Most scholars and experts in geopolitics are relatively consensual about the idea that geopolitics disregards the role of individual decision-makers. The main argument of this paper challenges this view, contending that the behavior of the state is understood as nothing but a result of flesh and blood decision-makers’ choices.
Starting from the neoclassical realist theory, the pivotal aspect of the paper is to demonstrate that neoclassical realism can offer a more profound contribution to sharpening geopolitical studies than other streams of the realist theoretical school. This contribution is given by the inclusion of intervening variables centered on decision-makers – or geopolitical agents – in geopolitical reasoning. In other words, it is claimed that the exam of geopolitical agents’ perceptions and capacities often provides valuable input to the explanation of political outcomes (i.e. choices of decision-makers) as a study object of geopolitical studies.
This paper offers, moreover, methodological steps on how to assess geopolitical agents’ perceptions, namely by identifying geomisguidance in their perception of the geographical setting.
Although a healthy skepticism about any grand theory should be conserved in international relations studies – and therefore this paper does not aim at presenting any – an analytical model of foreign policy can be constructed and applied to unpack state’s foreign policy outcomes on a case-to-case basis, and from their interaction, coming to a better understanding of the international system.