"The serialization of books is definitely a problem"

“A World in Flux?” is the theme of the Forum Siegen public lecture series for the winter semester. Prof. Dr. Niels Werber (Modern German Literature) addressed the question, “What is geopolitics? And what is popular geopolitics?” Werber began his discussion by referring to Dr. Karl Haushofer, who served as an officer during World War I and later became a proponent of so-called geopolitics. Beginning in 1924, Haushofer was co-editor of the *Zeitschrift für Geopolitik* during the Weimar Republic. His ideas—such as a strategic axis linking the German Empire and Japan—were little known within the German Empire itself. In the United States, however, they were heavily publicized, particularly by Frederic Sondern (“Hitler’s Scientists”). According to reports, not least in the *New York Times*, over 1,000 scientists were said to be working out Hitler’s strategy at the Munich Institute for Geopolitics, a strategy intended to make the German Reich the world’s leading power. Sondern stoked fears in the Anglo-Saxon world of an alliance between Germany, Russia, and Japan. This narrative, according to Werber, did not change even after the Wehrmacht’s invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941. The war in Europe, Sondern predicted, was merely a prelude on the path to total world domination. Werber: “That was pure fantasy with a huge impact.” Many high-circulation media outlets, especially in the U.S., disseminated these theories. Werber: “That led to a complete misjudgment of reality.” There was neither an Institute for Geopolitics nor 1,000 scholars in its employ. The popularity with which Sondern’s narrative spread obscured, not least, the ideology of National Socialism and the role of Adolf Hitler.

With regard to the topic of “populism”—in the sense of “what attracts widespread attention”—Werber also cited the *Spiegel* bestseller *The Power of Geography: How World Politics Can Be Explained Using 10 Maps* by Tim Marshall. Werber: “World politics is reduced to a few truths, simplified, and illustrated with maps.” According to this view, Russian rulers since Ivan the Terrible have recognized that, based purely on geographical conditions, Russia has a need to expand, particularly toward the ice-free ports on the Black Sea. The 2014 occupation of Crimea was a logical conclusion. Such a perspective, which makes geography the linchpin of world politics, obscures the view of various other factors that lead to warlike or peaceful conditions and thus inevitably legitimizes any course of action—even those that violate international law.

Referring to Carlo Masala’s book *If Russia Wins*, the literary scholar noted that the book is written in novel form and is therefore an easy read. It centers on a dystopian scenario following Ukraine’s defeat, the regeneration of the Russian army, and its attack on the Estonian city of Narva.  This would lead to a conflict over the interpretation of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty: “An armed attack against one or more NATO member states in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.” According to Masala, this sparks a debate among NATO partners over the definition of an armed attack. This leads to a failure to “designate” such an attack—based on differing (primarily American) political interests—and ultimately to the collapse of the alliance. Werber: “It can be assumed that the author intends to convey the message through his book that Europe must equip itself for self-defense.”

Referring to Florence Gaub’s book *Scenario: The Future Is at Stake*, the speaker summarized: “Florence Gaub offers a network of possibilities.” Gaub demonstrates how decisions are made under conditions of uncertainty, complexity, and incomplete knowledge. Considering the publications mentioned and their strong public response, Werber assumes that their success is based primarily on the spectacular stories and less on expertise: “It’s about creating literary evidence. The format works.” He continued: “The serialization of books is indeed a problem.” This raises the question: “Isn’t something getting lost in the process?”