Tag Archives: Chanakya

Roots of Geo-politics From Chanakya to Modern Era (Historians HATE This Theory!)

Introduction

Its not strenous to unearth the roots of geo-politics. The word geopolitics contains the term “geo” which means Earth or land, which is directly linked with the corridors of power in the field of politics. The arena of geopolitics is deeply rooted into the ‘Geo’ which signifies land, resources, size and location, all these mentioned factors determined any state’s power in the global world.

The global nations are interdependent on each other and none of them is fully equiped with factors that would grant absolute hegemony. That interdependence is the key concept in the Geopolitics.

For instance, Taiwan is the most refined exemplary in this context. The size is Taiwan is minuscule but its location and resources (manufactures almost 60% of the world’s semiconductors and almost 90% of the most advanced ones used in Japan and the United States) has made it most significant in the Asia-pacific region. Taiwan is located at the juncture of Japan and China, both anti-ideologies, whilst, Japan and Taiwan both are backed by mighty US, to wither China’s rising strength in the region.

Chanakya Saptanga Theory:

The roots of geo-politics can be traced back to the Chanakya (375–283 BCE), who was an ancient Indian polymath who acted as a teacher, literary figure, strategist, philosopher, economist, jurist, and a wise politician.
The word ‘Saptang’ represents seven limbs or elemennts. Collectively, they form state as an functional organism, ” like a chariot constitute of seven parts and all parts interdependent or subservent to eachother”.

1) Swami (The Sovereign King)

Kautaliya, adhering to the monarchy as an ideal form of state, considers king as swami and has accorded him the ‘ highest place in the political body’. The Swami is chief executive or head of state, above all authority, to whom other parts have to obey blindly.

2) Amatya (The Minister)

In a nutshell, the word Amatya is used for the ministers of the high cadre. Kautilya describes these Amatyas as morally infallible, honest in fiscal matters of the state.

3) Janapada (The People and The Territory)

The distinctive element of Saptanga is the symbol of State, which be founds for a “territorial society”. In this context, ‘Jana’ represents people and ‘Pada’ is a symbol of territory where these inhabitants reside permanently.

4) Durga (Fortification)

Kautilya has demonstrated forts as essential organs to safe guard state. He has discussed four types of fortification which include Audak, Paarvat, Dhannvana and Vana. Among all mentioned categories, the first two are used for safe keeping the territory and the rest of two would provide immunity to the farmers. These fortifications, thus, would not only safeguard the people and the capital, but would also be favorable for combating purposes, i.e. for both defensive and offensive motives.

The Art of Deconstructing Complex Problems

5) Kosha (The Treasury)

For the accumulation of revenues, Kautilya propoundeed the following legitimate sources:
(i) various forms of land tax; (ii) duty levied on the sale of commodities in the
market; (iii) tax on imports and exports and (iv) miscellaneous taxes.

6) Danda (The Army or The Force)

Kautilya conceded on a strong and hereditary Kshatriya army, as the most essential requisite of the state.

7) Mitra (The Allies)

Kautilya vividly understood that “political isolation means death”, therefore, he proceeded to consider the Mitra or the ally as a vital factor. He recognized two kinds of allies, namely Sahaja(hereditary connection or friendship from father and forefather) and Kritrima (mutual interest based friendship for protection of wealth and land). Chanakya’s rooted concepts into the roots of geo-politics.

Conclusion

The Saptang theory is a clear exhibition of Kautilya’s deeper understanding of not only the political nature of a wise man, but also the operating of his political institutions or organs, especially the state.

Ancient History

In ancient periods, the state was not a vast empire but, in Roman Greeks, the actual concepts were of small city-states. Those Cities had small population controlled strictly by a ruler or group of rulers, aristocracy, their territory governed with sovereignty. The best examples are of Athens and Sparta. Gradually time passed, the city-states grew into vast empires, such as, Roman Empire. They had roots of geo-politics, when this humonguous empire disintegrated, it generated chaos and turmoil in Europe, each state thriving for its independence, plunged into deadly conflicts. In the European history, 100 years prolonged war and 30 years war had dismayed entire Europe’s social, religious and cultural pattern.

In 1648, the conflictors united at Westphalia, tired of further conflict and to establish balance of power and stability among nations to evade further escalation in wars in future. It was the Treaty of Westphalia, where the modern concept of nation-state emerged. The European imperialism and barbaric onslaughts in America, Africa and Asia, allowed them to rise as great powers determining the geopolitics for the next centuries.

The League of Nations

The word nation means a centralized authority, it is taken from Naoci, which means commonness or kinship. A place where people of common language, culture or religion live with some similarity.
From 1648 till 1914, the balance of power theory functioned, but began dismantling after the WWI. Till the end of the bloody war, a theory emerged, named ‘Billiard Bard Model’ introduced by Arnold Welfare which says,” There are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies, only permanent interests in the geopolitics”.

Is Fear of Commitment Ruining Your Love Life? 4 Signs You NEED to Read This!

The aforementioned concept of Power balancing didn’t withstood. It was subdivided into two factors; internal power balancing, which relied on building economy, army and technology, another was external power balancing, relied on the Alliance Partner (contemporary example of NATO).

In 1919, the US President, Woodrow Wilson gave his famous speech and introduced his idea of ‘Liberal Institutionalism’ (The League of Nations). However, the Realists severely criticized such concept and presented their statement that, ‘ all consequences are dependent on our actions’.
One of the renowned ancient scholars, Thucidus, he introduced his idea of Thucidus Traps, a term popularized by American political scientist Graham T.Allison.

“Thucydides’s Trap refers to the natural, inevitable bewilderment that happens when a rising power threatens to supersede a ruling power, and when a rising power threatens to displace a ruling power, the resulting structural stress causes a violent clash the rule, not the exception”. All relates to the roots of geo-politics.

In the contemporary world, the US-China relations can be related to the prespective of Thucidus Trap, having modern roots of geo-politics. Both nations are suffering from their security dilemma, resulting in strengthening the arm power, and excessive arm power would certainly generate conflict, who wins, all depends on the power, which they are trying to accumulate.

A famous Italian philosopher, Machiavelli wrote a mongraph The Prince (1513) which is well known today. Machiavelli in his book “The Prince ” suggests two different methods of conduct; one is for the ruler and the common code of conduct for the people. Ruler can manipulate the common people and he does not need to describe his actions, he has to focus on the interests of the state.
The aforementioned theories were at the peak after the World War I.

Capitalism, Communism, and Fascism

The period between 1919-1939, remained a contentional era for three different ideologies; Capitalism, Communism, and Fascism. The USA, France and Britian were representing their capitalist agenda, Soviet Union (USSR) was flag barrier of communism (inspired by the readings of Karl Marx) and Germany and Italy were already under serious effect on Fascism.

Capitalism inspired from free market economy and no state intervention was anti-thesis to the Massolini vision of ‘ Nothing before state and against state’. The Fascist Germany and Italy threw complete national resources into building a powerful army. The inception of World War II marked end to the naive foundation of League of Nation, proposed by Woodrow Wilson, roots of geo-politics, but never participated by the US itself.

The United Nations

At the end of 1945, the Allied powers united to revive the loss glory of Europe, tracing its roots of geo-politics, by mitigating further pretensions for war. In 1945, the United Nations was formed with motives of promoting peace, collective security and collective peace, ascendent of League of Nations. Collective defense is a group of few nations against a declared threat, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is a suitable example for collective defense.

Earlier before World War I, the US didn’t preferred to intervene into other nation’s conflicts and enjoyed its personal benefits. Monroe Doctrine is the foundation of U.S. foreign policy enunciated by Pres. James Monroe. However, The Truman Doctrine of 1947 with the Truman Doctrine, President Harry S. Truman established that the United States would provide political, military and economic backup to all democratic nations under commination from external or internal intrusive forces.

IMF LOANS: BLESSING OR CURSE FOR PAKISTAN’S ECONOMY? Here’s why some say the IMF isn’t helping Pakistan.

For this purpose, the institutions like World Bank and IMF was established to issue liberal order, justified and controlled by the US. Many theories were introduced in favor and against the US control over global politics. According to the Hegemonic Stability Theory, to run global peace order, there has to be some sole authority (the US) to balance the entire eco-system of geo-politics. Paradoxically, the Democratic Peace Theory posits that more democracies will bring peace, which justifies the brutal invasions on Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan by the US and NATO forces. Although, there were definitely some veiled motives (oil and natural gas).

The geo-politics and roots of geo-politics are not shaped by the single moment but it needs terms, groupings, and engagements. The geo-politics is shaped by the economies, science and techology and humoungous projects like BRI. The current world order is demanding bipolar and multipolar not unipolar world. The transforming technology and rising tussles would result into something unprecendented.