What is critical geopolitics and how does it differ from traditional geopolitics?

• A. A field that analyzes how geopolitical knowledge is produced and used to justify power, rather than an objective map of geography; critiques traditional narratives.
• B. Maps are objective reflections of geography.
• C. A theory that focuses only on physical geography.
• D. The practice of ignoring geopolitics.

Answer: (A)

Critical geopolitics asks how geopolitical knowledge is produced and used to justify power, rather than treating maps as objective truths. It shows that what counts as geography—borders, threats, strategic spaces—are constructed through discourse, institutions, media, and policy, which shapes how people think and act. This differs from traditional geopolitics, which tends to treat geography as a neutral stage for state action and emphasizes strategic location and security narratives, with maps seen as straightforward representations of space. By examining who writes the maps, what assumptions are embedded, and how language creates categories like “threats” and “enemies,” critical geopolitics reveals how political aims drive geopolitical reasoning. For example, discussions around the so-called war on terror illustrate how geographic concepts are produced to justify interventions. The other choices don’t fit because they treat geography as purely objective, focus only on physical geography, or suggest ignoring geopolitics.