The Participation of Russian Geographers in the Military Activities of Their State: From the Past to the Present
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2025.02.048Keywords:
scientific geographical community, military factor in the development of science, totalitarian state, the evolution of science in Russia, metageographyAbstract
The Russian scientific geographical community has consistently supported its aggressive regime throughout the entire duration of the war against Ukraine. The war is redefining the perception of science and altering the representation of the scientific community. Putin’s Russia presents a recent illustration of this impact within the Russian scientific community. An in-depth examination of Russian geographical science during the era of Putinism holds substantial relevance beyond mere abstraction. In the case of Ukraine, a distinct practical context exists. The scientific geographical community in the Russian Federation has demonstrated a notable lack of effectiveness. The extensive body of Russian research concerning Ukraine has resulted in the development of a fundamentally incorrect image of the neighboring country. Russia’s aggression towards another state consistently presents a “rationale” that appears to be grounded in systematic analysis. The process of making decisions about wars in Russia is characterized by its duration and collective nature. The involvement of the scientific community is significant in this matter. The area of the prospective victim is thoroughly analyzed. For many decades, Russian geographers have consistently been ahead of the Russian army. An examination of the scientific geographical research conducted within the Russian state can provide useful information about the actions and strategies this state may employ concerning neighboring territories. The post-Soviet space does not have an integrated scientific geographical community that functions solely as a professional association. Russian geographers do not operate as colleagues; they consistently act in support of their aggressive state and engage in its military conflicts. The engagement of Russian geographers in the execution of assertive initiatives under Putin’s leadership aligns with anticipated trends. The Russian scientific geographical community exhibits a range of strengths and weaknesses. This serves as a focal point for Ukrainian experts in the fields of science about science and geographical science to conduct their research.
References
Nikolaenko, D. (1982). Introduction to the Metatheory of Metageography. Moscow: All-Russian Institute of Science and Technology Information of the Russian Academy of Sciences [in Russian].
Nikolaenko, D. (2002). Dynamics of Images of Science. Works (Vol. 5). Saint Petersburg: Amadeus [in Russian].
Pearson, C. (2008). Scarred Landscapes. War and Nature in Vichy France. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230228733
Lapno, M. et al. (Eds.). (1985). Soviet Geographers — Front and Rear (1941—1945). Issues of Geography, 128, 25—30 [in Russian].
Olson, K. (2024). The Secret Toxic Legacies of Chemical Warfare: Agent Blue Use during the 2nd Indochina and Vietnam Wars in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam (1961 to 1971). Open Journal of Soil Science, 14, 689—725. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2024.1411034
Olson, K. (2025). Historical Lesson: Environmental and Human Impacts of Cluster Bomb Use by the United States during the Second Indochina War. Open Journal of Soil Science, 15, 1—21. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2025.151001
Milutin, D.A. (1846). Critical Study of the Significance of Military Geography and Military Statistics. St. Petersburg: Military Printing House [in Russian].
Milutin, D.A. (1847). The First Experiments in Military Statistics (Vol. 1—2). St. Petersburg: Printing House of Military Educational Institutions, 1 [in Russian].
Milutin, D.A. (1848). The First Experiments in Military Statistics (Vol. 1—2). St. Petersburg: Printing House of Military Educational Institutions, 2 [in Russian].
Mallinson, W., & Ristic, Z. (2016). The Threat of Geopolitics to International Relations: Obsession with the Heartland. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Kolosov, V.A. (2012). Post-Soviet Borders: Specificity, Cross-Border Interactions, and Security. Geographical Position and Territorial Structures. In Memory of I. M. Maergoiz. Moscow: Novy Khronograf, 601—630 [in Russian].
Kolosov, V.A., Zotova, M.V., & Sebentsov, A.B. (2016). The Barrier Function of Russian Borders. Proceedings of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Series Geography, 5, 8—20 [in Russian]. https://doi.org/10.15356/0373-2444-2016-5-8-20
Kolosov, V.A. (2017). Phantom Boundaries as a Phenomenon in Political Geography. Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 5: Geography, 5, 3—11 [in Russian].
Generalplan Ost. Rechtliche, wirtschaftliche und räumliche Grundlagen des Ostaufbaus, Vorgelegt von SS-Oberführer Professor Dr. XX, Berlin-Dahlem, 28. Mai 1942.
Fernández de Betoño, U. (2020). The Nazi anti-urban utopia: “Generalplan Ost”. Mètode Revista de difusió de la investigació, 165—171. https://doi.org/10.7203/metode.10.13009
Barnes, T.J. (2015). “Desk Killers”: Walter Christaller, Central Place Theory, and the Nazis. In: Meusburger, P., Gregory D., & Suarsana, L. (Eds.). Geographies of knowledge and power, 187—201. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9960-7_9
Kay, A.J. (2006). Exploitation, resettlement, mass murder: Political and economic planning for German occupation policy in the Soviet Union, 1940—1941. New York: Berghahn. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt9qd88d
Rössler, M. (2016). Applied geography and area research in Nazi society: Central place theory and planning, 1933—1945. In: Giaccaria. P., & Minca, C. (Eds.). Hitler’s geographies: The spatialities of the Third Reich, 182—197. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226274560.003.0009
Baransky, N.N. (2001). My Life in Economic Geography. Moscow: Moscow State University [in Russian].
To Know Geography Excellently (1937). Geography in School, 5—7. Pravda, 250, September 10 [in Russian].
Emphasis on the Map as the Main Directive of the Central Committee of the VKP(b) for Teaching Geography (1934). Geography in School, 1, 10—18 [in Russian].
Abramov, L.S. (1997). On the Establishment of Research on Scientific Schools in Academic Geography. Proceedings of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Geographical Series, 6, 16—30 [in Russian].
Nikolaenko, D. (2002). N.N. Baransky and (Post) Soviet Economic Geography. St. Petersburg: Amadeus [in Russian].
Grigoryev, A.A. (1966). Patterns of Structure and Development of the Geographical Environment. Selected Theoretical Works. Moscow: Mysl [in Russian].
Grigoryev, A.A. (1970). Types of Geographic Environment. Selected Theoretical Works. Moscow: Mysl [in Russian].
(1951). On Some Theoretical Issues of Physical Geography (a brief report on the establishment of the Department of Physical Geography). Proceedings of the Russian Geographical Society, 5, 308—327 [in Russian].
(1948). Discussion on the State of Geographical Science. Bulletin of Moscow State University, 11, 194—199 [in Russian].
Gerasimov, I.P. (1976). Soviet Constructive Geography: Tasks, Approaches, Results. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
Saushkin, Yu.G. (1973). Economic Geography: History, Theory, Methods, Practice. Moscow: Mysl [in Russian].
Preobrazhensky, V.S. (1986). Search in Geography. Moscow: Prosveshchenie [in Russian].
Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vladimir Mikhailovich Kotlyakov. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
Bromley, Yu.V. (1978). Countries and Peoples. General Review. Moscow: Mysl [in Russian].
Cross-Border Cooperation between the Regions of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine (2013). Saint Petersburg: Edition of the Center for Integration Studies [in Russian].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Akademperiodyka of the NAS of Ukraine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
