A New Geography of Power

The transformation of the conditions of human action puts at stake our freedom to determine its ends. As communications, artificial intelligence, and robotics converge, this question has become one of the major challenges of the civilizational transformation now under way.

Civilizations Facing a New World

As early as 1869, Nikolai Danilevsky challenged the notion of a universal civilization modeled on Europe’s development in Russia and Europe. He identified several historical and cultural types, each following its own path. Later, Pyotr Savitsky developed the concept of “mestorazvitie”, or “place-development,” linking territory, human communities, and historical development.

The Chinese tradition offers other conceptual resources. Tianxia, “all under Heaven,” historically situates political organization within an encompassing conception of world order. The concept is being reinterpreted today, notably by Zhao Tingyang.

These approaches remind us that powers are more than territorial entities pursuing material interests. They also carry historical memories, visions of political order, and distinctive understandings of their place in the world.

Contemporary China cannot be understood solely through its rivalry with the United States. Russia, Iran, and India likewise approach contemporary change through their own civilizational legacies.

Yet, these historically differentiated societies now operate within an increasingly integrated technological environment.

The unification of the material conditions of human action does not entail the uniformity of the ends that guide it.

Yet, a deeper contradiction emerges.

Technology vastly expands the range of possible actions. But as societies become dependent on increasingly complex systems, they may find their freedom to choose the ends of those actions constrained.

Humanity has ever more powerful means at its disposal. Does that mean it has greater control over its own future?

The Metamorphosis of Time

1.1 Communication Networks

From the telegraph to satellites and the internet, successive innovations have transformed the relationship between distance, information, and decision-making. Activities that once took weeks to coordinate can now be synchronized almost instantly.

This compression of time changes the very way power is organized.

A company spreads its production across several continents. A financial institution operates in multiple markets at once. A military force draws on information gathered thousands of kilometers from its theater of operations. Territory still matters, but a new space of relationships now overlays it.

This environment rests on material infrastructure: undersea cables, satellites, power grids, data centers, and computer systems. It has its concentrations, chokepoints, and vulnerabilities. The more readily actors can operate at a distance, the more they rely on networks whose workings they may not fully control. A communications outage, an energy disruption, or the disabling of infrastructure can now generate consequences far removed from their point of origin. Territorial sovereignty no longer guarantees control over the means indispensable to its exercise.

A geography of connections now complements the geography of territories. An actor’s power has become inseparable from the dependencies linking it to........

© New Eastern Outlook