Nicholas John Spykman envisioned the Rimland theory of geopolitics in 1942 in his book ‘America’s Strategy in World Politics’. Later In 1944, his book titled ‘The Geography of Peace’ was published, posthumously. This book provides a more elaborate description of Spykman’s Rimland Theory. Spykman’s work emerged as a critique of Mackinder’s Heartland Theory which envisages the struggle between the land and the sea power for dominance over the world.
Geopolitical Zones in Spykman’s Rimland Theory
He divided the world into three geopolitical zones as follows just like Mackinder. However, the key difference is in the level of importance granted to different zones (See Fig. 1).
The Inner Core
Spykman’s inner core is quite similar to Mackinder’s Heartland but he does not impart similar significance to inner core as Mackinder does.
- He pointed out that the Russia was mostly an agricultural nation lacking industry in early 20th century.
- He considered Russia’s climate to be harsh allowing little prosperity leading to sparse population density.
- Further, most of the Russian population resides to the west of Ural mountains which is accessible from bordering countries. Thus, it is not well isulated from external aggression.
Therefore, it can not become a global superpower. Ultimately, Spykman did not treat heartland as an invincible fortress.
The Rimland
Contrary to heartland or core, the rimland is strategically very important. It is the lands surrounding heartland which are climatically moderate, agriculturally prosperous and well connected to waterways and seas. He termed the land surrounding the eastern, southern and western boundary of heartland, as Rimland. The rimland includes the areas as follows.
- West European Coastal Lands: They include Spain, Portugal, France, Great Britain, Belgium, Italy, Turkey, Scandinavia and some Balkan states.
- West Asia: It includes Arabian peninsula, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan.
- The Indian Subcontinent: This region includes India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Bhutan.
- The East Asia: It includes China, Japan, Korea and Southeast Asian countries. These countries have distinct culture than the Indian subcontinent.
The New World
Similar to Mackinder’s outer crescent, Spykman’s new world includes North America, South America, Africa and Australia. It is an area surrounded by water from all side. Therefore, outer crescent has capacity to develop great sea power. During the second world war, USA, an ally of Great Britain, was emerging as a key global power
Explanation of Spykman’s Rimland Theory
Spykman’s critique of heartland theory emerges mostly during the events of the second world war. The advances in science and technology helped develop better weapons and strategies. Subsequently, many of the advantages attributed to the heartland were negated. Ultimately, Spykman theorized that heartland is powerful but not as influential as Mackinder theorized.
- Spykman declared that the rimland is more prosperous and well connected to outside world. Additionally, it has access to both the land as well as the sea power. These amphibian characteristics of rimland makes it an area of greater geopolitical interest than the heartland.
- Further, the heartland has a lot of potential for economic and geopolitical growth but it can not become a global superpower without having alliances with nations in the rimland.
- To Spykman, the global superpowers can not be divided into land and sea powers. The land and the sea powers complement each other. Therefore, any nation can not become superpower by exercising only one.
- The sea transportation over long distances is faster and cheaper unlike the land power. On land, military faces many natural and political obstacles whereas on land, military can move around the enemy nations with ease.
- Additionally, the progress in air power has lead to considerable revision of war strategies. The air power also becomes more effective in combination with land and sea power. For instance, fifth generation aircrafts need refueling, repair and rest which is provided by aircraft carrier ships and land bases, especially away from the home countries.
- Containment policies: Hence, the focus of the midland basin i.e. the alliance of west Europe and USA should not be on conquering Russia but on containment of its spread to the rimland in the future. During the cold war and post cold war era, Spykman’s ideas acted as the basis of containment foreign policy of USA and NATO.
Relevance of Spykman’s Rimland Theory
Spykman’s ideas on geopolitics are quite similar to Mackinder but differs in terms of importance of heartland. They both tried to narrate historical events through geographical differences. Nonetheless, the rimland theory explains the present geopolitical situation in a balanced manner. These ideas’ relevance is as follows.
- Presently, the countries with access to sea water, throughout the year, are global superpowers such as USA and China. Though, Russia is influential too but its influence is limited to Eurasian continental countries.
- Russia’s conflict with Ukraine is an effort to gain a permanent access to sea power through Black Sea. It became pertinent for Russia to control Black Sea because Ukraine has intent to join NATO. Russia sees Ukraine’s intent as a threat to its national security.
- Russia and China (a rimland nation) are close allies which makes them a very strategic ally. This alliance gives them access to both the land and the sea power. It is an important pole which balances the global geopolitics.
- USA and Russia fought wars in rimland through their proxies e.g. Vietnam wars and Korea wars, for ideological expansion. While Russia was trying to spread its Marxist ideology to rimland for good political alliances, the USA was trying to stop Russia from making allies in the rimland during the cold war era.
- In medieval and ancient historical times too, Russia was never a global superpower. Contrarily, nations in the rimland i.e. India, China and Ottoman empire were very influential globally.
Conclusion
From the above discussion, we can conclude that the Mackiner and Spykman have very similar outlook of world’s geopolitics. However, the key difference in their ideas was that Mackinder attached greater geopolitical power with heartland while Spykman attached it to rimland (inner crescent). Rimland theory is more suitable explanation of struggle for global power in the past and the present as the evidence suggests.
Kulwinder Singh is an alumni of Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi and working as Assistant Professor of Geography at Pt. C.L.S. Government College, Kurukshetra University. He is a passionate teacher and avid learner.