"Geostrategy, a subfield of geopolitics, is a type of foreign policy guided principally by geographical factors as they inform, constrain, or affect political and military planning. As with all strategies, geostrategy is concerned with matching means to ends—in this case, a country's resources (whether they are limited or extensive) with its geopolitical objectives (which can be local, regional, or global). According to Gray and Sloan, geography is "the mother of strategy." Geostrategists, as distinct from geopoliticians, advocate proactive strategies, and approach geopolitics from a nationalist point-of-view. As with all political theories, geostrategies are relevant principally to the context in which they were devised: the nationality of the strategist, the strength of his or her country's resources, the scope of their country's goals, the political geography of the time period, and the technological factors that affect military, political, economic, and cultural engagement." (Wikipedia)
.
Isn't it remarkable indeed that GEOSTRATEGY, a word so important and so frequently cited (Google returns: 100,000) cannot be found in a high-esteemed encyclopedia such as the most famous and most praised one of them all - the Britannica? Things omitted can indeed matter more than things considered. Thus is the case with the Britannica that, to make things even weirder, does report on strategy - from the battlefield to the national level - but stops short of reporting on geostrategy as the "strategy of all strategies". It's with this thought in mind that I write this blog. My goal is to expose those geostrategies that are the culprit behind the millennial suffering of the Bosnian people.
.
I started one month ago today, with a curious case of the "Bosnian pyramids" and the surprising involvement of Russia's geostrategist Khavroshkin [See my other blog http://omerbashich.blogspot.com/] Unfortunately, as it turned out by now, not only that the case isn't about archaeology at all, but it isn't about the corruption of Bosnian officials either; the two (too obvious) views held mostly by people who possess admirable education, but in a field unrelated to geostrategy.
.
