Contemporary conflicts are increasingly geopolitical – orchestrated across multiple nations and domains, manifesting in many ways, from conventional ground engagements to strategic influence operations. 

For decades, international relations scholars have disregarded geography as irrelevant, reasoning that globalism had eliminated the need to consider it Yet, mountains, deserts, seas, gulfs and straits create chokepoints where belligerents (states and otherwise) can disrupt global trade and the world’s economy.

In the 21st century, long-term geopolitical power dynamics will hinge on controlling trade corridors.

Donald Trump’s rhetoric at least appears to suggest that he understands this. He continues to “double down” in his pursuit of a strategic initiative towards Greenland as a vital security interest for America – the importance of an emerging Arctic Ocean trade route. Likewise, his fixation on the Panama Canal underscores America’s strategic need to control key maritime chokepoints. And his Middle East initiative tracks the same logic: securing trade corridors that bypass rivals like Iran, Russia and China.

That’s why the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC-view image) should become central to American and European foreign policy. The IMEC is a planned economic corridor that aims to bolster economic development by fostering connectivity and economic integration between Asia, the Persian Gulf and Europe. The corridor is a proposed route from India to Europe through the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Greece.

The U.S. and the EU have also proposed plans to establish a

© Eurasia Review