Download Compass: The Geography and Economy of Mountain

Compass: The Geography and Economy of Mountain Regions
In Part 2 of a three-part interview, analyst Marko Papic discusses why mountain
chains historically have impeded economic development – as well as how some
states managed to overcome the challenges of their terrain. (Audio file, 4 minutes
58 seconds)
MARKO PAPIC:
The final way in which we look at mountains in terms of geopolitical significance
is commerce. Mountains, to put it bluntly, stifle commerce. Essentially there are
no navigable rivers within a mountain chain, almost by default.
A navigable river on a plain allows goods and often services to be transported at
very low costs. This means that within transactions, there is more capital left over
for investments, for development of the region, and this is why most capital
centers occur on rivers.
A mountainous region has to essentially plan to spend more money on things like
transportation, quite often because there are various ethnic groups and cultural
groups that exist within a mountain system and that simply use their advantage
of knowing the terrain and dominating a mere valley. You also often have to
account for defense and security of your cargo.
This is nowhere more clear than in the Balkans, where brigandry and banditry is
uh very well known and is actually praised in many of the countries of the region,
-- Greek, Serbian, Albanian.
Many of these brigands and bandits are often considered national heroes
because they opposed the dominant force in the region.
But what this all means is that countries that are dominated by mountains are
almost impossible to develop economically.
Exceptions to the Rule
Now there are exceptions -- and it should be noted that nothing in geopolitics is
completely determinate. So yes, mountains can be crossed, yes one can invade
another country via mountains. And yes, you can, you can attempt to
amalgamate a minority into a larger nation-state.
Similarly, you can certainly develop a mountainous country, but there are some
things that almost always have to be present. One is access to some sort of a
sea.
Two examples specifically are Japan and Greece. Japan and Greece are
extremely mountainous countries, to a point where transportation via road is
really not advantageous at all.
But because they are essentially surrounded by water, it is definitely possible to
develop an economy and develop commerce.
But what this also does to both countries is it creates almost a city-state type of
feel to how they actually run themselves. And this has throughout history of both
often impeded centralized control.
Now Japan has managed to overcome this, in part because of geopolitical
threats that surround it. It had to develop a centralized, firm control in order to
deal with the early 20th century geopolitical hotspot that was the Pacific. For
Greece, ti really has never been able to overcome its problems. Even when
Greece was a dominant power in ancient history, it really never managed to be
centralized. And certainly centralization never came from its coastal regions. It
came from Macedonia, which was the only part of Greece that actually had a
river valley that could produce food for itself.
Another example that’s quite often used to argue against the negative aspects of
mountains is Switzerland.
And it may be useful just to explain exactly how it is that mountains impact
Switzerland.
Case Study: Switzerland
Switzerland certainly is born of mountains. There wouldn’t be a Switzerland if
there wasn’t a St. Gotthard’s pass or if there weren’t numerous passes between
what essentially is northern Europe and southern Europe.
Various nascent Swiss tribes used their location in these passes to parlay an
advantage against far more powerful empires around them. And they essentially
managed to use the mountains that they controlled, which allowed for
communication between the Po valley and the Danube valley – an extremely
important connection in medieval Europe -- they managed to use this advantage
to create an independent state.
However, the commercial success of present-day Switzerland has nothing to do
with mountains. You could argue that it has something to do with mountains
because many wealthy people found the charms of Switzerland on their
vacations to the mountains and then decided to bring their capital to the region,
but really the industrial and commercial heartland of Switzerland is not in the
Alps. It is on the plains and on the hilly terrain, if you will, of Zurich, Basel,
Neufchatel and Geneva.
So modern Switzerland definitely pays homage to its history as a mountainous
nation, that’s where it was born, but its commercial success is not really bound to
the mountains themselves. In fact, Switzerland was so poor during Middle Ages
that its main export was essentially humans. Its young men found that the only
way they could provide for their families was to join various armies that fought
mainly on the Italian Peninsula.
And Machiavelli talked about it incessantly.