Soroor Ahmed analyses the United States’ and China’s respective overvaulting ambitions to rule the world and concludes that only time will tell which of the two theories, Halford John Mackinder’s Heartland Theory which claims that those who control the heartland of Eurasia would emerge the ruler of the world, and Nicholas John Spykman’s Rimland Theory which asserts that the power which controls the coasts would rule the world, prevails.
Eversince the Spanish-American War of 1898, which led to the occupation of Philippines, the United States has been focusing its attention in the Indo-Pacific. There was no threatfrom the Communist Soviet Union then, and China was not even a regional player. As therewas no scope for extending its imperialistic design in Africa which was already under thecontrol of European colonialist powers, the US was left with no option but to look towardsthe Pacific Ocean.
Alarmed over the expansionist ambitionof the United States, Japan attacked the PearlHarbour on December 6-7, 1941 sparking off the World War-II in the eastern theatre. Afterthe end of World War-II, the United States was locked in at least three bloody and prolongconflicts in Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia. That was the era when the Soviet Union had emergedas another Super Power and China, under Chairman Mao Zedong, had become a Communistcountry.
POST-WORLD WAR-II PACTS
In the post-World War-II years, Washington made several military and tradepacts/agreements, ranging from South East Asian Treaty Organisation (SEATO) to TransPacific Partnership. It is President Donald Trump, who immediately after taking charge inJanuary 2017, withdrew his country from TPP.
Quad, not exactly a military alliance, is the latest version. It came up in 2007. The onlydifference is that India has been roped into it. The other three members are the UnitedStates, Australia and Japan, which already have closer ties with US since the end of WorldWar-II.
No doubt China has emerged as a strong power and is flexing its muscle in East China Seaand South China Sea, where Beijing has a long claim over Taiwan and territorial disputeswith Japan, Vietnam, Philippines etc. Yet it has a very good trade relationship with all ofthem. Not only that China has increased its trade influence in several Pacific island-countries and South America.
This is bound to cause uneasiness in Capitol Hill. But one thing needs to be understood.While China is increasing its naval influence in Far East and Indian Ocean, it is atpresent not challenging the US navy near the latter’s coast. In contrast, it is the UnitedStates whose navy always remains on alert in the vicinity of China. After all there is USmilitary presence in Japan and South Korea.
In recent years, the western media is full with the news about the activities of Quad. Theleaders of the four member-countries were to meet in Australia in the third week of Mayafter the G-7 Summit in Hiroshima. But it had to be called off after President Joe Bidenhad to return to Washington following domestic economic emergency.
But there is another reason for Quad getting more attention of the western media. This issimply because of the declining influence of the Washington and its allies in the CentralAsia, Middle East and Africa. They are locked in the war in Ukraine too.
As Moscow is involved in a messy war with Kiev, China has got enough opportunity toincrease its influence in Central Asia, the otherwise Russian backyard. Not only that, itbrought two Middle East countries, Saudi Arabia and Iran to negotiating table. On March 10they agreed to restore diplomatic relationship. At the same time Israel, whose PrimeMinister Benjamin Netanyahu is yet to visit the US even five months after taking oath, isnot averse to improving its ties with China and Russia.
It is not that the US is not making any effort in the Middle East. In October 2021 if formedWest Asian Quad called I2U2, that is a combination of Israel, India, the United States andUAE.
But Beijing too is leaving no stone unturned. It is mooting a plan to form Himalayan Quad,which comprises China, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nepal. Beijing has invested heavily ininfrastructure sector in these three countries.
At the same time Iran, Türkiye, Russia and China are coming closer to neutralise the impactof the United States and West Europe from the entire Middle East and Eurasia.
The truth is that the shrinking influence of the US-led West has prompted the westernmedia to give undue coverage to threat emanating from China. Chinese claims over Taiwan,Senkaku Islands of Japan and Paracel Islands of Vietnam are not new. What is new is thenaval expansion of China in the Indian Ocean. Beijing has built ports/bases in Myanmar,Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Djibouti. That may be the reason behind the inclusion of India inQuad.
HEARTLAND THEORY VS RIMLAND THEORY
But if the United States is interested in Indian Ocean, it is not doing so out of love forNew Delhi. In fact, Washington wants to keep the sea lanes, especially Malacca Strait,free from the Chinese influence. It is through these routes that the US as well as itsallies, Japan, South Korea and Australia, carry their trade to oil-rich Middle East andAfrica.
In geographical terms, if the United States has lost the heartland to China, it wants to keepcontrol on rimland. The US has no alternative for the Belt and Road Initiative of China,but it, along with the West European allies, has big control over the oceans and seas.They would not let this advantage to be lost to China.
In 1904 British geographer Halford John Mackinder came up with the Heartland Theoryclaiming that those who control the heartland of Eurasia will rule the world. It is saidthat keeping this in mind Adolf Hitler invaded Poland and subsequently the Soviet Union inWorld War-II.
However, in 1942 US scholar Nicholas John Spykman countered it with the Rimland Theorystating that the power which controls the coasts would be the ruler of the world.
Only time will tell which of the two theories prevails.