The Geopolitical Shell Game: Old Routes, New Labels, Same Agenda
FIRST INSTANCE: The Great Game, 1830s - 1907 The concept of controlling central Asian and Middle Eastern trade routes for geopolitical advantage is far from novel. The 'Great Game' of the 19th century saw the British Empire and Imperial Russia vie for dominance over Afghanistan and surrounding territories, explicitly to secure access to India and prevent rival expansion. The strategic importance
of overland routes connecting Europe, the Middle East, and Asia was then, as now, about projecting power and controlling resources. Britain's consistent efforts to secure the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea as strategic waterways during this period foreshadowed today's discussions. REPETITIONS: The Cold War and Beyond The pattern re-emerged with renewed vigor during the Cold War. The US, with its
'containment' strategy, actively sought to build military and economic alliances (such as SEATO and CENTO in the 1950s) surrounding the Soviet Union. While these specific alliances crumbled, the underlying strategic imperative to control transit points, energy supplies, and influence sovereign nations in key geographic areas persisted. The US naval presence in the Persian Gulf, cemented by
alliances with Saudi Arabia (1945) and other Gulf states, directly served this purpose, ensuring oil flows to Western markets and enabling rapid military deployment. The focus was less on 'trade deals' and more on military pacts, but the objective—control of resources and routes—remained constant. The 2003 invasion of Iraq, for instance, had immediate ramifications on global oil markets and