Основы геополитики. Геополитическое будущее России

by Alexander Dugin, Александр Гельевич Дугин, Л. Гоголева (Translator)

Содержание

Книга 1. Основы геополитики стр. 3-578

Книга 2. Мыслить пространством стр. 579-914


От производителя
Книга является первым русскоязычным учебным пособием по геополитике. В ней систематически и подробно изложены основы геополитики как науки, ее теория, история. Охватывается широкий спектр геополитических школ и воззрений и актуальные проблемы. Впервые формулируется геополитическая доктрина России. Незаменимый справочник для всех тех, кто принимает решения в важнейших сферах российской политической жизни - для политиков, предпринимателей, экономистов, банкиров, дипломатов, аналитиков, политологов и т. д.

3-е издание, дополненное.

Genres: Politics, Russia, History, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Political Science, Government

924 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1997

About the author

Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin (Russian: Александр Гельевич Дугин, born 7 January 1962) is a Russian philosopher and activist. As a founder of the Russian Geopolitical School and the Eurasian Movement, Dugin is considered as one of the most important exponents of modern Russian conservative thought in the line of slavophiles. He earned his PhD in Sociology, in Political sciences, and also in Philosophy. During six years (2008 – 2014), he was the head of the Department of Sociology of International Relations in Sociological Faculty of Moscow State University. His publications include more than sixty books such as Foundations of Geopolitics, Fourth Political Theory, Theory of Multipolar World, Noomakhia (24 volumes), Ethnosociology. The influence of Dugin’s thought on modern day Russia (including political leaders) is recognized by not only his followers but also his philosophical and political opponents. His ideas are sometimes judged controversial or nonconformist but almost all agree that they are inspiring and original.

Reviews

[Michael Perkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think some of the reviewers here have missed the point of this book. You might consider the author bat-shit crazy, but he is revealing the hand, 20 years ago, that Russia has played out....

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2019/8...

Foreign Policy magazine article.....

https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/27/...

Russia’s push into Georgia in 2008, into Ukraine in 2014, and its recent campaign in Syria, as well as its efforts to consolidate a sphere of influence in the inner Eurasian heartland of the former USSR called the Eurasian Union, all are eerily foretold in geopolitical theory. Hardliners contended that conflict with the West was a permanent condition for Russia.

The Russian author of "The Foundations of Geopolitics"set out self-consciously to write a how-to manual for conquest and political rule in the manner of Niccolò Machiavelli. "The Foundations of Geopolitics" sold out in four editions, and continues to be assigned as a textbook at the General Staff Academy and other military universities in Russia.

“There has probably not been another book published in Russia during the post-communist period which has exerted a comparable influence on Russian military, police, and statist foreign policy elites,” writes historian John Dunlop, a Hoover Institution specialist on the Russian right.

The main argument in Foundations was the need to thwart the conspiracy of “Atlanticism” led by the United States and NATO and aimed at containing Russia within successive geographic rings of newly independent states.

The plan was simple: first put the Soviet Union back together. Russia, it followed, would not be making a Russian Empire, but a Eurasian one. “The Eurasian Empire will be constructed on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, the strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us."

This means that Georgia must be dismembered and Ukraine annexed: “Ukraine, as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions, represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia.”

======

Ivan Ilyin, Putin’s Philosopher of Russian Fascism by Timothy Snyder

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/03...

from the Snyder article, sound familiar?

Putin was an unknown when he was selected by post-Soviet Russia’s first president, Boris Yeltsin, to be prime minister in 1999. Putin was chosen by political casting call. Yeltsin’s intimates, carrying out what they called “Operation Successor,” asked themselves who the most popular character in Russian television was. Polling showed that this was the hero of a 1970s program, a Soviet spy who spoke German. This fit Putin, a former KGB officer who had served in East Germany.

When apartment buildings in Russian cities began to explode, Putin blamed Muslims and began a war in Chechnya. Contemporary evidence suggests that the bombs might have been planted by Russia’s own security organization, the FSB. Putin was elected president in 2000.

He succeeded in bringing economic crime within the Russian state, transforming general corruption into official kleptocracy. Because Putin’s victory over Russia’s oligarchs also meant control over their television stations, new media instruments were at hand. The Western trend towards infotainment was brought to its logical conclusion in Russia, generating an alternative reality meant to generate faith in Russian virtue but cynicism about facts. This transformation was engineered by Vladislav Surkov, the genius of Russian propaganda

Anyone following Russian politics could see in early 2016 that the Russian elite preferred Donald Trump to become the Republican nominee for president and then to defeat Hillary Clinton in the general election. In the spring of that year, Russian military intelligence was boasting of an effort to help Trump win. In the Russian assault on American democracy that followed, the main weapon was falsehood. Donald Trump is another masculinity-challenged kleptocrat from the realm of fiction, in his case that of reality television.

His campaign was helped by the elaborate untruths that Russia distributed about his opponent. In office, Trump imitates Putin in his pursuit of political post-truth: first filling the public sphere with lies, then blaming the institutions whose purpose is to seek facts, and finally rejoicing in the resulting confusion. Russian assistance to Trump weakened American trust in the institutions that Russia has been unable to build. Such trust was already in decline, thanks to America’s own media culture and growing inequality.

Documented here.....

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

===========

related review....

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[Warwick]

Dugin, an important Russian political theorist, wrote this book back in 1997; it was very influential at high levels, and, supposedly, used for training in the Russian military's General Staff Academy. His recommendations were aimed at ensuring Russia's supremacy over other geopolitical powers, especially the US, by establishing a ‘Eurasianism’ that counters both the EU and America.

Among his recommendations, according to the book's Wikipedia article, were:

• France and Germany should be encouraged to form a ‘Franco-German bloc’ (because both countries have a ‘firm anti-Atlanticist tradition’)

• The UK should be cut off from Europe

• Ukraine should be annexed by Russia

• Iran is a key ally (the book talks of a ‘Moscow-Tehran axis’)

• Georgia should be dismembered. Abkhazia and ‘United Ossetia’ will be incorporated into Russia

• Russia needs to create ‘geopolitical shocks’ within Turkey

• Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: ‘the main "scapegoat" will be precisely the U.S.’

• Quoting Wikipedia: ‘Russia should use its special forces within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism. For instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics.’


Pause to take this in. Well. You'd have to say that either these neo-cold-warriors have been very lucky, or they've done an extremely good job. (There's more on Dugin and Eurasianism in this NYRB piece from a couple of years ago.)

[Ivan · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you would want to know What Would Hitler Do? this book is for you.

For the people of the right side of the political spectrum, like yours truly, the perspective of a reasonable alternative to communism ideals, the christian religious delirium of the far right or the muslim and deconstructionist delirium of the left leaves one wanting for a rational philosophy, Dugin promises that, but does the bait and switch in the process and transforms it all in a very classic unashamed Russian imperialism - "A child born on the Continent must first be Orthodox, then Continental, Then Russian and then everything else, his parents must feel that as well, in that order"

Fuck you, Mr. Dugin, fuck you very much, for digging up the corpse of Hitler and doing a yet another travesty on the Russian people, who are left living some militaristic dreams of idiots like you over and over and over again.

That is why we all left.

Yours, wishing you to die in a fire together with all your friends and family

Ivan Dmitriev

[Maru Kun]

From Wikipedia:

"...The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia is a geopolitical book by Aleksandr Dugin. The book has had a large influence within the Russian military, police, and foreign policy elites[1] and was allegedly used as a textbook in the General Staff Academy of Russian military.[1]

The book declares that "the battle for the world rule of [ethnic] Russians" has not ended and Russia remains "the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution." The Eurasian Empire will be constructed "on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us."[5]

Military operations play relatively little role. The textbook believes in a sophisticated program of subversion, destabilization, and disinformation spearheaded by the Russian special services. The operations should be assisted by a tough, hard-headed utilization of Russia's gas, oil, and natural resources to bully and pressure other countries.[5]..."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Found...

[Alfie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dugin's ideas are, to those both inside and outside Russia, almost nonsensical. Apocalyptic. Purposefully esoteric.

However, many of those criticisms come from reading statements, most of which come from this book, without the necessary context. Statements such as 'Ukraine has no meaningful distinct culture or history, and as such should be incorporated into Russia' (paraphrased) do indeed seem disgusting. Indeed, even with the context, these ideas are incredibly strange and some are unjustifiable.

What one must understand before critiquing Dugin is the angle at which he is coming from. Western society is incredibly ethnocentric, and our general geopolitical outlook is shaped by this. If someone was to call the UK and the US the 'heartland(s) of the world', many of us in Western society would not be shocked or disgusted. Indeed, I suspect the majority of people would be inclined to agree.

Dugin's analysis of Russia's geopolitical role are shaped by the fact he is Russian. He is, despite his own denial, an extreme nationalist, and as a nationalist, he believes his country to be supreme.

This book is good - not because Dugin's ideas are (quite to the contrary) - but because it gives a very clear insight into his beliefs, and the beliefs of contemporary Russian strategists. Furthermore, the first section of the book (spent on summarising geopolitical theorists, from Kjellen to Haushofer to Spykman) is a surprisingly well-written and comprehensive overview of geopolitical theory.

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Being a translation, the reading was slow. However, the understanding of Russian thought processes more than made up for the slog. Every progressive/Russian apologist should read and understand that it was written 15 years ago. It almost begs the question, which came first - the book’s ideas or the plans that led to the events.

[Ahmed Hussein Shaheen · Rating 3 out of 5]

ربما يكون الوقت الذي قرأتُ فيه الكتاب الوقتَ الأغرب حيث قرأته والحرب "العملية العسكرية" في أوكرانيا في أوجها.

الكتاب يعرض للكثير من الأمور التي ينبغي على روسيا تبنيها وإنجازها، وإن كان لا يبين السبب وراء ذلك. فمثلًا يذكر الدور الحضاري والتاريخي للشعب الروسي ولكن لا يبين ما هو ذلك الدور، كما لا يبين سبب "عالميته" وأسباب أهميته بشكل واضح.

كتاب صعب وممل في بعض الأحيان وغير مفهوم في أحيان أخرى. ولكنه كتاب مهم

الترجمة رديئة

[Majd · Rating 5 out of 5]

يعتبر الفيلسوف الكسندر دوغين من اهم الشخصيات الروسية المعاصرة واحسب انني لا اجانب الصواب ان قلت ان اهميته وتأثيره لا يقل عن تأثير الرئيس فلاديمير بوتين، كيف لا وهو عقل بوتين فهو الذي يفكر وبوتين المنفذ لسياسات دوغين الشيطانية.
.
بداية نتعرف على الكسندر دوغين، هو فيلسوف حاصل على الدكتوراه في العلوم السياسية والعلوم الاجتماعية رئيس قسم علم الاجتماع للعلاقات الدولية في كلية علم الاجتماع بجامعة موسكو، وله نظرية تسمى النظرية السياسية الرابعة والتي ترى نفسها الخطوة التالية لانتهاء المدارس السياسية الثلاث: الليبرالية والاشتراكية والفاشية.
.
صدر هذا الكتاب عام ١٩٩٧ قبل وصول بوتين للسلطة ويضع فيه الكاتب رؤيته لما يجب ان تكون عليه روسيا في الساحة الدولية، فحسب ما يرى انه بعد سقوط الاتحاد السوفييتي خسرت روسيا الكثير من اراضيها اولا فهي بذلك دولة اصغر مما يجب ان تكون ولا يرى في روسيا الاتحادية الا مسخ فرضه الواقع الذي خلفه سقوط الاتحاد السوفييتي، ورغم ذلك له انتقادات حادة على الاتحاد السوفييتي الذي فرط في الدين وضيع الهوية المسيحية الارثوذوكسية، وكما يرى ان العودة لروسيا القيصرية ما قبل الاتحاد السوفييتي غير واقعية، لذا نستطيع القول انه يطمع في اعادة حدود روسيا القيصرية بنظام جديد بنظام جديد لم يحدد ملامحه.
.
يدرس دوغين الجغرافيا السياسية لروسيا وما حولها ليكون رؤيته لشبكة تحالفات التي يجب ان تكون وتسعى لها روسيا الامبراطورية وهو امتع واعقد واكثر ادهاشا في هذا الكتاب وفيه ما يصدمك حقا وخلاصة هذه الرؤية كالتالي:
.
١. العدو التقليدي لروسيا هو حلف الانجلو ساكسون المتمثلة في امريكا وبريطانيا ويسميها الحلف الاطلسي، ويرى ان اوروبا ليست عدو وانما سر العداء معها اليوم هو وقوعها تحت سيطرة الحلف الاطلسي.
.
٢. ينبغي الاخذ بيد اوروبا لتخرج من سطوة الحلف الاطلسي وتكوين تحالف وثيق مع المانيا بالتحديد لتقاسم النفوذ معها ولا بأس ان تكون فرنسا معهم في الحلف ولكن الاولوية لالمانيا.
.
٣. بالنسبة الى شرق اسيا ينبغي ان بتم تحرير اليابان من سطوة الحلف الاطلسي ايضا لانها هي من ينبغي ان تكون الحليفة لروسيا وليست الصين.
.
٤. الصين عدو لروسيا وخطر عليها وليست صديقة وكما يزعم الكاتب انها لها مطامع في سيبيريا، وهناك نقطة لم افهمها يقول فيها ان الصين قاعدة انطلاق للانجلو ساكسون.
.
٥. يرى ان اوكرانيا مستقلة تسبب خطر كبير على روسيا ويجب معالجته في اسرع وقت ممكن
.
وبالنسبة لهوية الامبراطورية يرى انها يجب ان تكون دولة ارثوذوكسية تحتضن كل الأرثوذكس الموجودين على وجه الارض مهما كان عرقهم وتكون موسكو قبلة للمسيحيين الشرقيين.
.
الكتاب خطير جدا وصعب جدا لا انكر انني لم استوعب عددا من الفصول والفقرات بسبب جهلي بالانظمة الروسية الداخلية وعدم المامي ببعض الامور في الساحة الدولية، ولكن من اراد ان يفهم ما يدور في عقل بوتين وتنظر للحرب الروسية الاوكرانية بعيدا عن الاعلام والبروباغاندا الغربية عليك بقراءة هذا الكتاب
.

[Mark Huisjes · Rating 1 out of 5]

Hoewel ik echt een sterke pacifistische inslag heb duwt dit boek me over de grens van absoluut naar conditioneel pacifisme. De soort kwaadaardige haat die bijna argeloos door dit boek wordt uitgestrooid moet tegengegaan worden. Ik geef hieronder een review van dit boek dat ik in 2015 geschreven heb en een reactie daarop naar aanleiding van de recente invasie van Oekraïne in 2022:

The dangerous pseudoscience of Vladimir Putin

The struggle for world domination by Russia has not yet been settled. - Alexander Dugin

Russia’s international revanchism since the fall of the Soviet Union has been legitimized by Alexander Dugin, the country’s most famous philosopher, through what he calls ‘Eurasianism’. He first published his ideas in his book The Foundations of Geopolitics (1997) which is now standard literature for anyone of any importance within the Russian government. This book states that Russia has a fundamentally different culture than the West because Russia is based on land whereas the West is ocean-oriented. This difference he terms tellurocracy (land-rule, Russia) and thallasocracy (sea-rule, the West). He claims that since antiquity these two systems have been locked in a mortal struggle for world domination. And in order for Russia to prevail it should first reconquer its former empire and then forcefully break the alliance between Europe and America. This has been neatly summarized by Dugin’s line: “The struggle for world domination by Russia has not yet been settled.” These ideas are dangerous pseudoscientific nonsense.

First of all while Eurasianism claims to be a science, it does not seek objective truth, seeking ‘National Truths’ instead. By doing so it is, completely opposite to the scientific method, which relies upon intersubjectivity and realism state among other things that there exists only one truth and that multiple ‘truths’ are either partially missed truth or entirely false, and furthermore that this does not change depending on the 42 43 observer, (Osaka, 2004). By rejecting these ideas Eurasianism places itself outside the domain of science.

Additionally it becomes apparent that Dugin is wilfully dishonest about the idea of sea- versus land-based struggle. He presents it as a widely accepted millennia old phenomenon while in fact the idea dates back only to 1904. In that year the British geographer and politician Halford Mackinder published an article called The Geographical Pivot of History in which he predicts conflict between the sea-based British Empire and the land-based Russian Empire. Worse still nowadays these ideas have disappeared from Western literature altogether because they became associated with the Geopolitik of Nazism and clash with our understanding of the laws of physics, which rule out things like fate. So the idea is neither old nor widely accepted leaving Dugin’s representation, dishonest at best, thus failing the honesty demarcation criterion.

Furthermore a beautiful example of why Eurasianism is a pseudoscience is given by Dugin himself. He states that in the days of the Soviet Union when geopolitics and all its different manifestations were banned there must have been a secret institution within the government that steered the country to take geopolitical actions. How else could interventions in Eastern Europe be explained? Eurasianism is always right even when it isn’t, because whenever the ideas don’t fit the facts, the facts are changed to fit the idea instead of the other way around. It is therefore unfalsifiable and cannot be scientific.

Finally Eurasianism cannot actually be verified because it does not make any predictions. Instead it just states things like “Kazakhstan and Ukraine are not real nations”. The only prediction in The Foundations of Geopolitics is that Russia will conquer the world. This one-time event however has been placed so vaguely and indeterminately far into the future that even if it somehow came to pass verification would still be impossible. In conclusion, Eurasianism can be added to the list of pseudosciences. Sadly for humanity this pseudoscience holds sway over a vast number of people who have a large amount of power in this world. In this case the chances of irrationality causing actual victims is high.

References
Dugin, A. (1997). Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia. Moscow: Arctogaia. Published as Osnovy geopolitiki: Geopoliticheskoe budushchee Rossii (Основы геополитики: Геополитическое будущее России).
Mackinder, H. J. (1904). The Geographical Pivot of History. London: The Royal Geographical Society.
Okasha, S. (2002). Philosophy of Science: A very short introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 13-17.
 
Being right isn't always fun
How my fears in 2015 became reality with the renewed Russian war against Ukraine and what may happen next.
Mark Huisjes, 12-05-2022

In late 2015 I wrote a column titled "The dangerous pseudoscience of Vladimir Putin" which is attached in this volume. A little over a year earlier the Maidan Uprising had led to a pro-democratic and pro-Western government coming to power in Kyiv. In response to this Russia invaded Ukraine by annexing the Crimean Peninsula and starting a proxy war in the Donbass region in the east of Ukraine. As justification for these actions Russia used arguments stemming from Eurasianism, a fascistoid political ideology by Alexander Dugin (that I promptly started to read up on). Most Western commentators at the time expected both invasions to result in so-called "frozen conflicts" without active warfare but without a peace treaty either. I was more sceptical. While frozen conflict status would have served certain purposes such as keeping Ukraine out of NATO, it seemed to conflict with Eurasianism. Eurasianism denies the very existence of Ukraine as a nation, or a country, separate from Russia. While my column mostly debunked Dugin's claims that Eurasianism is a science, I ended my column by expressing worry about the millions of people believing in Eurasianism and the power they had in the world. I worried that the chance was high that this irrational ideology would cause more victims. Unfortunately, I was right.

The conflicts in Ukraine did not freeze, and in the seven years that followed, 14 thousand people died in the low-level military conflict. On February 24th, 2022, Russia kicked their war against Ukraine into overdrive in what it called "a special military operation". Putin's popularity among the Russian populace and the ruling elite had been declining due to the coronavirus and the associated economic downturn. To regain popularity Putin ordered attacks along a nearly 2000-kilometre-long front from bases in Belarus, Russia and the occupied Donbass and Crimea. The stated goals: demilitarise Ukraine, "denazify" Ukraine and destroy the very idea of Ukraine. The Ukrainian army put up a tougher defence than anyone would have expected but Russia still occupied about a quarter of the country. Massacres followed.

When the small town of Bucha just north of Kyiv was liberated on March 31st by Ukrainian forces, the sheer barbarity of the Russian occupation became clear. According to the major of the town, 412 civilians were killed. As you entered the town you could see the streets were littered with bodies, many of which had just been left there for days to weeks. Some had been shot while trying to get food or water. Some bodies had been fed on by hungry pets whose owners had died or fled for their lives. Intercepted phone calls record snipers bragging about killing unsuspecting civilians. Some inhabitants had been killed using flechettes, razor sharp dart like objects that can be fired from small arms and artillery to inflict maximum damage to the human body. Investigators on site have reported evidence of beheading and a body being turned into a trap with a mine and tripwire. Some bodies had been mutilated. Teeth were pulled, ears and genitals were cut off. It is unknown if this was done to torture or to take souvenirs. A group of men was found in a basement, shot in the back of the head with their hands bound in summary executions. Many other basements were in frequent use as the Ukrainian army shelled the town trying to liberate it from the Russian forces. A torture chamber was discovered in one such a basement below a Russian command post. From another basement a group of women were rescued who had been repeatedly raped for weeks. Nine of whom subsequently became pregnant. A girl, just 14 years old, was gangraped by five Russian soldiers. A boy, 11 years old, was raped in front of his mother. Retreating Russian soldiers tried to burn some of the bodies of the women they had raped, to hide the fact of what they had done. Many countries have since condemned these atrocities as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

So far, however, that seems to be all that the Russian army is capable of today. Since the rapid advances in the first few days, the Russian army has been incapable of advancing further. Plagued by corruption, logistical problems, low morale and desertion the Russian army has been forced to evacuate back into Russia and Belarus along almost half of the front. Tank fuel had been sold on the black-market causing convoys to grind to a halt. Money to replace emergency rations had been siphoned off leaving soldiers with food that spoiled years ago. Truck tires tore themselves to pieces in the Ukrainian mud because they had been replaced by cheap Chinese knockoffs instead of the military-standard tires that were required. All in all, the Russian leadership vastly overestimated the effectiveness of its own forces and underestimated the Ukrainian tenacity and willingness to fight. Some reports even state that Russian soldiers made dinner reservations in Kyiv scheduled two days after the initial invasion. Two months later they retreated from the city having never reached their destination.

Of course, Western arms deliveries to Ukraine and sanctions on the Russian economy also have greatly helped in the battlefield defeats of the Russian army so far. Saint Javelin, a depiction of the Virgin Mary carrying an American made shoulder-fired Javelin anti-tank missile, became a national icon. Western militaries and agencies also provide Ukraine with near real time intelligence. This has allowed Ukraine to sink several Russian warships, such as the cruiser Moskva, in what my friends from Ukraine now jokingly call "special submarine operations". More Western aid will be necessary to fully defeat the Russian army and liberate the occupied regions of Ukraine.

These developments have also had major implications inside Russia and for Alexander Dugin personally. As war rages in Ukraine the violence has also spilled over into Russia itself. So far almost fifty major industrial and military complexes have mysteriously gone up in flames thousands of kilometres away from Ukraine. It is unknown whether this is due to Ukrainian special forces operating deep within enemy territory or due to home-grown anti-war resistance groups. Additionally late in the evening on the 20th of August 2022 a car bomb exploded outside Moscow destroying the car that Dugin was supposed to have driven in. The assassination attempt failed to kill Dugin who had decided to drive in a different car but did kill his daughter Darya Dugina. Both Dugin and Dugina have incited hatred against Ukrainians and called for violence against them on national Russian television. Seen in this light the attack is not surprising. We reap what we sow.

Putting on my prediction-hat once again, I fear however that defeating the Russian army will not be enough to end the suffering in Eastern Europe. The vast casualties Russia is taking and its reduced fossil fuel income now that Europe is hastily transitioning away from them, have weakened Putin's regime. If Putin's regime survives it will only do so through extreme violence and repression of its own population. In this scenario the dangerous and pseudoscientific Eurasianist ideology will not be removed from Russian society and Russia may rebuild to try once again to "re-gather the empire" in a weaker nation such as Kazakhstan. If Putin's regime does not survive, currently frozen conflicts such as Abkhazia, Ossetia, Ingushetia, Chechnya and Dagestan may reignite and new ones may start in ethnic enclaves such as Kalmykia, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Mari-El, Chuvashia and the Tuva Republic. This may well result in a further collapse of Russian imperial might akin to the collapse of the Soviet Union, though on a smaller scale.

Regardless of how the future plays out more people will die as long as Putin's regime and the Eurasianist ideology on which it is built exist. At the very least it must be kicked out of Ukraine. I think Ukraine will likely win this war, but Western support must make sure of this. In the words of Edmund Burke: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Slava Ukraini!

[Will E Hazell · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a mad, mad book.

Geopolitics is a dirty word nowadays. Sometimes what it takes is a literalist to breathe life into a dead field. Dugin is that man, and he employs the works of long dead ethnicists and Nazis to make it work. He also inserts his own occult interests into the mix, and his Foundations stretches geopolitics to the very edge of mysticism. This book is considered a cornerstone of contemporary Russian geopolitical thought. That said, it’s difficult to see its footprint on Russian policy today. It has a messy influence, if any.

Geopolitics makes some big claims, but Dugin begins with this disclaimer:

Quite simply, geopolitics does not pretend to be the sole and supreme authority in determining the state and political interests of a nation. Geopolitics is one of several basic disciplines enabling adequate formulation of the international and military doctrine of a state, along with other equally important disciplines.

The caveat is modest, but the rest of the book isn’t nearly so humble. What follows is a grand theory of destiny, ethnos, empire, and geography dressed up as science.

Land and Sea

For Dugin, the “basic geopolitical law” of world history is the conflict between Land (Tellurocracy) and Sea (Thalassocracy). This is the “chief ideological struggle:” merchants vs heroes, or democracy vs ideocracy. “This is the eternal opposition of Rome to Carthage, Sparta to Athens, England to Germany…” Critically, this also characterises the relationship between the Soviet Union and the United States.

This determinism is total.

Pressure is exerted on the World Island by the so-called “sea robbers” or “islanders”. These are colonial expeditions emanating from an extra-Eurasian centre, seeking to counterbalance overland impulses emanating from the inner limits of the continent.

This is how he divides the world:

1. Heartland: the inner continent and source of Land Power.
2. Rimland: coastal zones where Land and Sea clash.
3. Outerland: maritime platforms for Sea Powers.

There are some problems with this theory. First off, it’s highly context dependent. Dugin calls Rome a Land Power when it’s up against Carthage, and then a Sea Power in the context of the Germans, Celts, and Huns. The distinction between Land and Sea isn’t always clear. Land Powers build boats, and Sea Powers field armies.

Another complication for Dugin is that there’s often as much (if not more) competition between Powers of the same type as there is between their opposites. The Sea Powers of France, England, and Spain were belligerent rivals – and each made tactical alliances with Land Powers.

Perhaps it is the case that eventually a Power might establish a land monopoly, and another establishes a sea monopoly. In which case they might come to an epic civilisational clash. But so too did every other state on the road to that bipolar world.

Geopolitical blocs aren’t formed on a land vs sea basis, but in opposition to power.

Russia will Rise Again!

It seems today that we’re entering into a new multipolar world, a world with many Sea Powers and many Land Powers. Even if Dugin’s land vs sea thesis was true in the context of the Cold War, it is functionally irrelevant to today’s Russia.

Dugin has an answer to this, a theory that keeps Russia at the centre.

“He who controls Eastern Europe dominates the heartland; he who dominates the heartland dominates the World Island; he who dominates the World Island dominates the world.” – Halford Mackinder (Democratic Ideals and Reality)

Russia IS the “geographic axis of history.”

Geography as Destiny

Russia, as the bridge between East and West, has a destiny...

Eurasia is predestined to be geographically and strategically united. This is a strictly scientific geopolitical fact… It makes no sense to argue with this fact. The interests of the Russian people are inseparable from the construction of such a continental structure.

Russia will unite Eurasia. By what means? He lifts an idea from the Nazi theorist Karl Haushofer: “the need for a continental bloc or Berlin-Moscow-Tokyo axis.”

Berlin as the European heartland will become an Empire in the West; Japan will become a Pacific Empire in the East; and Iran will unite an Islamic Empire to the South. The Russian Empire will be the great unifier of this Eurasian Bloc.

Only Germany and the German people have all the necessary qualities for effective integration of this geopolitical region- historical will, a well-developed economy, a privileged geographical location, ethnic homogeneity, and awareness of its civilizational mission.

Japan as a symbol of the whole Pacific space is of paramount importance in these anti-Atlantic projects, because Japan’s strategic position, its development dynamics and the specificity of its value system make it an ideal partner in the planetary struggle against the Western civilization.

The fact that Japan, a Sea Power, is part of this land bloc axis isn’t easily explained. In this specific case it seems that Dugin’s philias are more important than “geopolitical destiny”. It’s also unclear why Russia is the axis and not the Islamic empire. The Middle East is not just a bridge between Asia and Europe, but also Africa. The Middle East is both historically more important and geographically more central. The silk road passed through Constantinople and Baghdad, not Moscow.

This Berlin-Moscow-Tokyo axis is an ambitious strategy, but he believes Russia has some leverage to onboard its new allies. The new Russian-led Eurasian Empire should:

1. Give the Kuril Islands back to Japan.
2. Give the Baltics and Kaliningrad to Germany.

In return, Russia will get the lion’s share: the Ukraine, Balkans and Central Asia.

For Dugin, all the small Nato-aligned states in between are essentially non-countries, destined to be divided between Germany, Russia, and Japan. This “cordon sanitaire” is just an extension of US “Atlanticism”. It will be a relief then when they are eventually subsumed.

The existence of Ukraine in its current borders and with the current status of a “sovereign state” is tantamount to a monstrous blow to Russia’s geopolitical security, tantamount to an invasion of its territory.

This bloc has purpose. It is designed to take down the Sea Powers: China and the United States. In the 1997 edition that I read, China was disqualified from joining the Eurasian axis. I suspect he may have changed his mind, but he once thought this:

China is dangerous to Russia for two reasons, as the geopolitical base of Atlantism and in its own right, as a country of increased demographic density in search of ’no man’s land’… Furthermore, China has a closed racial-cultural character and has never participated in Eurasian continental building during historically foreseeable periods.

What happens once these powers are defeated? It will likely dissolve. But it’s extremely wishful for him to assume that it will only collapse once “Atlanticism” is defeated.

He ironically ignores the chief benefit of Sea Power, that it can pick friends and balance Eurasia from afar. It will take much more than will power to keep a land bloc steady. This is evident in the fact that there has never been a cohesive, long-term Eurasian bloc. Napoleon’s Continental System collapsed when Tsar Alexander defected to the UK opposition. Metternich’s Holy Alliance crumbled under the weight of imperial self-interest. Even Hitler could not persuade Japan or Spain to set aside their national priorities to join his war against Russia. A Berlin–Moscow–Tokyo axis would face the same fate. And the stronger it becomes: the greater the incentives for each member to look for power gains elsewhere. It would dissolve in a catastrophe just like the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Dugin imagines seamless cooperation between hyper-militaristic rival civilizations, and his geopolitical strategy is completely dependent on simultaneous imperial projects in both Japan and the EU.

If this brings to mind Huxley and Orwell, don’t worry. It does for Dugin too.

Geopolitical themes in literature first emerge from George Orwell, who in his dystopia 1984 described the futurological division of the planet into three huge continental blocks “Eastasia, Eurasia, Oceania”.

He has a simple rebuttal:

Huxley and Orwell noted only the possible negative side of A Wonderful New World. The positive side remained unknown to them.

If only they had Russian mysticism!

A Return to Empire

Dugin envisions new empires grounded in culture and blood. As he puts it:

There can only be one political solution- to bring to the fore concepts of Russian nationalism. This nationalism, however, should use cultural and ethnic terminology rather than state terminology, with particular emphasis on such categories as “peoplehood” and “Russian Orthodoxy”.

This translates into a total collectivist creed:

The nation is everything, the individual is nothing

A German dominated Europe must also do the same thing. He quotes Thiriard:

Hitler’s main mistake was that he wanted to make Europe German, whereas he should have been aiming to make it European

Dugin believes that empire is essential to Russian survival. As the most diverse country in the world, it requires a unifying philosophy that goes beyond the nation state. There’s also an ethical edge: empire is a cure to ethnic flashpoints like the Caucasus.

It is also the natural state of things:

…modern nation-states are the result of the tragic collapse of traditional empires…”

He casts the Soviet Union in this same light:

The Soviet model was in some ways similar to this project, but with one important caveat: the concept of “ethnos” was viewed as a rudiment, a historical atavism, lacking the status of an internal political entity. In contrast, within the New Empire, ethnos, without direct state expression, would be recognised as the main political value and the supreme legal subject in all intra-imperial matters.

The idea of a non-Russian supremacist Russian empire is implausible. Experiments in “multicultural empire” have consistently collapsed: Serbia’s dominance in the Balkans, or the Alawite regime in Syria. Even if there is a great unifier (a Tito), all it takes is one supremacist (a Milosevic) for the state to descend into fratricide and genocide. Successful integration demands subtly and restraint. I don’t think Duginites have that.

Nordic Obsessions, Self-strengthening and Siberia

Dugin’s geopolitical project veers into outright madness near the end of the book.

The time will come when Moscow will lose its “middle” importance, will become insufficient in the geopolitical sense, too “Western”. In this case, the question of a new capital in Siberia will gain not just national, but continental and global significance.

His fixation on colonizing Siberia is another example of misplaced priorities. Why invest in building a new civilization in one of the least efficient, least productive regions on Earth? Great Power status in the modern world rests on economic strength, not on demographic stunts or territorial grandeur. Russia’s obsession with “Genghis Khan”–style all-in solutions to its demographic crisis only underscores its weakness. Shifting the capital eastward would not magically elevate Russia’s status. It would squander resources on a vanity project grounded in mysticism rather than material strategy.
Dugin embraces Friedrich List’s notion of large-space autarky. And he insists:

We must first achieve regional autonomy in providing the necessities of life and only then build projects for the improvement of living standards, technology, technical and industrial development.

Dugin is so obsessed with the “geographic axis of history” that he’s willing to completely self-sabotage the economy. What he’s arguing for here is autarky without scale. This is strange when the only benefit of autarky is economies of scale. So, what does that leave? Insistence on regional self-sufficiency all but guarantees inefficiency. This risks a permanent Russian vacation in the “middle-income trap”.

Military men like Dugin see only force and will. That mindset might work on the battlefield, not in an economy. A cunning strategy may defeat a cunning general; but you cannot outwit the millions of day-to-day consumers, bankers, and traders in a modern economy. Strong economies require strong incentives. Dugin thinks the focus should stay on military production (i.e. in a dead-end consumer market that fails to generate compounding long-term growth). He has absolutely failed to learn from the Soviet collapse, and his analysis remains resource-obsessed, and faith based.

Beneath all this lurks an ironic and extreme Eurocentrism, and an obsession with symbols (North and South, East and West) rather than sociology. I don’t think its even worth touching on his bizarre theories about the “Nordic origins of civilization.”

Why Does This Even Matter?

For Dugin, Russia’s survival depends on Empire.

The Russian Federation has hundreds of peoples who got along fine under the imperial model, but who don’t fit into the framework of “Little Russian nationalism” in any way. The conclusion is obvious: Russia will gradually become embroiled in an endless chain of internal conflicts and wars, and will eventually disintegrate.

Russia must survive, and therefore the world must retreat back into imperialism. He reframes this as a grand project for all of Eurasia. If only Japan, Germany, and Iran would take a look at a map, they would see that their destiny lies with Russia.

Dugin's deterministic insistence on geographical destiny leaves him blinds himself to the reciprocal, socially constructed natures of identifies and interests. Foundations of Geopolitics is less a piece of scientific theory than a mystic art. Even if Russia cannot exist without Empire, he cannot explain why it's worth it. It’s essentially a survivalist vision, almost amoral, with zero ethical reflections on the fate of outsiders. And most telling, Eurasianism is still nowhere near a reality. No one is listening to Dugin, probably not even Putin.

[أبو فاطمة 14 · Rating 3 out of 5]

قرأت الثلث الأول من الطبعة العربية وقمت بتصفح عابر لباقي الأجزاء
الكتاب صدر من دار الكتاب الجديد المتحدة عام 2004 بترجمة الدكتور عماد حاتم
نشر الكتاب لأول مرة باللغة الروسية عام 1999م

وكان الباعث على القراءة هو محاولة فهم شيء من الأحداث المتسارعة بعد أيام من بدء العمليات العسكرية بين روسيا وأوكرانيا في 2022 م حيث تفيد المقدمة ان هذا الكتاب يصوغ العقيدة الجيوبولتيكية لروسيا وهو دليل لجميع من يتخذون القرارات في الحياة السياسية لروسيا

و في الكتاب يبين الكاتب ان أوكرانيا ذات السيادة مشكلة وظاهرة بالغة السلبية للسياسة الروسية و تمثل خطرا يجب على موسكو أن تخضعها تحت سيطرتها.
الكتاب كان ثقيلا علي لأنني غير مختص ولكنه فتح أعيني على أشياء كنت اجهلها في السياسة والاستراتيجيات الدولية

ملخص لما قرأت من الثلث الأول للكتاب

---------------------------------------------------

الجيوبولتيكا هي علم السُلطة من أجل السُلطة، انها كتاب السلطة الذي يقدم فيها مُلَّخص لما يجب وضعه في الاعتبار عند اتخاذ القرارات الكبرى المصيرية مثل عقد التحالفات وشن الحروب والقيام بالإصلاحات

الجيوبولتيكا هي علم الحُكم

القانون الأساسي للجيوبولتيكا هو إقرار الثنائية في التكوين الجغرافي لكوكب الارض: القوة البرية والقوة البحرية

المبدأ الأساسي التالي هو منطقة الحافة
وهي المجال المركب الذي يحتمل إمكانية ان يكون جزءً من القوة البرية او البحرية

الباب الأول:

آباء الجيوبولتيكا (المؤسسون)
يمكن عد فريدريك راتسيل (١٨٤٤-١٩٠٤) أب الجيوبولتيكا وكتابه الأهم هو (الجغرافيا السياسية) رغم انه لم يستخدم مصطلح الجيوبولتيكا الذي كان اول من استخدمه هو السويدي رودلف تشيلين (١٨٦٤-١٩٢٢)
بينما كانت الشخصية الأوفر تألقاً بين علماء الجيوبولتيكا هو السير هيلفورد ج. ماكيندر (-٨٦١-١٩٤٧) الذي كان كتابه (المحور الجغرافي للتاريخ) هو أهم اعماله وكان ماكيندر يعمل على تعزيز الجيوبولتيكا الأنجلوسكسونية

ثم لا بد من ذكر الأمريكي الأميرال الفريد ماهان (١٨٤٠-١٩١٤) الذي كرست اعماله موضوع القوة البحرية وصار اسم ماهان مرادفاً لهذا المصطلح. ويرى ماهان ان التجارة هي الأداة الاولى السياسة وعلى الأعمال العسكرية ان تقتصر على تأمين الشروط الافضل لإقامة الحضارة التجارية الكونية
بينما كان فيدال دي لابلانش (1845-1918) مؤسساً للمدرسة الجغرافية الفرنسية و طرح نظريته ( البوسيبليزم ) حيث يضيف للبعد الجغرافي المكاني العامل الزماني ( التاريخية) و الحرية البشرية ( الانسان صاحب المبادرة) , واستقبلت نظريته كتصحيح للحتمية الجغرافية الصارمة لدى من سبق من المؤلفين الجيوبوليتكيين.

ثم يأتي من تابع خطى ماهان وهو الأمريكي نيكولاس سبيكمان (1893-1943) الذي كان ينظر الى الجيوبولتيكا على انها الأداة الأكثر أهمية في السياسة الدولية المحددة كمنهج تحليلي ونظام للمعادلات يسمحان معا باستنباط الاستراتيجية الأشد تأثيراً. وقد تبنى المدخل الىراغماتيكي لتحقيق (السيطرة العالمية) لصالح أمريكا. ويمكن تسميته مع ماهان (اب الأطلسية) و (الملهم الفكري للناتو).

كارل هاوسهوفر (1869-1946) الألماني ونظرياته المتعلقة بإقامة الحلف القاري (برلين -موسكو – طوكيو)
كارل شميدت بهيموت (1888 – 1985) ونظريته حقوق الشعب ومعالجته للتصورات ( العدو الشامل , الحرب الشاملة و الدولة الشمولية) وركز في نهاية حياته على شخصية (الفدائي)

ثم الروسي سافيستكي (1895-1968) وفكرته الأساسية تتلخص في كون روسيا تمثل تكوينا حضارياً مميزاً تحدده خاصية "التوسط"
هوية علماء الجيوبولتيكا تنعكس بصورة مباشرة على آرائهم فهم أولئك الأشخاص القادرون بمستوى عال من نفاذ البصيرة والاحساس بالمسؤولية على تلمس التوجهات التاريخية للتطور العالمي في المجال المكاني و ان يفهموا مكان شعبهم ودولتهم في هذا السياق و ان يصوغوا المشروع الأكثر فعالية للمستقبل

الباب الثاني:
النظريات والمدارس الجيوبوليتيكية المعاصرة
الأطلسية المعاصرة وهم اتباع سبيكمان: مثل مايننغ وكيرك وكوين وغري وكسينجر
وهؤلاء الأطلسيون كسبوا الحرب الباردة وكانت الجيوبولتيكا في حالة الغرب مادة علمية تملي الخطوط العامة للاستراتيجية الدولية
اما في المعسكر الشرقي فكانت جيوبولتكيا سلبية ترد على تحدي الأطلسية الاستراتيجية وفقا لمبدأ قوة الاستمرار لا أكثر
ومع تقدم الزمن ظهرت نظامين جيوبولتكيين جديدين هما (سلطة الجو) و (سلطة الأثير) ويعتبرها دوغين انهما تطور لما يسميه نوموس البحر كما أشار
و يطرح (صدام الحضارات) لهنتغتون و (نهاية التاريخ) لفوكوياما و العولمة والجيوبولتيكا التطبيقية والالكترونية

[Baraa · Rating 5 out of 5]

بالمختصر؛ من أراد أن يغوص في عقل بوتين وأن يعرف الأسس التأطيرية النظرية التي يسير عليها مذ تولى الحكم ليوم اللناس هذا، فعليه بكتاب دوغين اللعين هذا!
الكتاب خطير جدا ومفيد جدا في معرفة وجهة النظر الروسية التي تغزو من خلالها الشرق والغرب اليوم، الكاتب يرى أن الروس أمة قيصرية العقل أرثوذكسية القلب والوجدان وقدرها إمبراطوري توسعي وعلى قادة الاتحاد الروسي أن يعملو على هذابجميع الوسائل الممكنة وإلا الزوال هو المصير.بصراحة قبل سماع الكتاب كنت مغرورا ببوتين قليلا ولكن تفاجأت أن هذا الأجوف لم يقدح ذهنه حتى بفكرة واحدة من سياساته التي يطبقها منذ عقدين ونيّف من الزمن، إنما هي نظريات هذا الشيطان دوغين..

[J. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not gonna lie, he kinda had me in the first half... it was an overview of the background of "geopolitics" like you would expect a textbook to be. Sure he included your occasional nazi, but what social science doesn't wind up with a nazi influence of some sort (looking at you Anthropology, Sociology, Political Geography, etc...) but then he went allllll in on some pretty wacky conspiracy theories. Nevertheless, some of his ideas seem to have clearly been resonating with folks in the Kremlin as election interference, stirring up ethnic strife and national-seperatism in the UK and other countries seems to be being played out before our eyes in the news. The fact there is no authoritative English translation of this book is a major oversight in my opinion. I read it with the help of google translate so I can't be entirely sure that I understood every detail, but I think I got the gist of it, and it's pretty scary.

[Alberto Erazo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fundamentos de Geopolítica de Alexander Dugin es una obra clave para comprender las bases de la geopolítica desde una perspectiva ecléctica y filosófica. Dugin, pensador ruso de la corriente euroasiática, utiliza este texto para ofrecer una reinterpretación de la geopolítica tradicional, fusionando las ciencias políticas, la historia, la filosofía y la cultura con un enfoque que resalta la necesidad de una civilización rusa emergente y el desafío de Occidente. Este trabajo tiene una influencia que trasciende la teoría geopolítica y se adentra en lo que algunos consideran una síntesis de ideas que buscan conformar una nueva concepción del mundo.

En Fundamentos de Geopolítica, Dugin despliega su visión de la lucha global entre bloques geopolíticos, estableciendo una línea divisoria clara entre un "Occidente" imperialista y un "Oriente" o "Eurasia" que tiene la misión de contrarrestar y subvertir las tendencias unipolares de poder. La obra se construye sobre un entramado de ideas filosóficas que citan, entre otros, a pensadores como Carl Schmitt, que es central en el pensamiento de Dugin, además de tomar elementos de la tradición rusa y del pensamiento conservador europeo.

Dugin introduce un concepto clave: el del "imperialismo de tierra" versus el "imperialismo de mar". Según él, las potencias marítimas como Estados Unidos y el Reino Unido representan el poder que busca la expansión sin restricciones, mientras que las potencias terrestres (como Rusia) buscan controlar territorios más vastos, en una lógica de poder que se basa en la defensa de su espacio vital, de su continuidad histórica y de la integración de sus distintas etnias y naciones.

A lo largo de su obra, el autor reivindica la importancia de la "civilización euroasiática", un bloque geopolítico que ve como el contrapeso necesario a la hegemonía del "mundo anglosajón". Este concepto no es solo una aproximación política, sino una visión cultural que articula la defensa de una identidad que va más allá de las fronteras políticas tradicionales. En su interpretación, Dugin considera que la geopolítica no es solo un campo de interacción entre potencias nacionales, sino también un reflejo de la lucha entre civilizaciones, y cada bloque civilizatorio está marcado por una historia particular y una manera propia de ver el mundo.

Un aspecto profundamente interesante del libro es la forma en que Dugin redefine la relación entre política y espacio. La geopolítica, para él, no es simplemente un campo de interacción material o de lucha de poder entre estados, sino un espacio de ideas que se proyectan sobre el territorio. De esta manera, la geografía política se convierte en una especie de campo de batalla ideológica, en donde las visiones del mundo son capaces de materializarse a través de las decisiones políticas y de la configuración territorial.

La obra también es una crítica a la globalización, a la unificación del mundo bajo un mismo patrón cultural, económico y político que, para Dugin, no solo socava las particularidades de cada civilización, sino que implica un peligro existencial para las naciones y los pueblos que defienden su identidad y sus tradiciones. La obra es, en muchos sentidos, un manifiesto sobre la necesidad de resistir a la hegemonía de un orden mundial dirigido por las potencias occidentales.

Dugin ataca ferozmente el liberalismo, considerándolo no solo un sistema económico y político, sino una ideología hegemónica que busca destruir las tradiciones y valores nacionales. Para Dugin, el liberalismo promueve la disolución de las identidades y la imposición de un modelo universal que borra las diferencias culturales y espirituales de los pueblos. En su visión, el liberalismo es una forma de imperialismo global que, a través de la democracia, el individualismo y el mercado libre, impone una única forma de vida que somete a las naciones al poder de los grandes centros económicos y políticos del mundo, particularmente a los Estados Unidos y sus aliados.

Para Dugin, el liberalismo es una de las fuerzas más destructivas de la era moderna, pues ha deshumanizado a las sociedades y ha debilitado las estructuras nacionales y tradicionales. En su análisis, el liberalismo no solo ha provocado la fragmentación social, sino que ha dejado a las personas alienadas y desconectadas de sus raíces históricas y culturales. La geopolítica, desde esta perspectiva, es una lucha contra esta hegemonía liberal y por la preservación de la diversidad cultural y la autonomía de los pueblos.

En su crítica al liberalismo, Dugin también aborda la cuestión del universalismo, la idea de que hay un modelo de vida que debe ser impuesto a todas las culturas y sociedades del mundo. Para Dugin, esta es una falacia peligrosa, ya que el liberalismo pretende borrar las diferencias entre las culturas, forzando a todos a adoptar una misma visión de la vida. Este enfoque no solo es erróneo, sino que es destructivo, ya que despoja a los pueblos de su historia, su espiritualidad y sus valores. La geopolítica, en la visión de Dugin, debe ser entendida como una lucha entre civilizaciones, en la que cada una de ellas tiene derecho a existir según sus propios principios y tradiciones, sin ser forzada a adherirse a un sistema único y homogéneo.

A lo largo de Fundamentos de Geopolítica, Dugin ofrece una reflexión profunda sobre las dinámicas del poder global, destacando que la geopolítica no es solo una cuestión de territorios y recursos, sino una lucha ideológica y cultural. El liberalismo, con su afán de homogeneizar el mundo y su impulso hacia un orden global único, es para Dugin la gran amenaza que debe ser enfrentada. La obra se convierte así en una defensa de las identidades nacionales, las culturas particulares y los valores tradicionales, proponiendo una alternativa que recupere la conexión con el territorio, la espiritualidad y la comunidad frente a la atomización que genera el modelo liberal.

Fundamentos de Geopolítica es una obra que desafía profundamente las concepciones liberales y globalistas dominantes en el discurso contemporáneo. Dugin ofrece una crítica radical al liberalismo, al considerar que este sistema, lejos de promover la libertad, en realidad impone un modelo de opresión cultural, económica y política que destruye las identidades nacionales y las comunidades tradicionales. Con su propuesta de un orden euroasiático, Dugin no solo presenta una alternativa geopolítica, sino una llamada a la resistencia contra un modelo hegemónico que él considera peligroso para la humanidad. La obra es, por tanto, una reflexión profunda sobre las luchas ideológicas que dan forma a la política global y un manifiesto para la recuperación de la pluralidad cultural y la soberanía nacional frente a la tiranía del liberalismo global.

[Oleksii Shyliaiev · Rating 1 out of 5]

Через силу дочитал этот опус лишь для того, чтобы создать личное представление, чем руководствуется руководство россии в нынешней войне против Украины. Такого средоточия рашизма, фашизма, шовинизма на килограмм бумаги я в жизни своей еще не видел. Верно отметил один из рецензентов, что Дугин откопал труп Гитлера и Майн Кампфа и облек его в русско-националистическую оболочку. По моему высокие оценки этому недоразумению ставят только люди, все еще испытывающие влажные мечты по поводу ссср, российской империи и "величии" русских.
Также не знаю, в каком месте здесь наука. С серьезной точки зрения эту книгу рассматривать нельзя от слова совсем. Тем более после спекуляций на тему "Запад - это от слова за-пад, западение". Вновь умирающий запад.
В общем, не рекомендую никому. Жду, когда восстановятся мои потраченные нервные клетки.

[Loay Elshamy · Rating 5 out of 5]

كتاب يضيف بغزارة ويوسع نظرة القارئ للسياسة والتاريخ والجغرافيا والعالم والمستقبل

[MAYA QUARTZ · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alexander Dugin’s Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia is a blueprint for Russian strategic dominance, one that has gained eerie relevance in today’s geopolitical landscape.

This work serves as both a theoretical framework and a tactical guide, outlining Russia’s path to undermining Western influence and reasserting control over former Soviet territories. Dugin presents a stark dichotomy between “Atlanticism,” represented by the U.S. and NATO, and “Eurasianism,” an ideology that promotes Russian expansion and the consolidation of a Eurasian empire. His proposals range from fostering internal divisions in Western nations to forming strategic alliances with China and Iran, many of which align disturbingly well with modern geopolitical developments.

Dugin’s work is methodical in its approach, dissecting the world into spheres of influence and prescribing a strategy for Russian ascendance. He explicitly calls for the dismemberment of Ukraine and Georgia, a directive that has played out in real-world conflicts. His suggestions for cultivating discord within the U.S. and Europe—through political subversion, media influence, and the encouragement of separatist movements—seem less like abstract theory and more like a roadmap that has been, to some degree, followed. The book’s chilling resonance with real-world events raises the question: was Dugin merely an astute observer of inevitable geopolitical shifts, or has his work actively shaped Russian foreign policy?

One of the most striking aspects of Foundations of Geopolitics is its unapologetic embrace of realpolitik. Dugin is not concerned with moral arguments but with raw power dynamics. He rejects liberal democracy as a viable model for Russia, instead advocating for a hierarchical, nationalist state that wields geopolitical influence through manipulation rather than direct military confrontation. His vision of a multipolar world is not one of peaceful coexistence but of constant ideological and territorial struggle, where Russia reclaims its role as a dominant force.

However, the book’s analytical framework has its flaws. Dugin’s portrayal of global politics as a binary conflict between land-based and sea-based powers oversimplifies the complexities of international relations. His fixation on geography as the primary determinant of power ignores the evolving roles of technology, economics, and diplomacy in shaping modern geopolitics. Moreover, his prescriptions often lean into a form of deterministic nationalism, as if Russian destiny is preordained rather than subject to internal and external contingencies.

Despite these shortcomings, Foundations of Geopolitics is a deeply consequential work. It has reportedly been used as a textbook in Russian military and political institutions, underscoring its influence among Russia’s elite. The book provides a disturbing yet insightful look into the mindset that may be driving Russian policy today. While it is easy to dismiss Dugin’s theories as extremist rhetoric, the extent to which his vision aligns with Russia’s actions over the past two decades suggests that his ideas hold significant weight in shaping strategic decisions.

Reading this book is a sobering experience, as it forces one to confront the possibility that much of the West’s current destabilization is not merely a product of internal political shifts but of deliberate external influence. If Dugin’s goal was to encourage the self-destruction of the United States and its allies without direct confrontation, it seems that—at least to some extent—his vision has been realized. Whether Foundations of Geopolitics is an inspired prophecy or a self-fulfilling one remains a critical question, but one thing is certain: ignoring its implications comes at great peril.

[Joel · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Foundations of Geopolitics” is Aleksandr Dugin’s master magnum opus. It is the first and last thing he wrote; though he wrote before it and after it — tomes and tomes and tomes. Everything leading up to it was just that, and everything after it was trying to explain it. In his policy book, Dugin lays out the foundations of a renewed Russian order.

The times during which he wrote must have been remarkable. He wrote his book in the mid 1990s, when the Soviet Union had disintegrated and the Russian Federation was in mayhem. Dugin was already well known; he’d been one of the first “Eurasianists” since the last decade of communism, when the ideas of nationalism were still anathema. But he imagined, in this treatise, what a renewed Russia might look like. During those years, “Foundations of Geopolitics” became a best-seller. It was heavily read in the Russian military establishment; and became the foundational tract of the Eurasian party, the party Dugin himself founded. And Vladimir Putin got his hands on a copy.

In fact, Putin’s master plan comes right off the pages of “Foundations of Geopolitics”; even the Ukraine invasion.

The book sort of uses British geologist Halford Mackinder’s “Heartland theory” as a jumping off point. In the heartland theory, Mackinder posits that Eastern Europe (Ukraine) is the fulcrum upon which world power turns. He who controls the heartland controls eventually the world island, which is greater Europe and Eurasia and even China, and then can control the world. Dugin then expounds further, suggesting there are two types of powers: land powers, which are much more hierarchical, agrarian and conservative — and sea powers which are more egalitarian and mercantilistic. And every geopolitical battle is a battle between these two types of powers (Athens and Sparta; Carthage and Rome; England and Germany — etc.) Russia, in control finally of the heartland, is the main land power; the United States, the world’s greatest sea power. Laying the foundation for the conflict we are now in.

He then goes to tremendous length to divvy up the world, slicing it as if it were Potsdam or he were Balfour; ‘giving’ countries and regions to the most significant regional powers to achieve “balance” which he hopes will avoid world war.

It is all very interesting and academic; geopolitics is not a particularly mainstream political idea, it is not in fashion these days. If ever it was. It would appear to be a crank ideology, except that it seems that geography matters a lot more than we want to imagine. And we are almost in WWIII; with a great power controlling the heartland, almost.

Final point, this was a widely read book in its day. Still is. I wonder if the planners in the Pentagon and NATO had their hands on this book, and gave it the attention it deserved, if they wouldn’t have been able to avoid WWIII. We don’t have to believe something to take it seriously; it is just as important to recognize that other people believe something, and that too gives it legitimacy and power. Like it or not, Vladimir Putin has been imagining the legacy he wants to leave Russia with when he dies; and chose the moment to attempt to make his vision a reality. I’d humbly suggest we should probably try and understand what that vision is. “Foundations of Geopolitics” is a good place to start.

[Paul Mamani · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Foundations of Geopolitics:
The Geopolitical Future of Russia" is a geopolitical book by Aleksandr Dugin, first published in 1997.
The book outlines Dugin's vision for Russia's geopolitical strategy, advocating for a Eurasian empire that opposes Western influence. It emphasizes the importance of Russia's historical and cultural ties with neighboring countries and proposes a strategic partnership with China, India, and the Islamic world. The book has been influential within Russian military and political circles.




German Summary
"Grundlagen der Geopolitik:

Die geopolitische Zukunft Russlands" ist ein geopolitisches Buch von Alexander Dugin, das erstmals 1997 veröffentlicht wurde. Das Buch skizziert Dugins Vision für die geopolitische Strategie Russlands und plädiert für ein eurasisches Reich, das den westlichen Einfluss entgegensteht. Es betont die Bedeutung der historischen und kulturellen Bindungen Russlands mit den Nachbarländern und schlägt eine strategische Partnerschaft mit China, Indien und der islamischen Welt vor. Das Buch hat innerhalb der russischen militärischen und politischen Kreise Einfluss ausgeübt.


Summarised by Inti
lake Titicaca Peru

[And · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's compelling (for fascist propaganda). An eye opening account of context, perspective and what drives the current Russian ruling elite.

outline:

chauvinism of Russian people (to everyone else)

who will naturally dominate Eurasia

who will then naturally dominate the world in a world empire headed by Russians

it should begin in Ukraine for the control of the black sea coast

the sea power atlanticists are the greatest threat to this aim

hopefully avoid civil war which could result in a ring of low level war on the (current) russian border destabilising Russia, to be avoided (?!)


look out for:
new world order
liberal cosmopolitan elite
mondialists Vs nationalists
Rus to court Germans to split Anglo-Saxons away from Europe
Rus to court mahgreb


another millennium, another ideology of, whatever it is, it is just because it is against 'the west'.

Russia is autocracy but natural (historical) and therefore just, unlike the liberal artificial (unnatural) societies. Therefore Russia should take the world under its imperial control?! You have to admire the honesty of it all.

TL;DR 2025 👀

[Vlad · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's an uneven book. Some of it is a hopelessly outdated thinking, that might be appropriate to read in a 19th century work. Some of it is trivial geographic history with dubious conclusions of Russian greatness. But there are parts that are a very interesting read and can be used to explain the actions of Putin's regime to a tee.

I think, the book was used as a textbook in some Russian universities, and as such it starts with an overview of geopolitical thought. The book was written in 1997, when Russian science was in tatters and even scientists were more interested in capitalism pastime of making money. Most likely Dugin did not have access to most modern international relations work, as he quotes only Fukuyama and Huntington, but in passing. He is more interested in metaphysical work of the 19th and early 20th century, which basically try to explain why their particular country is exceptional and destined for greatness by looking creatively at the globe. Dugin is obsessed with Thalassocracy (a maritime empire like Britain and later USA) vs Tellurocracy (a continental empire). He lists pioneering authors of geopolitics, each proving that their country has the most important geographic location to rule the world. This overview of geopolitical thought is actually a great introduction to geopolitics, and is textbook worthy. But this overview finishes at 1/4 of the book and the rest is Dugin's view of the world, and his advice to the next Russian emperor how to return Russia to glory after losing the (cold) war with its arch-enemy - the Atlantists. It's far from being scientific, but chillingly it had predicted a lot of what we see happening now, which makes this work interesting to any student of international relations.

Nothing in Russia changes, and the dichotomy of pro-western and pro-traditionalists that can be used to explain and classify all Russian philosophers is still there. The main complaint of Dugin is that Atlantists are trying to build a world government (presumably to make the world a safer place and to end world wars) and that will lead to Russia disappearing from the map, which is unacceptable to the Russian nationalist.

Dugin's nationalism is Imperial - he understands that to support only ethnic (slavic) Russians will lead to a collapse of the Empire he so wants to restore. The structure of his complicated nationalism is never clarified, it is stated more as a wish/hope - that Russia is a place of magic power and not simply the land of slavic Russians but the land of Russians by geography - an amalgamation of peoples living on Russian land and feeling deep connection with Russia. Dugin also, as many geopolitical thinkers before him and today's realists feels that the clash with the Atlantists (USA) is inevitable.

It is easy to dismiss Dugin as a cultish imperialist-nationalist wishing for return to greatness. But his analysis is interesting in both (1) understanding that international relations are often moving according to hidden forces based on genetic/geographic logic that is not yet will understood and (2) understanding the current ideology of Putin's regime, which is a mix of nationalism, historical revisionism and a quest for glory that allows to keep a grip on the Russian/Soviet psyche for the kremlin elites to continue benefiting from unaccountable riches.

[Jey Islander]

After Soviet era, between Western and China civilization, as a geographical giant with nuclear weapon, Russia has lost its ideological and cultural confidence. they keen to setup some pillar stones to make themselves "great again" . Dugin is the one who want to re-inject Orthodox back to Russia and defined Russia as a unique civilization between Western and Eastern. for me, I see it as an ineffective resistance.

[Omar Almansouri · Rating 2 out of 5]

أسس جنون العظمة!
كم يستفزني المفكر الذي يتعامل مع الشعوب والأفراد كما لو أنهم قطع لا إرادة لها سوا إرادته في اللعب بها في شطرنجه! لا عجب أن يكون هذا المفكر، المهووس بالسيطرة وسلب الاستقلالية الفردية، "عقل بوتين" كما يسميه البعض! هذا الفكر لا يقود إلا إلى خلق حالة هتلرية جديدة في ظني.

[TOny · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book if anything, gives you a perfect understanding of euroasianism. It is the russian strife for survival and beyond. The bulwark against Atlanticism.

[Kevin Wolf · Rating 1 out of 5]

This translation is awful. Obviously machine translated. It's gibberish at many points, not much better than word salad.

[CHris · Rating 3 out of 5]

WHere can I find this book ? I have searched everywhere. I need it in english.

[Matas Maldeikis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Visas Rusijos imperinis blogis vienoje vietoje.

[John Eliade · Rating 1 out of 5]

I can't fucking believe I read this.

[مي · Rating 5 out of 5]

وجدت الكتاب صوتيا مجانا على تطبيق منطوق للكتب الصوتية

[Scott Holstad · Rating 2 out of 5]

Переоцененное, совершенно неоригинальное, смущающе упрощенное, невпечатляющее дерьмо! Это русская интеллигенция? Почему миру есть о чем беспокоиться о главных политико-философских курсах действий России, мне непонятно. Плоды этого мы видим в Украине прямо сейчас. Дугин - это шутка. Однако некоторые из его европейских политических философов-традиционалистов менее склонны и, вероятно, более опасны.