Understanding the essence of the “Great Game” by classics of the Russian school of geopolitics (Ending)

Th is article is devoted to understanding the essence of Th e Great Game — the policy of containing the development of Russia by Anglo-Saxon elites and powers, dating back more than two centuries, by the classics of the Russian school of geopolitics. Th e author of the article considers the geopolitical concepts of the founders of the civilizational approach and civilizational geopolitics — N.Ya. Danilevsky, K.N. Leontyev, representatives of pan-Slavism (R.A. Fadeev, I.I. Dusinsky), military-strategic direction (D.A. Milyutina, A.E. Vandama, A.E. Snesareva), Eurasia (P.E. N. Savitsky), Y.S. Kartsova, V.P. Semenova-Tyan-Shansky, P.N. Durnovo.
Th e author emphasizes that the development of Russian geopolitical thought took place in the absence of a political order from the state, as well as political and economic elites to develop a geopolitical strategy for the development of Russia and the implementation of its foreign policy. Unfortunately, the author states, many ideas of the classics of the Russian school of geopolitics (in particular, in their understanding of the essence, content and dynamics of the Great Game) turned out to be unclaimed by the ruling circles and governments, among which there were many people, Anglophile orientation, promoting the ideas of allied relations with England, to the detriment of the national interests of Russia.
At the same time, the author of the article notes, the understanding of the essence and features of the development of the events of the “Great Game” by representatives of the Russian school of geopolitics was largely carried out fragmentally, oft en in the aspect of analyzing the centuries-old civilizational confrontation between Russia and the Romano-German cultural and historical type (Western European great culture, civilization), and not purely continentalist concepts.
Authors who comprehend the essence and signifi cant events of the “Great Game” in their works include: representatives of Pan-Slavism — N.Ya. Danilevsky, I.I. Dusinsky, R.A. Fadeeva; representatives of the military-strategic direction — A.E. Snesarev and A.E. Vandam; Y.S. Kartsov and P.N. Durnovo. Th e rest of the classics of the Rus sian school of geopolitics addressed this issue selectively, within the framework of other topics of interest to them

1. Elishev S.O. O sushchnosti “sovremennyh revolyucij” i gosudarstvennyh perevorotov [On the essence of “modern revolutions” and coups d’etat]. M., 2017 (in Russian).

2. Elishev S.O. Politika. Bazovye ponyatiya [Politics. Basic concepts]. M., 2018 (in Russian).

3. Karcov Yu.S. V chem zaklyuchayutsya vneshnie zadachi Rossii [What are Russia’s external tasks] // Svet i teni Ve-likoj vojny. Pervaya mirovaya v dokumentah epohi. M., 2014 (in Russian).

4. Savickij P.N. Izbrannoe [Selected]. M., 2010 (in Russian).

5. Semyonov-Tyan-Shanskij V.P. O mogushchestvennom territorial’nom vladenii primenitel’no k Rossii: ocherk po politicheskoj geografi i [On powerful territorial possession in relation to Russia: an essay on political geography] // Rozhdenie nacii. M., 1996 (in Russian).

6. Semyonov-Tyan-Shanskij V.P. Rajon i strana [Region and country] // Geopolitika: Hrestomatiya / Sost. B.A. Isaev. SPb., 2007 (in Russian).