8 ms·

Ask HN: What books do you recommend for coming up to speed on geopolitics?

13 points by akeck 4y ago

beezlebroxxxxxx 3y ago
You really need to look at history. Grand narratives have their limitations; niche focuses on specific areas can sometimes lack context or discussions of broader implications; you need to synthesize and compromise between the two approaches to create your own understanding. You can focus on some trends and areas that have implications for modern geopolitics (at least right now). Pick books or articles on them and then follow whatever interests you: - The south China sea and surrounding area, especially the debates around the nine-dash line - The fall of the USSR, complicated because of the number of states but still very important - The conflict between India and Pakistan - Post colonial developments in the Arab world (including north Africa) and Sub Saharan Africa, again difficult due to the number of states but still important (some sectarian and ethnic conflicts which seem hyper recent have long histories, often predating colonialism, that had rocket fuel thrown on them in the post colonial environment) - The rise of Brazil - American naval superiority in the wake of WWII (this goes nicely with discussions on the south China sea) - For a particular institution, the history of the WTO can be very eye-opening As always, read contesting approaches or narratives on a particular topic. Criticism is as important as the original argument.
genmud 4y ago
Depends on what region you are looking at / interested in and what your goals are. An equivalent question would be "how do I get into software engineering?". Geopolitics are a very difficult thing to come up to speed on and the relationships are massively varied, while also constantly changing. For me, understanding what drives certain countries can help you understand how they might approach problems. You can largely read how they think about it by looking at their policies and PR releases. I'll give some examples of policy strategies by country: - USA: State Department "A foreign policy for the american people" [1] - Russia: Aleksandr Dugin "Foundations of Geopolitics" [2] - China: Belt and Road Initiative [3] [1] - https://www.state.gov/a-foreign-policy-for-the-american-people/ https://www.state.gov/a-foreign-policy-for-the-american-peop... [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
- alephnerd 4y ago
  Dugin is bullshit. No one worth their mettle in the IR space cares about it. It's like saying the DoD's policy is based on Zeihan. Eg. the RAND Corporation (the goto think tank for the US Govt) - "while Dugin is reported to have connections and ties with Russian officials, including the Russian military leadership, and although Russian leaders may cite his work or ideas, it does not appear that he is directly influential in Russian policymaking. He is perhaps best thought of as an extremist provocateur with some limited and peripheral impact than as an influential analyst with a direct impact on policy" (pg 81) [0] [0] - https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1800/RR1826/RAND_RR1826.pdf https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/...
  - genmud 4y ago
    Eh, that rand report was back in 2017 and to say that Dugin hasn't directly influenced domestic / international strategy is a bit of a naive take. Dugin might be bullshit, but many of the things he outlined in his book have been taken to heart by Russian leadership. You can directly observe these fingerprints all over Russian Information Operations (IO). You say that people in the IR (I assume international relations) space don't care about it, yet if you look at the book in the context of influencing their intelligence and military strategy, it very closely aligns with the approach they have taken. I assume the IR community you are referring to also were the ones yelling that Russia wouldn't re-invade Ukraine because they were dependent on oil money from the EU.
    - BWStearns 4y ago
      Dugin doesn't really speak to "geopolitics" in general though. He mostly writes nationalist fanfic dressed up as policy or history. He might be an ok source for informing Kremlinology efforts but his ideas aren't exactly useful for predicting anything other than what Russia might do next, which is kind of necessary for a general theory of geopolitics.
    - alephnerd 4y ago
      Within the context of the Ukraine conflict some elements do come up, but this is in general the "Near Abroad" doctrine - which has been a very public Russian policy since the 90s, as was seen with Russian handling of Chechnya, Abkhazia, the Tajik Civil War, and the first Azeri-Armenian War. Duginphilia has always been much more of an ethnic Russian far-right phenomenon (so Chechen militias raised by Kadyrov and the Buryat+Sakha conscripts in the Z trucks that are committing war crimes are excluded), which unsurprisingly were the same groups thaat have been fighting in Donbas from 2014-22. Yet bigger picture, Dugin's book viewed the PRC as an existential threat to Russia (unsurprising due to the multiple near wars the USSR and PRC almost fought in the 60s and 70s). If Dugin had any credence, Putin wouldn't have signed the Russia-China Strategic Partnership in 2013-14, which has been upgraded to a full fledged economic and political alliance in the aftermath of the 2022 invasion; Putin+Medvedev wouldn't have caused a standoff with the JSDF from 2011-2013 when Cruise Missles were deployed on the Kuril Islands and the JSDF and VVF were scrambling with each other; nor would Putin have allowed BRI investments in Central Asia (Russia's Near Abroad). All these policies are direct contradictions to Dugin's core thesis (China bad. Make Japan our friend to make an axis against China threatening our Near Abroad) > I assume the IR community you are referring to also were the ones yelling that Russia wouldn't re-invade Ukraine because they were dependent on oil money from the EU. Which IR community are you talking about? People affiliated to the main American think tanks (eg. Atlantic Council [0] and CSIS [1]) were warning about an escalation to the Russian-Ukraine conflict months before the 2022 Invasion began. If you are talking about "Geopolitics Commentators" on CNN, NYT, WaPo, Fox, Youtube, etc they're out of the loop. For IR Policy, the DoD, DHS, Senate+House subcommittees would go straight to the think tanks to be briefed (and have a backchannel to initiate diplomacy). [0] - https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/event/russias-dangerous-military-escalation-with-ukraine/ https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/event/russias-dangerous-mili... [1] - https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-possible-invasion-ukraine https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-possible-invasion-ukra...
mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
What geo? If you want a historical US perspective there is a book titled American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures by Colin Woodward. Spoiler alert - many areas of the US have political leanings shaped by the people that originally settled there (and by settled I mean mostly Europeans ousting the original people that were there).
alephnerd 4y ago
Which region? - Indo/Asia-Pacific, MENA, CEE, Western Europe, North America, South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, ASEAN, etc Also which aspect of policy - business law, military technology, cybersecurity, innovation, economic regulation, internal politics, developmental economics/poverty alleviation, etc For books/papers, it's best to read content published by members of the top 50 think tanks - https://repository.upenn.edu/think_tanks/ https://repository.upenn.edu/think_tanks/ For a lot of regions, you may need regional language fluency (eg. Japanese NatSec people prefer writing in Japanese, Korean NatSec people prefer writing in Korean, PRC NatSec people prefer Mandarin, Russian+Ukrainain NatSec people prefer Russian+German, West+Central Africa excluding Nigera NatSec people prefer French)
ismokedoinks 4y ago
Verso has a big collection of pop-leftist books on geopolitics in many different regions.
hackandthink 4y ago
It helps learning about history but it takes time. Ian Kershaw is nice to read and gives a good overview over European history. https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/279961/roller-coaster-by-kershaw-ian/ https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/279961/roller-coaster-by-ker... "In synthesizing and evaluating an enormous body of scholarship, not only on Europe, East and West, but also on the wider world and the globalisation processes that have so deeply affected European history, Ian Kershaw has produced a historical masterpiece." (Times Literary Supplement)
linhns 4y ago
Prisoner of Geography by Tim Marshall This covers in general every geopolitical important region. After finishing this you can look up deeper materials for regions that interest you.
- robsun 3y ago
  There is also a book published by Tim Marshall in 2021 The Power of Geography. Highly recommend reading these two positions.
BWStearns 4y ago
I suspect you might really mean more generally International Relations, in which case reading intro IR textbooks or history about specific events is probably more informative if your goal is to understand "why do countries do the things they do and what are the 'rules'". Something like https://www.cfr.org/book/world https://www.cfr.org/book/world might be a good place to start. It's relatively recent and I just gave it a skim and while it's certainly an American worldview it seems to stay pretty objective and I think it would be a worthwhile introduction.
dragonwriter 4y ago
Kind of depends what your foundation in political science, international relations, etc., is. Coming out it from nothing specialized beyond typical university general ed, I’d say Man, the State, and War and Theory of International Politics, both by Kenneth Waltz, which are more foundational IR than geopolitics per se to start with.
kk6mrp 4y ago
The Absent Superpower et all by Peter Zeihan. Not sure how much I agree with, but he seems to have a good handle on the topic.
- QuarterReptile 3y ago
  The thing I can't get past with Zeihan is his insistence that the US Navy has everyone outmatched. Seems like China has a larger surface navy, huge shipbuilding capacity, successful employment of that capacity, and rapidly improving systems. Is Zeihan resting his claims on carrier-based aircraft? Differences in training? Is there some gap in killer technology that I'm missing?
hayst4ck 4y ago
As with most questions here, the context of your question matters greatly for the answer. What do you hope to accomplish with your time investment? Why are you asking this question?

13 points by akeck 4y ago

You really need to look at history. Grand narratives have their limitations; niche focuses on specific areas can sometimes lack context or discussions of broader implications; you need to synthesize and compromise between the two approaches to create your own understanding. You can focus on some trends and areas that have implications for modern geopolitics (at least right now). Pick books or articles on them and then follow whatever interests you: - The south China sea and surrounding area, especially the debates around the nine-dash line - The fall of the USSR, complicated because of the number of states but still very important - The conflict between India and Pakistan - Post colonial developments in the Arab world (including north Africa) and Sub Saharan Africa, again difficult due to the number of states but still important (some sectarian and ethnic conflicts which seem hyper recent have long histories, often predating colonialism, that had rocket fuel thrown on them in the post colonial environment) - The rise of Brazil - American naval superiority in the wake of WWII (this goes nicely with discussions on the south China sea) - For a particular institution, the history of the WTO can be very eye-opening As always, read contesting approaches or narratives on a particular topic. Criticism is as important as the original argument.

genmud 4y ago

Depends on what region you are looking at / interested in and what your goals are. An equivalent question would be "how do I get into software engineering?". Geopolitics are a very difficult thing to come up to speed on and the relationships are massively varied, while also constantly changing. For me, understanding what drives certain countries can help you understand how they might approach problems. You can largely read how they think about it by looking at their policies and PR releases. I'll give some examples of policy strategies by country: - USA: State Department "A foreign policy for the american people" [1] - Russia: Aleksandr Dugin "Foundations of Geopolitics" [2] - China: Belt and Road Initiative [3] [1] - https://www.state.gov/a-foreign-policy-for-the-american-people/ https://www.state.gov/a-foreign-policy-for-the-american-peop... [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative

alephnerd 4y ago
Dugin is bullshit. No one worth their mettle in the IR space cares about it. It's like saying the DoD's policy is based on Zeihan. Eg. the RAND Corporation (the goto think tank for the US Govt) - "while Dugin is reported to have connections and ties with Russian officials, including the Russian military leadership, and although Russian leaders may cite his work or ideas, it does not appear that he is directly influential in Russian policymaking. He is perhaps best thought of as an extremist provocateur with some limited and peripheral impact than as an influential analyst with a direct impact on policy" (pg 81) [0] [0] - https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1800/RR1826/RAND_RR1826.pdf https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/...
- genmud 4y ago
  Eh, that rand report was back in 2017 and to say that Dugin hasn't directly influenced domestic / international strategy is a bit of a naive take. Dugin might be bullshit, but many of the things he outlined in his book have been taken to heart by Russian leadership. You can directly observe these fingerprints all over Russian Information Operations (IO). You say that people in the IR (I assume international relations) space don't care about it, yet if you look at the book in the context of influencing their intelligence and military strategy, it very closely aligns with the approach they have taken. I assume the IR community you are referring to also were the ones yelling that Russia wouldn't re-invade Ukraine because they were dependent on oil money from the EU.
  - BWStearns 4y ago
    Dugin doesn't really speak to "geopolitics" in general though. He mostly writes nationalist fanfic dressed up as policy or history. He might be an ok source for informing Kremlinology efforts but his ideas aren't exactly useful for predicting anything other than what Russia might do next, which is kind of necessary for a general theory of geopolitics.
  - alephnerd 4y ago
    Within the context of the Ukraine conflict some elements do come up, but this is in general the "Near Abroad" doctrine - which has been a very public Russian policy since the 90s, as was seen with Russian handling of Chechnya, Abkhazia, the Tajik Civil War, and the first Azeri-Armenian War. Duginphilia has always been much more of an ethnic Russian far-right phenomenon (so Chechen militias raised by Kadyrov and the Buryat+Sakha conscripts in the Z trucks that are committing war crimes are excluded), which unsurprisingly were the same groups thaat have been fighting in Donbas from 2014-22. Yet bigger picture, Dugin's book viewed the PRC as an existential threat to Russia (unsurprising due to the multiple near wars the USSR and PRC almost fought in the 60s and 70s). If Dugin had any credence, Putin wouldn't have signed the Russia-China Strategic Partnership in 2013-14, which has been upgraded to a full fledged economic and political alliance in the aftermath of the 2022 invasion; Putin+Medvedev wouldn't have caused a standoff with the JSDF from 2011-2013 when Cruise Missles were deployed on the Kuril Islands and the JSDF and VVF were scrambling with each other; nor would Putin have allowed BRI investments in Central Asia (Russia's Near Abroad). All these policies are direct contradictions to Dugin's core thesis (China bad. Make Japan our friend to make an axis against China threatening our Near Abroad) > I assume the IR community you are referring to also were the ones yelling that Russia wouldn't re-invade Ukraine because they were dependent on oil money from the EU. Which IR community are you talking about? People affiliated to the main American think tanks (eg. Atlantic Council [0] and CSIS [1]) were warning about an escalation to the Russian-Ukraine conflict months before the 2022 Invasion began. If you are talking about "Geopolitics Commentators" on CNN, NYT, WaPo, Fox, Youtube, etc they're out of the loop. For IR Policy, the DoD, DHS, Senate+House subcommittees would go straight to the think tanks to be briefed (and have a backchannel to initiate diplomacy). [0] - https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/event/russias-dangerous-military-escalation-with-ukraine/ https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/event/russias-dangerous-mili... [1] - https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-possible-invasion-ukraine https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-possible-invasion-ukra...

mattbrewsbytes 4y ago

What geo? If you want a historical US perspective there is a book titled American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures by Colin Woodward. Spoiler alert - many areas of the US have political leanings shaped by the people that originally settled there (and by settled I mean mostly Europeans ousting the original people that were there).

alephnerd 4y ago

Which region? - Indo/Asia-Pacific, MENA, CEE, Western Europe, North America, South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, ASEAN, etc Also which aspect of policy - business law, military technology, cybersecurity, innovation, economic regulation, internal politics, developmental economics/poverty alleviation, etc For books/papers, it's best to read content published by members of the top 50 think tanks - https://repository.upenn.edu/think_tanks/ https://repository.upenn.edu/think_tanks/ For a lot of regions, you may need regional language fluency (eg. Japanese NatSec people prefer writing in Japanese, Korean NatSec people prefer writing in Korean, PRC NatSec people prefer Mandarin, Russian+Ukrainain NatSec people prefer Russian+German, West+Central Africa excluding Nigera NatSec people prefer French)

ismokedoinks 4y ago

Verso has a big collection of pop-leftist books on geopolitics in many different regions.

hackandthink 4y ago

It helps learning about history but it takes time. Ian Kershaw is nice to read and gives a good overview over European history. https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/279961/roller-coaster-by-kershaw-ian/ https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/279961/roller-coaster-by-ker... "In synthesizing and evaluating an enormous body of scholarship, not only on Europe, East and West, but also on the wider world and the globalisation processes that have so deeply affected European history, Ian Kershaw has produced a historical masterpiece." (Times Literary Supplement)

linhns 4y ago

Prisoner of Geography by Tim Marshall This covers in general every geopolitical important region. After finishing this you can look up deeper materials for regions that interest you.

robsun 3y ago
There is also a book published by Tim Marshall in 2021 The Power of Geography. Highly recommend reading these two positions.

BWStearns 4y ago

I suspect you might really mean more generally International Relations, in which case reading intro IR textbooks or history about specific events is probably more informative if your goal is to understand "why do countries do the things they do and what are the 'rules'". Something like https://www.cfr.org/book/world https://www.cfr.org/book/world might be a good place to start. It's relatively recent and I just gave it a skim and while it's certainly an American worldview it seems to stay pretty objective and I think it would be a worthwhile introduction.

dragonwriter 4y ago

Kind of depends what your foundation in political science, international relations, etc., is. Coming out it from nothing specialized beyond typical university general ed, I’d say Man, the State, and War and Theory of International Politics, both by Kenneth Waltz, which are more foundational IR than geopolitics per se to start with.

kk6mrp 4y ago

The Absent Superpower et all by Peter Zeihan. Not sure how much I agree with, but he seems to have a good handle on the topic.

QuarterReptile 3y ago
The thing I can't get past with Zeihan is his insistence that the US Navy has everyone outmatched. Seems like China has a larger surface navy, huge shipbuilding capacity, successful employment of that capacity, and rapidly improving systems. Is Zeihan resting his claims on carrier-based aircraft? Differences in training? Is there some gap in killer technology that I'm missing?

hayst4ck 4y ago

As with most questions here, the context of your question matters greatly for the answer. What do you hope to accomplish with your time investment? Why are you asking this question?