The language of global politics increasingly relies on two sweeping labels: a “Collective West” that supposedly acts as a unified strategic actor, and a “Global South” that is presumed to share common interests and alignments. Both terms remain useful as political shorthand and as instruments of bargaining. But as analytical lenses, they now conceal more than they reveal.
This essay argues that contemporary ordering is better explained as interaction among geostrategic realms—structurally coherent spatial systems shaped by geography, trade and energy corridors, technology standards, and modes of power projection—than as bloc competition between two camps. Drawing on Saul B. Cohen’s realm concept and the rational-choice logic of selectorate theory (Bueno de Mesquita et al. 2003; Cohen 2015), the essay shows how leaders’ incentives for political survival filter external choices, producing selective cooperation and transactional bargains rather than durable ideological cohesion.
A realm-based map—Maritime, East Asian, Eurasian Continental, and South Asian—captures the main constraints and opportunities that organize alignment and contestation in 2025. The conclusion assesses Europe’s narrowing strategic corridor as U.S. leadership becomes more conditional and as intra-European preferences diverge.
Full article: https://www.geopolitic.ro/2026/01/realms-of-survival/