Report by Editor (September 2008)
Introduction
Editor
In September 2008, the Department of Geography of Durham University organised the "Critical Geopolitics 2008" conference.
Main aims were "to assess the current state of ‘critical geopolitics’ and [...] explore areas for reconsideration and future research.". The organisers further stressed that "...politically as well as intellectually, the time is right to appraise and reflect upon the contribution that this corpus of critical scholarship has made both within and beyond the discipline".
The conference schedule was broad and ambitious and included subjects like political space, the War on Terror, boundaries and migration. Among the speakers were key representatives of the Critical Geopolitics school such as Gerard Toal and Simon Dalby.
About Critical Geopolitics
dr. Gerard Toal
dr. Simon Dalby
The conference yielded interesting insights into Critical Geopolitics:
- Within Geopolitics, there are several schools of thought. Critical Geopolitics, obviously one of them, has many sub-disciplines and lacks a formal definition.
- Critical Geopolitics and Human/Physical Geography are not integrated. This would be difficult due to their different methodologies. The main focus of Critical Geopolitics is the artificiality of constructed spaces.
- Contacts between Anglo-Saxon and French geopoliticians are very rare. A likely explanation is the language barrier. The conference participants were a reflection of this divide, including many British and American delegates, but none from France. Moreover, few of the participants knew the work of Aymeric Chauprade, which is well-appreciated in France.
- Critical Geopolitics academics have a very small media presence. A conference participant stated something like "a Critical Geopolitics that is only discussed in the journals is not truly critical".
Selected lessons
The conference offered many other thought-provoking facts and opinions. A selection of the ones about global conflicts:
- Most wars after the Second World War were civil conflicts and not between states. This is not in line with assumptions of International Relations.
- Recent wars had another geography than the 1980s wars. Nowadys, there is less violence as two decades ago, despite the attention of news bulletins for developments in Iraq and Afghanistan in news bulletins.
- The thought that dominated in "the West" after the collapse of the Soviet-Union was "We won". An alternative would have been to change the rules of international relations.
- The Cold War was a cultural war. Some geopolitical agents have a strong interest in re-starting this war.
- The recognition of Kosovo's independence by the US and other states blew up the whole system of international relations. Another danger is that the borders of Kosovo have not gained any international recognition.
- Conservative Geopolitics say "this is the world" and who disagrees is "idealistic".
Conclusion
In all, the conference gave an excellent overview of the accomplishments of Critical Geopolitics so far. At least as important, it also proved to be a fertile soil for future research. During the last night -on the way back from pub to hotel- two PhD students decided to work together on a paper to be presented at a next conference...
