Nuno Morgado’s concept of neoclassical geopolitics

Nuno Morgado’s concept of neoclassical geopolitics offers a comprehensive model that integrates both systemic factors and individual agency to explain geopolitical dynamics. This model, by emphasizing the perceptions and capacities of geopolitical agents, challenges traditional structural approaches that rely solely on international imperatives and geographic determinism. In this analysis, we will expand on Morgado’s framework, particularly focusing on how geopolitical agents, such as state elites, shape policy outcomes based on their perceptions and ideological orientation (See Morgado 2019, 2020, 2023).

The Role of Geopolitical Agents in Shaping Foreign Policy

Morgado emphasizes that geopolitical outcomes are not solely dictated by geographic constraints or international power dynamics. Instead, they are heavily influenced by the perceptions, preferences, and capacities of geopolitical agents—the state elites who manage foreign policy. This highlights the agency-structure debate central to neoclassical geopolitics, where individual leaders' perceptions of space (Raumsinn) and strategic realities shape the policy responses to external stimuli.

In this model, the effectiveness of foreign policy depends not only on material capabilities, such as military strength or economic resources, but also on the subjective interpretation of those capabilities by decision-makers. For instance, the success of a country like Brazil in projecting regional power in South America may be as much a result of its leadership's perception of its geopolitical environment as its tangible resources. Morgado's concept of geomisguidance is critical here—it describes scenarios where geopolitical agents fail to recognize or properly respond to geographic incentives. When elites misinterpret or overlook these systemic stimuli, their geopolitical strategies may falter.

Ideological Orientation and Geopolitical Agency

A core tenet of Morgado’s theory is the importance of ideology in shaping geopolitical perceptions. Geopolitical agents interpret systemic stimuli through the lens of their ideological orientation, which affects their ability to mobilize national resources and their strategic priorities. For example, leaders with statist ideologies are more likely to prioritize national sovereignty and power consolidation, while those leaning towards globalism may emphasize multilateralism and cooperation.

Morgado’s framework is particularly relevant in the current geopolitical landscape, where many state elites increasingly support global governance structures to address complex global challenges, such as climate change and economic instability. This shift in preference is especially significant when analyzing the foreign policies of states like Brazil, which oscillates between regional leadership and alignment with global powers.

In the context of Brazil, Morgado’s analysis of Meridionalism offers a clear example of how geopolitical agents’ ideological leanings shape their foreign policy direction. As Morgado outlines in his study of Brazil's geopolitical positioning, Meridionalism can be seen as a counterweight to Western hegemony, particularly the influence of the U.S. Morgado argues that this ideological framework seeks to align Brazil more closely with neo-Eurasianism and Russia's strategic interests, indicating the potential subordination of Brazil’s geopolitical autonomy to broader Eurasian goals.

The Interaction Between Systemic Stimuli and Geopolitical Agency

Morgado’s theory asserts that systemic stimuli, such as geographical location or global power distribution, create opportunities and constraints for states. However, these factors alone do not determine outcomes. Instead, it is the geopolitical agent's ability to perceive and respond to these stimuli that defines the state's foreign policy trajectory. For instance, the United States, with its strategic maritime advantages, has consistently maintained naval superiority. However, this superiority is not just a product of its geography, but also the strategic vision of its elites to prioritize maritime power.

In contrast, Russia’s geographic challenges, such as its need for strategic depth and access to warm-water ports, have historically shaped its foreign policy. Yet, Morgado points out that the way Russian leaders, particularly under Putin, interpret these geographic constraints through a nationalist and Eurasianist lens has been key to shaping its aggressive foreign policy. Similarly, China's Belt and Road Initiative reflects not just the geographical ambition to connect Eurasia, but also the Chinese leadership’s perception of how such connectivity will bolster China’s global influence.

Operationalizing Neoclassical Geopolitics

Morgado provides a methodological approach for applying neoclassical geopolitics to real-world analysis. He outlines the steps necessary to evaluate how systemic stimuli interact with geopolitical agents' perceptions. This involves examining several variables, such as:

Consciousness Horizon: This concept, borrowed from Morgado’s work, refers to the extent to which geopolitical agents are aware of the geographical realities influencing their policy decisions. A limited consciousness horizon can result in flawed decision-making, as seen in cases where geopolitical agents fail to grasp the significance of geographic opportunities or threats.

Coherence of Ideology: The consistency between a geopolitical agent’s discourse and their ideological stance is crucial for effective foreign policy. Morgado suggests that leaders who firmly believe in statist or nationalist ideologies are more likely to extract the necessary resources and make strategic decisions that align with their state's long-term interests.

Network of Relations: The alliances and diplomatic engagements that geopolitical agents cultivate also play a significant role. Morgado points out that geopolitical agents often shape their perceptions through consultations with key stakeholders, including business elites, military leaders, and international organizations. These networks influence how they assess systemic stimuli and define their strategic priorities.

Strategic Capacity: Finally, Morgado highlights the importance of geopolitical agents' capacities in managing the resources available to them. A strong state with well-organized institutions and a capable leadership can effectively mobilize resources to pursue its foreign policy objectives. However, weak leadership or mismanagement can lead to strategic failure, even if the state has significant material resources.

Conclusion

Nuno Morgado’s neoclassical geopolitics offers a sophisticated framework for understanding the dynamic interplay between geographic constraints and the agency of state elites. By emphasizing the role of perception and ideology, Morgado moves beyond traditional structural approaches to geopolitics, providing a model that accounts for the subjective and strategic choices of geopolitical agents.

In analyzing states like Brazil, Morgado’s insights into how geopolitical agents interpret systemic stimuli, manage resources, and align their strategies with ideological commitments are particularly valuable. His concept of geomisguidance serves as a warning for policymakers who fail to recognize the geographical realities underpinning their decisions. As global competition intensifies, the ability of state elites to accurately perceive and respond to these stimuli will be a defining factor in the success of their geopolitical strategies.

References:

Morgado, N. (2019). Does the agent matter? The Geopolitical Agent in Neoclassical Geopolitics. SWS Journal of Social Sciences and Art, 1(2), 96-108.

Morgado, N. (2020). Neoclassical geopolitics: Preliminary theoretical principles and methodological guidelines. Ме?ународни проблеми, 72(1), 129-157.

Morgado, N. (2023). Modelling neoclassical geopolitics. European Journal of Geography, 14(4), 13-21.