted that lots of World trade will move to railroad network. There is a lot of critique for the unfulfilled prediction. He could not predict the Cold war and situation after the Soviet empire broke apart. Vast majority of commodities are moved by sea.
The is the only debtor of international monetary reserves.
In Seventies, after the Vietnam war (November 1, 1955 – April 30, 1975) the USA was economically exhausted and was no more unable to create own surpluses. The Nixon team Kissinger/Volcker realized that US could turn tables to control surpluses of other nations. The perpetual $ machine funding its "TwinDeficits", "DeficitsWithoutTears", "Our currency, Your problem" was born. Yannis Varoufakis named it "Global Minotaur". The monetary gold has been "neutralized".
Africa, South America are ATM insignificant. They are not right now adding to the World GDP, not yet...
Both sides (E-A/BRICS vs UK-US-eu_elements) will fight over them
Yet these will side with the new emerging SuperGiant entity (BRICS)
China has shown "this is the way" in development, out of poverty.
The biggest threat to is if EuroAsia integrates & unites.
The USA/UK will fight the Euro-Asian integration teeth and nails but will ultimately fail. There will be BerlinWall_2.0 even at some point.
It was the which imposed past first roadblocks, created Mackinder Gates.
Roots of this theory go to post WW2 order in which USA switched its ally China to Japan (as to CTRL one gate to Euro-Asia) while supporting the Chinese part of government which was chased out from mainland and settled in Taiwan (similar like Japan UK).
Another main-stone is the control of West Germany preventing the emergence of Paris-Berlin-Moscow-Peking axis.
South Korea resembles Germany´s role in Europe. Both host US bases.
Lesser states under attack, forming failed states preventing E-A trade
Afghanistan (20 years, let opium thrive, nothing built, prevented any development, created factions)
Iraq (After unable to ctrl ISIS)
Syria, UA...
OBOR has been systematically countered in targeted policies to weaken
governments, glow opposition, create failed states which are "made unstable".
BChIM - Myanmar
CPAK - AFG, Pakistan
West Asia - Iraq, Syria
New Eurasia - Ukraine
Ukraine affair as a next Mackinder Roadblock
Puts wedge between EU and rest of Euro-Asia
Weakens both Russia (great to blame) and EU (The USA's nr2 economical competitor)
The USA raids European economy to scavenge value support for the $.
Kills all independenceideas those pesky EUpeans had.
AfghanistanRoadblock of 20 years
Trade route choke-point
The location is on several trade routes N-S Nd E-W.
In past many empires had capitals in : Greco-Bactrians, Kushans, Indo-Sassanids, Kabul Shahi, Saffarids, Samanids, Ghaznavids, Ghurids, Kartids, Timurids, Hotakis and Durranis
Opium & Afghanistan
The Opium wars in 19th century put China' dragon asleep, brought economic and political exploitation
Taliban imposed ban in 2001 = 0t. Production under US occupation grew and peaked in 2021 at 7k t
In 1st month promised development if phased out.
The Afghanistan turned into Mackinder roadblock not just prevented land trade but also allowed exportation of heroin, radicalism and refugees which put growth in the central Asia down by dozens of years.
Pipelines, railroads will be built.
Projects are already discussed.
The Mackinder Gates to EuroAsia ( & ).
They guard access to Euro-Asian landmass from E Nd W.
Waged colonial empires to secure commodities.
Both were at war with USA but are now allies due to synced objectives.
Both will be side-lined if E-A integration grows.
The European hot war as a part of this bigger picture.
Could blow the #Nordstream? YES! Some US-UK interest? Also yes.
Could they also green light and push for the Crimean bridge attack?
Are objectives destructions or changes in Western and Russian policies?
Is the objective to split two surplus economies to trade together before they establish too strong ties? Here is about Global Britain strategy.
On 24th of August 2022 BRICS announced expansion by Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Ethiopia and Argentina. The new members increased the share of World´s GDP in PPP to 37% and population to 46%. The block found itself with 3 major advantages:
Extension of the OBOR branch to Africa (point 9., pic 2.)
Further integration and cooperation between major energy exporters (Russia, KSA, Iran, UAE)
Control of 3 major naval trade chokepoints
CONCLUSION/SUMMARY:
The Ukraine case shows features similar to what has been seen in Afgnanistan, Syria, Iraq and even Libya. These together for a pattern.'
It looks like Ukraine is a new Roadblock on the old Silk-road, new pressure point has been erected.
Next failed/weaken broken state - Ukraine - full of weapons (US left lots of weapons in AFG, Iraq), full of heat, many fighting factions, political instability, local insecurity, scars and a nest for future problem, bottlenecks for peaceful development and trade.
PREDICTIONs:
Majority of Mackinder Roadblocks will be in time dismantled
There will be attempts to re-establish old Roadblocks and create new ones
E-A economic areas will experience bigger growth than RoW
EU will occasionally open to both sides East and West
EU will create own security alliance, NATO will breakup or morph
Russia Security Council Secretary: "Russia is a bone in the throat of the West, which is trying to create its own world order. Even more than a hundred years ago, the English geographer Mackinder formulated the well-known theory of the geographical axis of history and the so-called Heartland, that is, the middle land occupied by Russia. He argued that control of the Heartland meant domination of the World Island, as he called Eurasia. Dominance over the Heartland, in his opinion, creates the basis for control over the Eurasian space, and this in turn leads to global dominance.
He also owns the idea of isolating our state with the help of the so-called cordon sanitaire separating the small countries of Eastern Europe from Russia. The initiative to separate Ukraine , as well as other national outskirts of the former empire, also came from Mackinder. So many years have passed, but their goals have not changed."
Uncovering the truth took over two years of self-funded, tireless investigation.
I decided to open it for free, no paywall, despite huge investment. Because the truth matters. Please consider supporting my work with a donation. Every bit helps keep this mission alive!