This paper by Carsten Nickel argues that apparent volatility in United States foreign policy masks a persistent west–east (latitudinal) geostrategy that continues to structure American power, limiting the scope for real strategic disruption under Trump’s second term.
Abstract
As analysts and policymakers around the world struggle to make sense of a seemingly erratic United States (US) administration, this paper introduces the concept of latitudinal geostrategy. Moving beyond less succinct notions, it defines geopolitics as the territorial patterns (geo-) of interactions with allies and adversaries (-politics). It argues that US projections of power and influence have traditionally followed a geographical west-to-east arc linking North America to Eurasia. This history has shaped the structure of political and economic exchanges with friends, as well as rivalries, thereby limiting the effects of disruption during the first nine months of President Trump’s second term.
This paper traces the intellectual evolution of latitudinalism through the writings of major US geostrategists from Mahan to Brzezinski, highlighting how their ideas shaped in historical US discourses and interactions in the Middle East, Europe, and East Asia, in turn complicating major deviations today. It juxtaposes this pattern with the alternative of longitudinal geopolitics, as unsuccessfully advanced by German, French, and Russian strategists during the twentieth century, and as echoed in Trump’s National Security Strategy and the intervention in Venezuela. This comparison underscores the persistence of US latitudinal reach, with implications for both policymaking and its analysis.
Read the blog: The world according to Washington’s map
