- Email: [email protected]
Dictionary of geopolitics
REVIEWS
243
inclusion of the non-seaside resort of Wiesbaden) in terms of so many different themes and yet tie their evolution together within a theoretical framework. During the course of the reading, the reader is sometimes left wondering how a medium-sized domestic resort such as Bournemouth could possibly be compared with the massive conurbation of Los Angeles. But the selection of the three somewhat unbalanced sites was quite intentional, Sloane stated at the outset, and the concluding chapter- “The contemporary significance and wider implications of resort-industrial regions”-ably ties together the various themes and their theoretical underpinnings while at the same time setting the stage for future evolutionary trends. As one who has attempted to theorize the underpinnings and delineate phases of evolution of seaside resorts and relate them to the various impacts upon the landscape, I kept thinking what I would do differently if I were writing a book such as this. I probably would have selected a Florida site (Palm Beach or Miami) over Los Angeles because the role of leisure in the economy and patterns of tourism seasonality there (not necessarily during the same months) are more like Bournemouth or Nice. I probably would also have emphasized touristic material culture elements in the landscape and patterns of morphological evolution, and devoted less space to the broader socioeconomic-politico underpinnings. Finally I would have tried to incorporate the global diffusion of some of the resort evolution patterns (to the hills of Asia and the coasts of Africa, Australia, and Latin America). As I realize what a massive undertaking such a project would be, I must compliment Sloane on what he has produced. Aside from the criticism of excessive detail (a positive or negative criticism, depending on one’s point of view) and an occasionally cumbersome style, negative criticisms are few. There are numerous excellent maps, photographs, and tables that accompany the text. However, there are many typographical errors and misspelt words and placenames (e.g. Wiltshire Blvd, Longbeach) and also inconsistencies in style. These short-comings are more than offset by the content, however. Every professional historian, geographer, and (of course) historical geographer interested in leisure and tourism or urban geography and planning should have a copy of this book. Although not suitable for introductory courses in tourism geography, Fashionable Resort Regions is one of the most comprehensive tomes on the topic to date that places the evolution of leisure landscapes within a broader, indeed global, socio-economic and political theoretical framework without sacrificing empiricism. Mississippi State University
JOHN 0. LOUGHLIN
KLAUS
J. MEYER-ARENDT
(Ed.), Dictionary of Geopolitics (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1994.
Pp. xi +284. $69.50) Scholarly dictionaries are a rarity, possibly because they are difficult to prepare and edit, but quality efforts serve invaluable purposes when devoted to time-honored themes of interest to interdisciplinary and international professionals. Such is the case with the term geopolitics, one of the most used, maligned, and misunderstood terms in the lexicon of political geographers and those studying international relations. For geographers, geopolitics has gone through four different states since 1870 according to the editor. The editor rightly calls this volume a “first on the subject”, and hopes it “will clarify the nature of the field and the controversies that have periodically torn it apart” (p. x). I believe this effort is definitely a step in the right direction. The above dictionary does not provide short and crisp definitions of a very large
244
REVIEWS
number of terms. Rather the editor includes 219 main entries that relate to the history, practice, and interpretation of geopolitics. The entries are written by 11 political geographers, all male and almost all with a European background. The project unfolded by the editor asking political geographers for suggested entries. Once that list was compiled he contacted individuals, mostly from the active political geography research community, to prepare the entries. The entries are not limited to geography, but include terms, concepts, events, and individuals familiar to those in political science and international relations. The 11 authors, including the editor, are: S. Dalby, H. Heske, S. Holder, J. HulTerd, P. La Blotier, J. Nijman, P. O’Sullivan, J. O’Loughlin, G. O’Tuathail, G. Parker and N. Smith. The number of entries by these contributors is uneven. Neil Smith has 56 (almost one-quarter of the total), Parker (34), O’Sullivan (31!, and Heske (24:). The fewest are by Hufferd (6) and Holder (4). The author(s) of each entry are given following the description as are citations in the bibliography and related entries volume itself. The 600-plus entries in the bibliography (mostly English, German, Spanish and French) and the 500-plus entries in the index are valuable components. The entries are in alphabetical order and most are one word. What makes the book invaluable is the variety of entries used to help us define and understand geopolitics and geopoliticians during the past century. There are entries for the following categories: geopoliticians (such as J. Ancel, Z. Brzezinski, G. Kennan, H. Kissenger), US Presidents (Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan), authors (Bowman, Cohen, De Seversky, Folkes, C. Gray, A. and K. Haushofer, Kjellen, La Coste, Mackinder, Mahan, Ratzel, Reclus, Ritter, Siegfried, Sykman, Sprouts, and Wittfogel), and for major doctrines (e.g. Eisenhower, Breshnev, and Truman). O’Loughlin has also included several geopolitical schools (the Brazilian Escoda Superior de Guerra, la gtopolitique politique, Geopolitik, Kolonialgeografie), and major journals (Geopolitics, Hhodote, and Zeitschrift @I Geopofitik). Major treaties and agreements are described, including Bretton Woods, Paris Peace Conference, and Versailles as are a number of concepts, including critical geopolitics, Blut und Boden, and the Organic Theory of the State. Warfare themes are described, including airpower, gunboat diplomacy, guerillas and counter-insurgency, and SDI. Many geopolitical terms are introduced, including buffer zone, chokepoints, cordon sanitaire, detente, la front&-e, Lebenaaum, Pan-regions, and Wehrgeographie. New geopolitical terms are included such as environmental security and END (European National Disarmament). Regional entries include Amazonia, Greater East Asian Coprosperity Sphere, and Pan-Asianism, as well as regionalist terms, including Altantropa, Eurafrika, and 1’Europe mtdiane. Most of the references are less than one-half page. Some two-page entries include Carter Doctrine, la G&opolitique and politique, Geopolitik origins, Great Powers, Imperialism, League of Nations, and Nuclear Strategy. Twenty entries exceed two pages; these include American exceptionalism, Brazilian geopolitics, la Giopolitique, Albrecht Haushofer, Heartland, Japanese Geopolitics, and Monroe Doctrine. The longest entries were on Yalta, Washington’s Farewell Address, Truman Doctrine, Geopolifik, Kjelltn, Kennan, and Haushofer. There were no entries, as one might expect, on New World Order, Peace Institutes, Wallerstein and world systems theory, Tactical Nuclear Weapons, or Nuclear Freeze Movements. No regional security pacts such as NATO, OAS or Warsaw Pact are main entries. No entries are provided on propaganda mapping, geographic information systems or peacekeeping forces. There was nothing on the uses of geopolitics by the former white South African government or Israel or the Gulf War. No women geopoliticians are included; I assumed that Margaret Thatcher merited inclusion. There were no entries to geopolitics as applied to oceans, such as Law of the Sea or Exclusive Economic Zones, polar areas, or outer space, all increasingly important geopolitical frontiers. Also we know nothing about how these concepts might or could be applied
REVIEWS
245
to Third World hegemons and who are the geopolitical advocates in Nigeria, India, Indonesia, or the Arab Middle East. Since scholarly dictionaries represent the training, thinking, experiences, and writing styles of the authors, one might question if the entries and descriptions would be different if women political geographers (such as Nurit Kliot in Israel, Bertha Becker in Brazil, or Janet Kodras in the US) were contributing or males raised in the US (such as George Demko, Bill Wood, Saul Cohen, Joe Schwartzberg, and Alec Murphy) were preparing entries. Of course, the answer is yes. Also I suspect the entries and definitions would be different if there were geographers writing from the Arab Middle East, South Africa, Nigeria, Israel, China, India and Indonesia. This user-friendly dictionary will be very useful for teaching about geopolitical policies and concepts, schools of thought, and state language to justify political decisions. One could use the definitions and descriptions to look at the words, texts, and meanings of those who prepared treaties and delivered speeches. One might also use the dictionary to study how selected terms were defined differently by scholars in different time periods and different countries. I strongly recommend that libraries purchase copies of this dictionary as it will be an important reference for those interested in international commerce, foreign policy, statecraft, diplomatic history, and geopolitical discourse. Perhaps in the future other teams will prepare similar dictionaries on environment, gender, ethnicity and multiculturalism. University of Kentucky
STANLEYD. BRUNN
243
inclusion of the non-seaside resort of Wiesbaden) in terms of so many different themes and yet tie their evolution together within a theoretical framework. During the course of the reading, the reader is sometimes left wondering how a medium-sized domestic resort such as Bournemouth could possibly be compared with the massive conurbation of Los Angeles. But the selection of the three somewhat unbalanced sites was quite intentional, Sloane stated at the outset, and the concluding chapter- “The contemporary significance and wider implications of resort-industrial regions”-ably ties together the various themes and their theoretical underpinnings while at the same time setting the stage for future evolutionary trends. As one who has attempted to theorize the underpinnings and delineate phases of evolution of seaside resorts and relate them to the various impacts upon the landscape, I kept thinking what I would do differently if I were writing a book such as this. I probably would have selected a Florida site (Palm Beach or Miami) over Los Angeles because the role of leisure in the economy and patterns of tourism seasonality there (not necessarily during the same months) are more like Bournemouth or Nice. I probably would also have emphasized touristic material culture elements in the landscape and patterns of morphological evolution, and devoted less space to the broader socioeconomic-politico underpinnings. Finally I would have tried to incorporate the global diffusion of some of the resort evolution patterns (to the hills of Asia and the coasts of Africa, Australia, and Latin America). As I realize what a massive undertaking such a project would be, I must compliment Sloane on what he has produced. Aside from the criticism of excessive detail (a positive or negative criticism, depending on one’s point of view) and an occasionally cumbersome style, negative criticisms are few. There are numerous excellent maps, photographs, and tables that accompany the text. However, there are many typographical errors and misspelt words and placenames (e.g. Wiltshire Blvd, Longbeach) and also inconsistencies in style. These short-comings are more than offset by the content, however. Every professional historian, geographer, and (of course) historical geographer interested in leisure and tourism or urban geography and planning should have a copy of this book. Although not suitable for introductory courses in tourism geography, Fashionable Resort Regions is one of the most comprehensive tomes on the topic to date that places the evolution of leisure landscapes within a broader, indeed global, socio-economic and political theoretical framework without sacrificing empiricism. Mississippi State University
JOHN 0. LOUGHLIN
KLAUS
J. MEYER-ARENDT
(Ed.), Dictionary of Geopolitics (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1994.
Pp. xi +284. $69.50) Scholarly dictionaries are a rarity, possibly because they are difficult to prepare and edit, but quality efforts serve invaluable purposes when devoted to time-honored themes of interest to interdisciplinary and international professionals. Such is the case with the term geopolitics, one of the most used, maligned, and misunderstood terms in the lexicon of political geographers and those studying international relations. For geographers, geopolitics has gone through four different states since 1870 according to the editor. The editor rightly calls this volume a “first on the subject”, and hopes it “will clarify the nature of the field and the controversies that have periodically torn it apart” (p. x). I believe this effort is definitely a step in the right direction. The above dictionary does not provide short and crisp definitions of a very large
244
REVIEWS
number of terms. Rather the editor includes 219 main entries that relate to the history, practice, and interpretation of geopolitics. The entries are written by 11 political geographers, all male and almost all with a European background. The project unfolded by the editor asking political geographers for suggested entries. Once that list was compiled he contacted individuals, mostly from the active political geography research community, to prepare the entries. The entries are not limited to geography, but include terms, concepts, events, and individuals familiar to those in political science and international relations. The 11 authors, including the editor, are: S. Dalby, H. Heske, S. Holder, J. HulTerd, P. La Blotier, J. Nijman, P. O’Sullivan, J. O’Loughlin, G. O’Tuathail, G. Parker and N. Smith. The number of entries by these contributors is uneven. Neil Smith has 56 (almost one-quarter of the total), Parker (34), O’Sullivan (31!, and Heske (24:). The fewest are by Hufferd (6) and Holder (4). The author(s) of each entry are given following the description as are citations in the bibliography and related entries volume itself. The 600-plus entries in the bibliography (mostly English, German, Spanish and French) and the 500-plus entries in the index are valuable components. The entries are in alphabetical order and most are one word. What makes the book invaluable is the variety of entries used to help us define and understand geopolitics and geopoliticians during the past century. There are entries for the following categories: geopoliticians (such as J. Ancel, Z. Brzezinski, G. Kennan, H. Kissenger), US Presidents (Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan), authors (Bowman, Cohen, De Seversky, Folkes, C. Gray, A. and K. Haushofer, Kjellen, La Coste, Mackinder, Mahan, Ratzel, Reclus, Ritter, Siegfried, Sykman, Sprouts, and Wittfogel), and for major doctrines (e.g. Eisenhower, Breshnev, and Truman). O’Loughlin has also included several geopolitical schools (the Brazilian Escoda Superior de Guerra, la gtopolitique politique, Geopolitik, Kolonialgeografie), and major journals (Geopolitics, Hhodote, and Zeitschrift @I Geopofitik). Major treaties and agreements are described, including Bretton Woods, Paris Peace Conference, and Versailles as are a number of concepts, including critical geopolitics, Blut und Boden, and the Organic Theory of the State. Warfare themes are described, including airpower, gunboat diplomacy, guerillas and counter-insurgency, and SDI. Many geopolitical terms are introduced, including buffer zone, chokepoints, cordon sanitaire, detente, la front&-e, Lebenaaum, Pan-regions, and Wehrgeographie. New geopolitical terms are included such as environmental security and END (European National Disarmament). Regional entries include Amazonia, Greater East Asian Coprosperity Sphere, and Pan-Asianism, as well as regionalist terms, including Altantropa, Eurafrika, and 1’Europe mtdiane. Most of the references are less than one-half page. Some two-page entries include Carter Doctrine, la G&opolitique and politique, Geopolitik origins, Great Powers, Imperialism, League of Nations, and Nuclear Strategy. Twenty entries exceed two pages; these include American exceptionalism, Brazilian geopolitics, la Giopolitique, Albrecht Haushofer, Heartland, Japanese Geopolitics, and Monroe Doctrine. The longest entries were on Yalta, Washington’s Farewell Address, Truman Doctrine, Geopolifik, Kjelltn, Kennan, and Haushofer. There were no entries, as one might expect, on New World Order, Peace Institutes, Wallerstein and world systems theory, Tactical Nuclear Weapons, or Nuclear Freeze Movements. No regional security pacts such as NATO, OAS or Warsaw Pact are main entries. No entries are provided on propaganda mapping, geographic information systems or peacekeeping forces. There was nothing on the uses of geopolitics by the former white South African government or Israel or the Gulf War. No women geopoliticians are included; I assumed that Margaret Thatcher merited inclusion. There were no entries to geopolitics as applied to oceans, such as Law of the Sea or Exclusive Economic Zones, polar areas, or outer space, all increasingly important geopolitical frontiers. Also we know nothing about how these concepts might or could be applied
REVIEWS
245
to Third World hegemons and who are the geopolitical advocates in Nigeria, India, Indonesia, or the Arab Middle East. Since scholarly dictionaries represent the training, thinking, experiences, and writing styles of the authors, one might question if the entries and descriptions would be different if women political geographers (such as Nurit Kliot in Israel, Bertha Becker in Brazil, or Janet Kodras in the US) were contributing or males raised in the US (such as George Demko, Bill Wood, Saul Cohen, Joe Schwartzberg, and Alec Murphy) were preparing entries. Of course, the answer is yes. Also I suspect the entries and definitions would be different if there were geographers writing from the Arab Middle East, South Africa, Nigeria, Israel, China, India and Indonesia. This user-friendly dictionary will be very useful for teaching about geopolitical policies and concepts, schools of thought, and state language to justify political decisions. One could use the definitions and descriptions to look at the words, texts, and meanings of those who prepared treaties and delivered speeches. One might also use the dictionary to study how selected terms were defined differently by scholars in different time periods and different countries. I strongly recommend that libraries purchase copies of this dictionary as it will be an important reference for those interested in international commerce, foreign policy, statecraft, diplomatic history, and geopolitical discourse. Perhaps in the future other teams will prepare similar dictionaries on environment, gender, ethnicity and multiculturalism. University of Kentucky
STANLEYD. BRUNN