The Future World Order from a Geopolitical Perspective: Heartland and Rimland
The theories of two great geopolitical thinkers, Halford J. Mackinder[1] (1861-1947) and Nicholas John Spackman[2] (1893-1943), respectively known as the Heartland and Rimland, played key roles in the conspiracy of the British and American naval powers against the land-based powers and in outlining the logic of the First and Second World Wars. In the Heartland Theory, Mackinder, an Englishman, studied the historical record of Eurasian countries and warned Britain that if a unified political unit as a land-based power completely dominated the heartland region (including Russia, the Caucasus, Central Asian countries, northern parts of Iran, and Eastern Europe), it would overcome maritime powers such as Britain and become the next superpower. In contrast, the American-born Spykman believed that, conversely, dominance of the Eurasian maritime periphery would determine the next superpower, because it would prevent the power ruling the heartland from advancing towards the seas. Therefore, in the 20th century, sea-based powers similar to the United States, such as Britain in Europe and Japan in Southeast Asia, should become its strategic allies.
Iran’s situation
These two theories, regardless of the aforementioned differences, had one thing in common in drawing the world map, namely that some countries, including Iran, have a dual geography. In other words, the northern half of Iran is located in the Heartland and the southern half is located in the Rimmand (the maritime margin proposed by Spockman or the inner crescent proposed by Mackinder). This geographical division is very meaningful in the history of the Iranian dynasties and the non-native invader governments that ruled these regions. For example, when the central governments in Iran were able to establish their dominance over the land areas located in the Heartland part of the Iranian plateau and the sea routes located in the south of Iran, they became an undisputed empire. Conversely, when the Iranian government and military forces were weakened, they were attacked from the north by powerful land forces such as the Mongols, Russians, etc. and were threatened from the south by maritime powers such as Portugal and Britain.
Iranian history and geography argue that the land-based powers ruling over most of the heartland and the maritime powers seeking to dominate the Eurasian seaboard are opposed to Iran becoming an independent deterrent military power. For example, the bitter experience of Iran’s occupation during World War I and II, by the Russian land-based power from the north and the British naval power from the south, is evidence of this. Also, during the Cold War, the Soviet Union (as the land-based power ruling over most of the heartland) and the United States, as the undisputed naval power replacing Britain, used Iran as a means of reconciliation. Documents published from the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union also show that the United States, during a military simulation in January 1974, corresponding to 1352, had prepared a scenario of nuclear bombing of Iran with 54 atomic bombs to prevent the advance of Soviet forces, given the concern about the occupation of Iran by the Soviet Union due to the occupation of Afghanistan and the Soviet presence in Iraq. These declassified documents were published by the “US National Security Archive Site[3]” located at George Washington University in the United States.
The world today is also on the verge of a serious transformation in the global order. Iran will not be immune from the upcoming storms in terms of its geopolitical position. Iran’s importance to the desired American order in the West Asian region is linked to several factors. Overcoming Iran is linked to the United States’ grand strategy of containing and weakening Chinese hegemony. As Michael Flynn, the national security advisor to the first Trump administration, bluntly stated in an interview: “Israeli victory, both in reality and in the global perspective, will establish the image of global dominance of the United States and, of course, will establish Israeli dominance in that region… We must let Israel finish the job. “When that happens, the United States can completely shift its focus to China… We need to focus on the main enemy of the 21st century, and that enemy is China… Establishing positive American relations with the new Iranian regime – whichever regime rises from the ashes – if we have a positive relationship with that regime, it will really benefit the United States, especially against China, and it will weaken China.”
Defeating Iran will help restore the United States’ dominance as the superpower of the 21st century in several ways. First, by defeating Iran, Israel’s hegemony in the region will be established. The United States will certainly seek Israeli military superiority in the West Asian region, and this will even include Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Defeating Iran’s geography can prevent China from becoming hegemonic in two ways, according to Mackinder and Spykman’s theory:
A) Possibility of access and dominance over Central Asia and the Caucasus: The northern half of Iran, as part of the heartland, has special access geographically and civilizationally to the landlocked countries of Central Asia and the countries of the Caucasus. These countries have been mainly under the influence of Russia. These countries are also located in the heartland. The further divergence of these countries from Russia and China will benefit the allies of the United States of America, since part of the heartland (countries that separated from the Soviet Union) will be separated from the influence and alliance with Russia.
b) Possibility of controlling and dominating the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean: The southern half of Iran, as part of the maritime border (rimland), also provides the possibility of dominating one of the most important energy routes and straits, namely the Strait of Hormuz. According to the report of the “US Energy Information Administration[4]”, about 14.2 million barrels of crude oil and another 5.9 million barrels of petroleum products pass through this strait daily, which in the first quarter of the year accounts for about 20% of the total global oil production. Dominating the Strait of Hormuz makes it possible that one of China’s most important initiatives regarding the Belt and Road Project, namely the Gwadar Port and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, will face a strategic failure – China wanted to bypass the Strait of Malacca and the US Navy in this way.
In addition, due to Iran’s huge oil and gas reserves, if the United States can install its allied Western-oriented government in Iran, then it will complete the petro-dollar project to dominate the dollar in the global oil trade. It should be noted that the countries that fell victim to the petro-dollar order include Iraq, Sudan, Syria, and Libya. The countries mentioned did not follow this order. The names of these countries were previously revealed by former NATO commander Wesley Clark in an interview as targets of the United States for overthrow. In addition to the anti-petro-dollar approach of these countries, their geographical location in the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea, the Persian Gulf, and the Strait of Hormuz indicates the United States’ attempt to control the maritime border. This is while China is the largest oil importer in the world and, in addition to its need for their energy resources, must maintain the security of their maritime transit. But with the United States forcing Arab countries and Iran (and other candidates for American aggression, including Venezuela) to follow its preferred order for trade exchanges, China will also be forced to submit to the rule of the dollar and other American dictates in the international economic order.
[1]. Halford J. Mackinder
[2]. Nicholas John Spykman
[3] . Available at:
https://unredacted.com/2015/12/15/1974-u-s-war-game-launched-54-nuclear-weapons-in-iran-to-save-country-from-soviet-invasion-according-to-declassified-document-in-new-national-security-archive-publication/
[4]. Energy Intelligence Agency