Skip to main content

Tim Marshall - Five Way Interview

Tim Marshall is a leading authority on foreign affairs with more than 30 years of reporting experience. He was diplomatic editor at Sky News, and before that was working for the BBC and LBC/IRN radio. He has reported from 40 countries and covered conflicts in Croatia, Bosnia, Macedonia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Israel. He is the author of the No. 1 Sunday Times bestsellers Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps that Tell You Everything You Need to Know About Global Politics (which has sold over 2 million copies worldwide) and The Power of Geography: Ten Maps that Reveal the Future of Our World. His latest book is The Future of Geography.

Why geography?  

After World War 2 the ‘geo’ in geopolitics fell out of fashion, but as a foreign correspondent, I always made sure to explain not just what was going on, but why it was going on – and I found that so often where it was going on played a big part. Geography often remains an overlooked factor in reporting on international affairs despite being one – I emphasize one – of the determining factors in what's happening. It’s important to remember that geography doesn’t just cover the topography of a place, but encompasses things such as demographics, economics, and technology, all of which can be key issues in global events.

Why this book? 

The blindingly obvious finally became apparent to me. I'd been covering international relations for thirty years, and then I noticed that so much of it was increasingly happening in space. The more I looked at it the more I realised that the technological advances allowing the new space race were converging with the economic and military imperatives driving Space 2.0. What was taking place in space was reflective of our conflicts and alliances on Earth – and ultimately what happens up there is going to have a fundamental impact on us down here. So I believe it’s becoming more and more important that people are made aware of how this is all going to affect them.

Do you hold out any hope for things not going horribly wrong (in an astropolitical sense) in space?  

Yes! It’s true that humans have a history of using new inventions for terrible acts. The printing press fuelled the witch-hunting craze by enabling the mass circulation of negative propaganda about them, contributing to many deaths. Planes were used to bomb cities. The internet led to social media… So while there are many accelerating negative effects that will be caused by competition in space, including militarisation, there are many positive opportunities that will arise, including potentially helping us to reverse climate change. There is an arms race in space, there will be 'incidents' but we will also reach a stage where the great powers realise they need new treaties to govern everyone’s activities and mitigate the risks, just as they did after a few years of the nuclear arms race. 

What’s next?  

Support the paperback version of The Future of Geography in the near future . . . I do have two possible new two projects in mind, so watch this space. 

What’s exciting you at the moment?  

The attacking formation of Leeds United FC! But in the realm of space, there are constant new developments that are worth getting excited about. The recent race to see whether Russia or India would be the next to land a craft on the moon was an interesting one, with all sorts of implications for international relations on Earth. The fact that Russia failed and India did not speaks volumes about their roles in the future of space exploration. The Caltech team that managed to wirelessly transfer energy from a solar panel in space down to earth is a significant breakthrough. These are events that have the potential to have huge ramifications for the future of humanity. 


 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...
Post a Comment
Read more

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...
Post a Comment
Read more

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more