JERRY FENG writes about his thoughts on Sir Halford Mackinder’s 1904 “Heartland Theory” in connection with a Chinese proverb, Chinese culture, and rising geopolitical tensions between China and the US.

“天無二日，地無二主”

(tiān wú èr hǔ, dì wú èr zhǔ)

“There cannot be two suns in the heavens. There cannot be two lords upon the earth.” 

— Chinese Proverb

In his piece “Geopolitical Pivot of History” from 1904, Sir Halford Mackinder argued that whoever controlled the vast heartland of Europe and Asia (“Eurasia”) could thus pool its vast resources together and dominate the rest of the world. With growing tensions between the US and China, this Heartland Theory becomes ever more relevant. 

At first glance, the idea that a land-based empire could dominate the whole world might sound like a farfetched idea. After all, in 1904, the maritime empires of Britain and France looked like the real dominant powers of the world. Russia, though massive, only ever exerted influence around its borders. In the past, nomadic tribes conquered vast territories of land by using horses and camels. As technology improved, the mobility of water transportation then challenged animal-based forms of transportation, allowing maritime empires like Britain to rise in influence. In Mackinder’s time, railroads became the “new” horses and camels of the land empires that could provide enough mobility to challenge water-based forms of transportation. Eventually, this Eurasian empire’s mobilization would challenge the existing order of maritime empires and become the world hegemon.

Figure 1. Map showing the height of Mongol Empire Expansion, via World History Encyclopedia.

In our most recent memory, the last real “scare” to the status quo of the US-dominated world order was the Soviet Union and the Communist takeover of Mainland China, especially following the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, and Mutual Assistance in 1950. For the first time since the Mongol Empire 600 years ago, the Eurasian continent stretching from Central Europe to Far East Siberia and from the Arctic Ocean to the South China Sea, including the world’s biggest country and the world’s most populous country, seemed to be unified in the same world view. Both China and the USSR proclaimed to be Communist nations, and both wanted to challenge the United States’s dominant world position. 

Figure 2. Map showing list of Communist countries in 1950, via ATTAC Report. 

After the fall of the Soviet Union, however, we experienced a couple of decades of an undisputed unipolar world with the United States as the hegemon. Yet, just three decades after the fall, we are confronted with another serious challenge due to China’s rise as a power; and, China does not seem willing to continue living in the shadow of the US. Today, we will be looking at Mackinder’s theory in connection to 21st-century geopolitics and to a cryptic Chinese proverb: “天無二日，地無二主” (tiānwúèrhǔ, dìwúèrzhǔ), or “There cannot be two suns in the heavens. There cannot be two lords upon the earth.” 

Figure 3. Political cartoon about an increasingly confrontative US-China relationship, via South China Morning Post. 

Initially, many would be keen to draw similarities between this proverb and another idea known as the “Thucydides’s Trap,” which argues that a rising power is doomed to go to war with the incumbent power. An aspiring lord will inevitably come into conflict with the established lord of the earth. In the case of Sparta and Athens, that was true. In the case of Japan and the Qing Dynasty, that was also true. But, in the case of Great Britain and the United States, that ended up not being true, nor was it true for the Soviet Union and the United States. 

The same Chinese proverb exists in many other forms as well. For example, a common Chinese saying is “一山不容二虎” (yīshānbùróngèrhǔ), or “One mountain does not permit two tigers.” In the Book of Rites (禮記), a collection of texts that described ceremonial and administrative norms of the Zhou Dynasty during the Warring States period, there is a similar proverb but a different version of the second half. This version states, “天無二日，民無二王” (tiānwúèrhǔ, mínwúèrwáng), or “There cannot be two suns in the heavens. The people cannot have two kings.” 

Figure 4. Image of Luke Skywalker looking into the sky of Twin Suns on the planet of Tatooine, via Syfy. 

In each of the cases mentioned above concerning the Thucydides’s Trap, the situation always involved a rising power and an incumbent power, not about two powers who were already at equal standing. However, if we take a look at the historical example of Rome, we find a striking parallel to the idea of not being able to have two kings. In the 200s and 300s AD, Rome was divided into a ‘tetrarchy,’ or rule of four with two emperors and two junior rulers. The people could not have two emperors or rulers, neither could the rulers effectively share power, and one broke off to form the Eastern Roman Empire while the other became the Western equivalent. Rome’s example seems more fitting to this proverb as it started as one entity, and it became clear that two rulers could not concurrently govern this vast empire together, leading to its disintegration. The Western Empire fell soon after while the Eastern Empire lived on for another millennium. In this example, the people did not have two kings, and one ended up rising to be the sole king of the region. 

Figure 5. Map depicting the split of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires, via Byzantine Empire. 

The Chinese proverb in the prompt only states that there cannot be two objects of paramount importance at the same time in the same dimension — suns for the heavens and lords for the earth. Unlike Thucydides’s Trap, however, this proverb does not imply that there must be a relationship where one is rising while the other is falling. Perhaps this is the key to reconciling this seemingly cryptic proverb with 21st-century geopolitics: one lord is rising while the other is setting, and this cycle continues. In Rome, two kings could not co-rule. In the world, there were two Romes, except one set while the other rose. To understand this proverb, we must understand a little bit of Chinese culture, philosophy, and history. 

Chinese culture and philosophy are heavily influenced by ideas of nature and its continuous cycles of change. The very first written Chinese characters were based on images they saw from nature. The Chinese have a system of medicine that only uses herbal remedies to cure diseases. They believe that human activities should align with the changing of seasons. Many Chinese idioms, proverbs, and famous sayings also deal with observations of nature: such as the tiger in the mountain, for instance. Daoist teachings tell people to “順其自然” (shùnqízìrán), or “passively follow that of nature” as a way to adapt to changes rather than trying to make the conditions ideal to yourself. Another very famous saying “三十年河東，三十年河西” (sānshíniánhédōng, sānshíniánhéxī), or “30 years the river flows east; 30 years the river flows west” is a good example that connects to this topic of power, cycles, and change. The river’s changing flow is constant, but the changing flow will give rise to changing dynamics for those who live beside the river. One year, the British were the hegemon. Later, the Americans became the hegemon. In the future, will it be China?

Figure 6. Illustration showing the natural changes a river undergoes, via World Rivers. 

Figure 7 (top). Map of China during the Spring and Autumn Period, via Wikipedia.

Figure 8 (bottom left). Map of China during the Warring States Period, via ThoughtCo. 

Figure 9 (bottom right). Map of China during the Three Kingdoms Period, via Museo d’Arte Cinese. 

This oneness in Chinese history is reflected in their ideology of leadership as well. Throughout the changing of dynasties, every new ruler had to justify their rule by claiming the “Mandate of Heaven.” This idea permitted that only one ruler receive a special blessing from the heavens to rule “all under heaven,” or “天下” (tiānxià) — the entire realm where Chinese culture has permeated. Two people could not concurrently claim this mandate, hence why a centralized dynasty always replaced the three disunited periods mentioned above. The Emperor of these dynasties went by many names, but one name was “天子” (tiānzǐ), or “son of heaven.” Similar to the Romans, the Chinese could only have one king. The earth has one ruler. The mountain has one tiger.

In The Analects (論語), a collection of Confucius’s sayings compiled by his followers, Confucius talked about the role of a ruler in the very first verse of the chapter on governance. Confucius was an ancient Chinese thinker who influenced Chinese culture and thinking for millennia to come. He said, “為政以德，譬如北辰，居其所，而眾星共之,” or “When doing the work of governance, one must employ morality, just like the northern star, residing in its place while all surrounding stars revolve around it.” This specific verse vaguely resembles the Chinese proverb in the prompt about not having two suns or two rulers concurrently. Logically, revolving around something implies there can only be one center, and that is the one ruler or star. Regarding the idea of rigidity, Confucius has also said, “君君臣臣父父子子” (jūnjūn chénchén fùfù zǐzǐ), or “Let rulers be rulers, let ministers be ministers, let fathers be fathers, and let sons be sons.” We should faithfully play the role we were meant to play in life, and we should obey those in higher positions than us. This structure is a rigidity that people are expected to abide by. In another interpretation, maybe the rising powers should play their role as number two and respect the authority of the incumbent power.

Figure 10. Old painting of Confucius, via National Geographic.

Having provided some context of Chinese history, culture, and philosophy, we can now start discussing how this relates to 21st-century history. By far, the question everyone is asking today is whether or not China and the United States will go to war. China is indisputably the rising sun while the US is the incumbent (potentially setting) sun. Let us consider a few flashpoints that could lead to war: China’s growing economic power, China’s increasingly aggressive behaviors on the world stage, and a potential China-Russia axis. 

Economically, China has consistently outgrown the US every year since its reform and opening period in the early 1980s. China has well-averaged its growth rates hovering around 9 – 10% between 1980 and 2010 despite slowing down to around 7% after. By total value, China has also begun closing the gap between itself and the US but suffered a little setback in the past couple of years. China has been able to overtake the US as the biggest trading partner of most countries around the world. This massive growth in wealth has allowed it to take initiative on big projects such as its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), investing trillions of dollars in infrastructural projects across the world. Regardless of the real intentions of the BRI, China gained access to strategic ports, leverage over countries that could not pay back their debts, and a period of political clout. But, China’s recent economic slowdown should serve as relief for Americans who will remain the world’s economic leader (at least in nominal terms) for some years longer. There will be some time before there are two economic lords on the earth, though one has certainly flown close to the sun. It is unlikely that a war will be fought simply over one nation’s GDP overtaking that of the incumbent GDP powerhouse.

Figure 11. Map showing each country’s biggest trading part between China and the US in the years 1980 and 2018, via howmuch.

China’s increasingly aggressive behavior is also a concern for some people. In the South China Sea, China’s famous “nine-dash line” has created lots of controversy with neighboring nations in Southeast Asia and frightened other nearby countries such as Australia, South Korea, and Japan. Decades ago, Chinese President Deng Xiaoping said, “韜光養晦” (tāoguāngyǎnghuì), or “Hide your strength, bide your time.” China’s recent behavior is, however, indicative of China now ready to show off its strength not just to signal its arrival as a dominant power, but also to test the United States’s red lines. Similarly, since the Chinese Communist Party’s takeover — or liberation — of the Mainland in 1949, Taiwan has been a crucial part of China’s nationalist agenda and foreign policy. Various Taiwan Straits crises in the 1950s, the 1990s, and the early 2020s have shown that China’s policy over time has been largely consistent: China will not easily give up claims to the island. China’s regular intrusion of Taiwan’s airspace and greater frequency of naval and air exercises around Taiwan in the early 2020s prove their resolve. 

Figure 12 (left). Map showing areas of Chinese military drills, via BBC News. 

Figure 13 (right). Map showing frequencies of Chinese intrusion into Taiwanese airspace, via The Economist. 

Chinese leaders are also clearly aware of the Taiwanese youth increasingly identifying solely as “Taiwanese” rather than “Chinese” or “Both Taiwanese and Chinese.” Chairman Mao once said that he would give China 100 years to reunify Taiwan. With developments going against the desires of the Chinese leaders, China is running out of time to retake Taiwan in a way that could still somewhat be justified from the perspective that Taiwanese and Chinese people are one people. If any conflict were to spark between China and the US, it would certainly be over the status of Taiwan. One accidental spark and the powder keg explodes. 

Figure 14. Graph showing trends in how Taiwanese people identify over the last 30 years, via BBC News. 

The budding China-Russia axis in recent years probably most relates to Mackinder’s theory and our cryptic Chinese proverb. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 just after the Beijing Winter Olympics, and everyone wondered whether Taiwan was next. Even more, Russia and China signed an agreement just before the invasion stating their friendship was one with “no limits.” For historians, this development looked like a repeat of the Golden Age of Sino-Soviet relations in the early 1950s. Back then, this Eurasian alliance did plan policy together and coordinated efforts in crises such as the Korean War and the Hungarian Crisis. For some time, it seemed like the Soviet Union and China would become a strong force to displace the US. However, we have seen through history that this alliance fractured to a point where both countries became embittered enemies, nearly going to full-on war amongst themselves. 

One explanation for this unique phenomenon in connection to our proverb is that the world of Communism is its own heaven. China and the USSR were two suns in this specific domain, and both were fighting to be the single sun in the sky. For the United States, it was always about the entire world, not just the world of Communism. The US was one lord, and the Soviet-Chinese axis was the other aspiring lord. In both of these cases — and luckily for everyone — all parties decided that avoiding a destructive war was more important than each of their places in the sun. 

Mackinder was certainly right that a Eurasian country, or alliance of Eurasian nations that could coordinate and pool its resources together, could dominate the world. The Soviet-Chinese alliance, had it lasted longer and made the right decisions, very likely could have displaced the US. But, the biggest challenge was figuring out a way to unite these Eurasian states together into one cohesive entity. For the Soviets and Chinese, Communist ideology was just a façade to help mask their differences in strategy, priority, and decision-making. For the Russians and Chinese today, anti-American hegemony will also just serve as a rallying cry to mask their differences in other strategic interests. This Eurasian axis between China and Russia lacks substance to integrate them further and will thus fail to meet Mackinder’s worries of a truly united effort to dominate the rest of the world. 

Perhaps the solution is rather the need to come to reality and acknowledge the changing trends of history. Another well-known Chinese concept of Yin and Yang (阴阳), tells us there is no ultimate good or bad and that we should strive to achieve a balance in life. There is no strict boundary between light and dark: they are dynamic, and they are interdependent upon each other. In the dark, there is always a bit of light, and the reverse is true for some dark in the light. The goal, instead, is not to achieve total victory but to pursue a structure that works — even with its imperfections. In its unipolar era, the United States wholeheartedly believed that the universe was on its side in spreading democracy across the world. Yet, America’s attempts in Iraq and Afghanistan just proved how much the US overextended itself — and probably manufactured a break to the natural balance and harmony of the world. 

Figure 15. Simple depiction and explanation of Yin and Yang, via Yoga Medicine.

Great Britain realized its time as world hegemon was over and reluctantly handed over its lordship to the United States. While seemingly a fully dark result, the bit of light in the darkness allowed Great Britain to enjoy the security of being a close ally of the United States from then until now. The Soviet Union forcefully tried to keep pace with the US but could not keep up; eventually, they collapsed due to domestic and international factors. Gorbachev realized that the USSR was overstretched and tried to salvage the Union, but it was too late. When the Soviet Union existed, there was a Yin and Yang, but its fall meant the destruction of the balance and gave rise to another replacement: China. The United States worries about losing ground to China, but a calculated retreat might be the wiser decision. Similarly for China, perhaps the time is not yet ripe to fully challenge the US on all fronts like the Soviets did prior. 

The ancient Greek myth of Daedalus and his son Icarus teaches us a lot about hubris. Both father and son attempted to escape prison with wax wings. The US and the USSR both wished to avoid a self-destructive war. Icarus disregarded warnings from his father to not fly too close to the sun for fear of the wings melting, and Icarus ended up falling to his death. The USSR overstretched itself and ended up collapsing. Icarus wanted to be in the sky with the sun, but the sun needed to set for him to take its place. He moved too quickly, and the nature of the wax wings’ properties took control. The USSR needed to realize their limits and play with the cards they were dealt with rather than playing with the cards they wished they had. 

The Chinese knew deeply about balance, harmony, and the cycles of nature. Learning from the Soviets, the Chinese should know how to rise gracefully, which does not lead to war or mass self-destruction. According to Yin and Yang, one’s rise does not necessitate another’s demise. There can be two tigers on the mountain, but each just needs to occupy a different part of the mountain. There can certainly be two suns in the sky, but both need to accept the cycle that one always sets and another rises. There can be two lords on the earth, but each must understand their role concerning one another. Adapt, change, and align with the natural forces. The question we should be asking is not whether there can be two lords upon the earth. Rather, we should be asking how we can acknowledge the trends of history and rise peacefully while falling gracefully. 

Jerry Feng is an undergraduate student at Yale College studying History and Global Affairs. Jerry can be reached at jerry.feng@yale.edu.