The New Space Frontier: Geopolitics and Space Power to Heliopolitics

Introduction: Graffiti, space and powerA SPECIFIC JAMAICAN WAY OF expressing criticism is to 'throw word'. Similar to the African-American practice of 'signifying', this rhetorical device, developed in a context of power inequalities, allows critics to convey their disapproval of certain behaviour indirectly by speaking 'to the air' rather than to any one person. Those being reprimanded will be well aware that they are the intended authence but find it difficult to retort because, as the saying goes, Throw a stone in a pigsty, the one that squeals the loudest is the one that has been hit.1 This article examines textual graffiti in Kingston, Jamaica as a form of 'throw word', a way for socio-politically and economically marginalised citizens to air their often critical opinions of urban life. We explore how graffiti texts can be used to understand relations and contestations of power in urban space. The texts can provide insight into how certain urban actors give spatial expression to their concerns surrounding various issues relevant to the urban experience. We analyse the distribution of texts throughout the city and to what extent they offer a (not necessarily emancipatory) voice for marginalised groups, arguing that, in the final analysis, they reflect a conservative ideology that tends to bolster rather than undermine the dominant order in terms of political, class and cultural struggles.There is a growing body of literature on graffiti, particularly within urban geography.2 Most of these studies, however, have focused on large cities in the global north, such as New York and Philadelphia. Little is known about graffiti in cities in the global south, such as Kingston. Graffiti in Kingston is markedly different from that commonly referred to in the USA, where scrawled names ('tags') and brightly coloured murals ('pieces') reflecting an urban subculture of graffiti writers are the main focus of research. In contrast, the graffiti in Kingston is more political, publicly oriented and often intentionally provocative. For the purpose of this article, the use of the term graffiti refers to the textual street-oriented forms of graffiti generally seen around the city of Kingston, Jamaica.While geographers have long studied landscapes as texts,3 graffiti not only alters or edits the text of the cityscape. It also forms an independent body of texts or narratives that refer to each other as well as to the 'canvas' of the city on which they are literally inscribed; collectively, then, graffiti forms a discourse. The discursive nature of Kingston's graffiti is best understood through a broader urban perspective. Factors such as crime, poverty, garrison politics and public sexual mores4 contribute to the urban experience which finds discursive expression through urban phenomena such as graffiti.Contestations over urban space are a well-established focus within the literature on urbanisation, and qualitative approaches within this field have shifted towards studying the intimate connections of space with knowledge and power. Following authors such as Michel Foucault and Michel de Certeau,5 we are interested in the manifestation of power in space, not only through the use of 'spatial strategies' (in de Certeau's terms) or 'disciplinary diagrams' (as Foucault puts it) of surveillance and control by those in power, but also through the spatial and discursive tactics of economically and sociopolitically marginalised groups. This shift in emphasis also entails broadening the focus from struggles over access to and uses of spaces and places, to include the cultural politics of symbolic struggles over the meanings of places and socio-spatial boundaries.Recent shifts within the spatial structure of cities, linked to neoliberal policies, evidence the manifestation of power in space. The privatisation, regulation and militarisation of public space both reflect and contribute to power inequalities within the city. …

This handbook examines the militarization of space, providing a fair and balanced discussion of the emerging issues concerning space security and defense. The militarization of space is already underway, with unpredictable consequences for the way war will be conducted in the future.Military Space Power: A Guide to the Issuesexamines the militarization of space from historical, technological, and geopolitical angles. It traces space militarization from concepts proposed before World War II through the use of space for military surveillance and communications purposes to the actual deployment of weapons that pass through high-altitude space, such as ballistic missiles and nuclear-armed interceptors. The book focuses on the main space pioneers like the United States, Russia, and China, but also includes discussion of potential future players. It looks at the state of current space technology, but also projects how recent inventions or new discoveries might be weaponized for the space environment. And it analyzes how the militarization of space might influence international relations. The result is a fair and balanced discussion of the emerging issues concerning space security and defense.

Abstract: This book presents a comprehensive analysis of the evolving nexus between geopolitical tensions and resource-based conflicts in the 21st century. It conceptualizes natural resources—oil, gas, water, rare earth elements, and digital infrastructure—as strategic assets embedded in global power structures and examines how their control shapes international behavior, diplomacy, and conflict. Through a multi-theoretical framework combining international relations theory, political economy, environmental security, and strategic studies, the book investigates the transformation of resource competition into a multidimensional phenomenon influenced by climate change, nationalism, and technological militarization. Methodologically, the study adopts a comparative case study approach, incorporating empirical evidence from high-risk zones such as the South China Sea, Nile Basin, Arctic region, and cyber-physical infrastructure networks. The analysis reveals that resource scarcity and asymmetrical access are increasingly weaponized by state and non-state actors, leading to shifts in global alliances, disruption of supply chains, and emergence of new conflict frontlines. Furthermore, the work explores the inadequacies of current governance mechanisms and proposes an integrated framework based on preventive diplomacy, resource justice, and cooperative sovereignty. The key contribution of this volume lies in its interdisciplinary synthesis and forward-looking governance proposals. By bridging academic theory with real-world policy imperatives, the book offers critical insights for scholars, policymakers, and multilateral institutions seeking to navigate the geopolitical challenges of resource interdependence in a rapidly transforming global order. Keywords geopolitical tensions, resource wars, energy security, water conflict, rare earth elements, climate-induced conflict, hydro-politics, cyber-infrastructure, space militarization, resource nationalism, global governance, strategic competition, preventive diplomacy, environmental security, multilateral institutions, AI and conflict, global power realignment, international relations theory, critical resources, conflict prevention

Introduction. In the context of the aggravation of the international military-political situation, the issues of protecting national sovereignty and national security of Russia using various mechanisms of state policy come to the fore, including relying on the norms of international law governing the latest relations developing between states regarding the militarization of outer space. Due to the fact that this problem is far from being finally resolved, further research in this area is very relevant and determines the need for a scientific understanding of the problem of the militarization of outer space and the development of recommendations aimed at the further development of the system of international legal regulation in this area of interstate relations.Materials and methods. The theoretical and empirical basis of the study is made up of international legal documents (primarily the UN Security Council, the UN General Assembly), normative legal acts of international treaty law, foreign and domestic international legal literature. Based on the integrative approach to scientific legal research when writing the article, the following were used, in particular, general scientific and special methods of understanding legal phenomena and processes in the field of international law, namely, system-structural analysis; the method of synthesis of legal phenomena and processes of military-technological exploration of outer space; formal-logical method, as well as the method of norm-setting support for the processes of using space for military purposes.Results of the study. The author identified two levels of military exploration of outer space, considered the problems of legal regulation of the use of anti-satellite weapons, and proposed directions for the formation of an agreement on control over antisatellite weapons. It is proposed to include in these agreements really important provisions that will give this area of international law real significance. In particular, it is possible to include in these agreements a provision on an international moratorium on kinetic tests of anti-satellite weapons systems, to designate certain orbital altitudes as security zones, where the placement of objects is possible only with the consent and under the control of international organizations.Discussion and conclusions. The approaches proposed in the article are important for Russia and the world community, since they serve to specify steps that reduce the possibility of further militarization of outer space, and can be used as building blocks for creating codified rules for the use of outer space.Russia, as a space power with serious capabilities in the field of using outer space for military purposes, should play a key role in this process, which requires reasonable participation in the system of international legal regulation and defending its national interests in the field of using outer space for national defense

Reviewed by: Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realism and the Neoliberal Challenge Holger Schmidt Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realism and the Neoliberal Challenge, edited by Charles W. Kegley. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995. 374 p. $30.00/Paper. Like other seminal historical events of this century, the end of the Cold War provided a stimulus for students of world affairs to readjust the theoretical prisms through which they perceive international political events. Much like its object of study, international relations theory today is in a [End Page 194] state of transition. One symptom of this theoretical reassessment is the increasing criticism mounted against realism, the discipline’s dominant paradigm during the postwar era. Analyses of realism’s conceptual and empirical shortcomings have become a growth industry since the bipolar superpower confrontation of the Cold War has receded into history. Perhaps the most powerful contemporary alternative to realist conceptions of world politics is presented by scholars operating within the liberal tradition. The peaceful resolution of the US-Soviet geopolitical and ideological rivalry, the ensuing spread of capitalism and democracy to new areas of the globe, and the growing number of multilateral cooperative efforts have lent renewed credibility to liberalism’s emphasis on progress and change. Charles Kegley’s Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realism and the Neoliberal Challenge is a product of both the growing dissatisfaction with the limitations of the traditional realist framework and the current resurgence of liberal thinking. Reflecting the intellectual climate within the discipline, the volume aims at a critical examination of realism from a liberal perspective and tries to assess liberalism’s potential to advance scholars’ understanding of world affairs. In addition, the book attempts to stress continuities with past debates among students of international relations by tracing the origins of the contemporary contest between the discipline’s two main schools of thought. While Controversies in International Relations Theory is primarily designed as a liberal critique of the realist theoretical orthodoxy, the editor also attempts to demonstrate how the two approaches “overlap and reinforce each other” in order to pave the way for a possible future synthesis of liberal and realist insights. The book consists of five major parts. Part One, featuring such prominent authors as Michael Doyle, Joseph Grieco, Ole Holsti, and Kenneth Waltz, introduces the reader to the central tenets of modern realist and liberal thought and the different philosophical traditions from which the two approaches have emerged. These introductory essays set the stage for the main discussion in Parts Two to Four, in which various core issues and substantive problems in contemporary international affairs are examined in light of the two contending theoretical perspectives, focusing on the institutional, economic, military, and normative dimensions of world politics. The volume concludes with a look to the future of the realist-liberal debate. In keeping with the editor’s goal of correcting the past pro-realist bias within the discipline, the essays in Controversies in International [End Page 195] Relations Theory concentrate on highlighting realism’s conceptual and empirical shortcomings. On the conceptual level, realism is faulted for its narrow focus on security issues and great power rivalries, which, in Ole Holsti’s words, not only fails to “capture the complexities of contemporary international life but—blinds the analyst to the institutions, processes, and norms that permit cooperation and significantly mitigate some features of an anarchic system.” On the empirical level, Barry Hughes’ contribution on the European Union and Nicholas Onuf’s and Thomas Johnson’s essay on the so-called “democratic peace” examine two phenomena that seriously bring into question core realist assumptions. While the absence of armed conflict among democratic states challenges the realist assertion that unit-level factors, such as regime type, have no significant impact on which states do or do not go to war with each other, the Europeans’ ongoing attempts to form an ever closer union puzzle realists for two reasons: First, the continued transfer of authority from the state to the community level contradicts their proposition that states inherently seek to retain a maximum possible degree of political and economic independence. Second, the Europeans’ increased integrative efforts run counter to the realist claim that EC cooperation...

450 China Review International: Vol. 4, No. 2, Fall 1997 Alastair Iain Johnston. Cultural Realism: Strategie Culture and Grand Strategy in Chinese History. Princeton Studies in International History and Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995. xiii, 307 pp. Hardcover $39.50, isbn 0-691-02996-2. It has long been conventional wisdom that one of the distinguishing features of Chinese strategy is a marked preference for nonviolent or minimally violent solutions to security problems. This view colors most of the modern secondary literature , both Chinese and Western, and has rarely been questioned. After all, Sunzi himself tell us that "attaining one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the pinnacle of excellence. Subjugating the enemy's army without fighting is the true pinnacle of excellence" (Sawyer translation, p. 177). In this intricate and closely reasoned study based on the systematic analysis of implied and asserted cause-effect relationships in the Seven Military Classics and Ming memorials dealing with frontier policy, Alastair Iain Johnston challenges the established view. He argues that the "core paradigm" of Chinese strategic thought differs little from Western realpolitik views: conflict is seen as both unavoidable and zero-sum, violence is regarded as highly efficacious and preferable to all nonviolent approaches, and offensive strategies are favored over static defense. Furthermore, Johnston concludes that these views had a measurable effect on Chinese policies toward the Mongols during the Ming dynasty (1368-1644). A political scientist and student of Chinese foreign policy, Johnston does not approach his subject from a traditional sinological perspective. The conceptual framework for this study, along with its central question and a fair amount ofjargon , is provided by international-relations theory. In that context, the book is intended as a contribution to the debate between the dominant structural-realist school, which holds that a state's behavior is determined by ahistorical, structural factors such as relative capabilities and position in an anarchic multistate system, and the advocates of "strategic culture," who argue that deeply rooted cultural preferences exert a significant influence on strategic choice. Johnston's sympathies are with the cultural approach, but he is extremely critical of most of the existing literature for its lack ofmethodological rigor and its failure to offer a definition of "strategic culture" that can be tested empirically. On one level, then, this book is a more rigorous test for the existence and influence of strategic culture that happens to take Chinese culture as the object of study. y niversityJohnston begins by defining strategic culture in terms ofa "central paradigm " that offers answers to three related questions: die nature of conflict, the nature of the enemy, and the efficacy ofviolence. From this central paradigm there follows a preference ranking of the three most basic grand strategic options ofHawai'i Press Reviews 451 (offense, defense, and accommodation). The job is then to search for evidence of a central paradigm and preference ranking in selected "objects ofanalysis," in this case the Seven Military Classics (Wujing qi shu) (a set ofmilitary treatises mostly dating from the Warring States period tiiat were brought together as the basic curriculum for military examinations in the last quarter ofthe eleventh century), three Ming military treatises ofcomparable scope and content, and 120 Ming memorials on policy toward the Mongols (ofwhich sixteen are subjected to especially close scrutiny). Analysis of these texts centers on statements asserting or implying cause-effect relationships, especially those in which the result is the weakening of the enemy or the security ofthe state. Though the texts contain many contradictory signals, this method provides a convincing means of determining which message is primary and which secondary. Johnston finds enough congruence between the preference rankings of the Seven Military Classics, the Ming military treatises, and the Ming memorials to conclude that China does indeed have a strategic culture, and one with tremendous staying power over time. This strategic culture, which he labels "the parabellum paradigm," flows from a zero-sum view of conflict and favors violence over accommodation and offense over defense. This basic preference, however , is moderated by another lesson of the military texts, the concept of quan bian (or "absolute flexibility"), which holds that under unfavorable circumstances one must settle temporarily for a...

Anti-satellite (ASAT) weaponry and their associated controversies have transformed the militarization of space into a foundational component of global rivalries in the twenty-first century. This paper examines the ASAT systems and the space military doctrines and related policies of the United States, China, India, and Russia-perhaps the world's leading challengers in this arena. Using the international relations theory of realism and the empirical methodology focusing on documented ASAT tests, this research explains the complexity of the deterrence problem, the effects on space debris, and the collision of arms control with the ASAT tests and the development of potential ASAT technologies. This analysis argues that the space militarization process manifests an increasing threat to the global order and the environment of space. By analyzing the national doctrines as well as the global order in a multipolar condition, this research identifies the governance gaps and outlines a set of policies, including technical resilience, confidence-building, tailored arms control, and the preservation of legitimate security interests to reduce the risk of escalating threats, to construct governance models for the identified gaps.

Significance Using satellites to collect solar power in space and transmit it to earth to generate electricity overcomes a serious limitation of terrestrial renewable energy: its intermittency. As such, it could enable transition to a wholly renewable energy system. Impacts Design concepts vary, but generally envisage each satellite generating an amount of electricity on a par with a nuclear power plant. Placing critical national infrastructure in space would both hasten the militarisation of space and add urgency to arms control initiatives. Large-scale funding for SBSP would spur development of supporting technologies and spin-offs, including robotics and launch systems.

The space domain is witnessing unprecedented developments, characterized by technological breakthroughs, commercial innovation, and a diversifying array of participants. Amidst this renaissance, collaborative ventures to return humans to the Moon and potentially Mars coexist with renewed geopolitical competition—particularly from China and Russia—raising concerns about a new space race and the weaponization of space. Simultaneously, the growing number of stakeholders amplifies the peril of collisions with space debris, satellites, and other objects, underscoring the high stakes involved. This paper explores the application of traditional theories of international relations – realism, liberalism, and constructivism – to the evolving field of space policy. Scholars and practitioners seek a theoretical framework to unravel the complexities inherent in space studies, spanning science, politics, and economics. These theories serve as maps, offering order and meaning to a multifaceted space domain. Despite the nascent stage of efforts to formulate a unique theory of space power, the paper contends that established theories provide a foundation and shared language. The paper illustrates how international relations theories offer distinct perspectives to analyze space policy, illuminating concepts such as competition, cooperation, power, and norms of behavior.

Status of the issue. The development of the theory of strategic culture began more than seven decades ago. To date, the theory has evolved from the theoretical justification of the behavioral styles of elites representing institutions and security services, to the development of models for the use of national strategic cultures as an important tool for political struggle at the global and regional levels. It should be noted that Russian political science is significantly lagging behind foreign science in the theoretical understanding of the problem and in the development of effective models for countering the Anglo-Saxon strategic culture, which has an openly aggressive Russophobic content. Results. In the course of political analysis of the evolution of the theory of strategic culture, four stages of its development and their features were identified. At the first stage-the 40-60s of the XX century, the main content was the study of national styles in strategic planning in the field of national security, caused by a military clash during the World War II. Stereotyping of the initial grounds and a certain ethnocentrism as the main features of the stage, were subjected to reasonable criticism and stimulated the further development of theoretical provisions of the problem. At the second stage – the 70-90s of the XX century researchers developed a methodology for structural and functional analysis, institutionalism and modeling of competitive relations between regional actors. This was caused by the advent of the era of nuclear deterrence. The third stage of the wave of research on strategic culture is formed at the turn of the XX and XXI centuries. Theoretical and methodological research is carried out during this period in the framework of a critical rethinking of previous approaches and the formation of a trend towards neorealism. On the basis of comparative analysis, distinctions and justifications of different types of strategic culture and corresponding strategic thinking, as well as the behavior of actors, were identified. At the present stage of theory evolution, the main attention of researchers is focused on the dynamics of changing strategic culture under the influence of threats and risks of globalization and specific events, identifying competing narratives within countries themselves, searching for effective models for changing existing national strategic cultures in the interests of the dominant regional strategic cultures – Anglo-Saxon, European, Asian (Chinese). The effectiveness of applying the results of Western research programs in political practice is proved by the process of reformatting, for example, the Ukrainian strategic culture with an anti-Russian trend. Application. Political science – in order to continue the debate on strategic culture, the further development of the theory in the light of modern conditions of the clash of strategic cultures on a global level, and also political practice of compromise to minimize the challenges, risks and threats in international relations at the regional and global levels. Conclusions. Further development of the theory of strategic culture is actualized by the sharp aggravation of the confrontation between national and regional strategic cultures in different geopolitical strategic regions of the planet. This confrontation is caused by two main factors: the presence and strengthening of a number of national strategic cultures and the desire to dominate individual national and regional strategic cultures. In the context of using national strategic cultures as an important tool of political struggle, the development of models for interaction of strategic cultures based on compromise can help to minimize risks in international relations. The level of modern theoretical understanding of the problem does not correspond to the complexity of tasks to ensure national, regional and global security.

Tingyang Zhao, a Chinese philosopher, published two books last year which further develop his flagship concept of ‘Tianxia’. He has arguably brought Tianxia into the topical discussions of world order in the last few years. In A possible world, Zhao engages with the earlier criticism on his conceptualization of the Tianxia system and tries to provide a more robust explanation of what that system actually was. He also engages in a fascinating discussion on the relationship between the formation of China and the Tianxia system. He takes up this specific topic and develops it in The making and becoming of China. According to Zhao, under Tianxia all member states benefit more from participating in the system than from staying out, and interdependence and reciprocity exist among all, which ensures perpetual peace. He argues that the Tianxia order is more peace-driven than the West-dominated world order. Zhao has a very negative view of the current world order—an order of ‘inter-national’ politics. He proposes that its problems are caused by a political logic rooted in individuals’ interests and rationality, which originates in western religious monotheism. Zhao proposes a world system with a set of new rules that change the logic of competition (A possible world, p. 220). He thinks that ‘relational rationality’ could be used to construct a system where stable coexistence is possible and to reach the ideal goal of ‘Confucian improvement’—where all involved benefit (pp. 35–7). This way, the tensions created by globalization and a nation-state orientated world structure will be eased. However, it is very difficult to tell how ‘Confucian improvement’ differs from the foundational liberal argument about ‘absolute gains’ versus ‘relative gains’. Zhao criticizes International Relations (IR) theory for focusing on strategies only (A possible world, pp. 14–17) but this section seems to suggest that he is in fact conflating realism and strategic studies with IR theory, demonstrating his unfamiliarity with the discipline.

The rise of China is a defining event in world politics. International Relations (IR) scholars employ different IR theories to examine and predict the political, economic, strategic implications of the ascendency of China on the world stage. One school of thought-the strategic culture approach-deserves particular attention. Differing from traditional realist and liberal approaches, strategic culture theory crosses the disciplines of cultural studies, history, and strategic studies. Theoretically speaking, the strategic culture approach is rooted in social constructivism in IR, which argues that ideational factors, such as culture and identity, rather than material variablespower and interests-are “what make(s) the world hang together” (Ruggie 1998).

Subject Japan's military space programme. Significance Japan's national space systems, particularly when linked to those of the United States, make it one of the pre-eminent military space powers regionally, if not globally. Impacts Japan's militarisation of space indicates a determination to face down threats from North Korea and China. Augmentation of Japanese space power should enhance US deterrence against China. Japan's attempt to match China's space capabilities risks an arms race in yet another dimension.

This chapter examines the limitations and problems of strategic studies with respect to security challenges in the global South. It first considers the ethnocentrism that bedevils strategic studies and international relations before discussing mainstream strategic studies during the cold war. It then looks at whether strategic studies kept up with the changing pattern of conflict, where the main theatre is the non-Western world, with particular emphasis on the decline in armed conflicts after the end of the cold war, along with the problem of human security and how it has been impacted by technology. It also explores the issue of whether to take into account non-military threats in strategic studies and the debates over strategic culture and grand strategy in China and India. It concludes by proposing Global International Relations as a new approach to strategic studies that seeks to adapt to the strategic challenges and responses of non-Western countries.

This chapter examines the limitations and problems of strategic studies with respect to security challenges in the global South. It first considers the ethnocentrism that bedevils strategic studies and international relations before discussing mainstream strategic studies during the cold war. It then looks at whether strategic studies has kept up with the changing pattern of conflict, where the main theatre is the non-Western world, with particular emphasis on the decline in armed conflicts after the end of the cold war, along with the problem of human security and how it has been impacted by technology. The chapter also explores the issue of whether to take into account non-military threats in strategic studies and the debates over strategic culture and grand strategy in China and India. It concludes by proposing Global International Relations as a new approach to strategic studies that seeks to adapt to the strategic challenges and responses of non-Western countries.