Publication | Closed Access
The New Geography of Conflict
154
Citations
0
References
2001
Year
Historical GeographyEast Asian StudiesInternational ConflictSocial SciencesGeopolitical ConflictNew GeographyDiplomacyU.s. ForcesLanguage StudiesGeopoliticsInternational RelationsGeographyU.s. Military GeographyEast Asian LanguagesCentral AsiaPolitical ConflictConflict StudiesPolitical GeographyMilitary HistoryIndo-pacific Literatures
In 1999 the U.S. Department of Defense transferred command of forces in Central Asia from Pacific Command to Central Command, reflecting a shift from viewing the region as peripheral to recognizing its strategic value due to vast oil and gas reserves. Central Command, already responsible for U.S.
In October 1999, in a rare alteration of U.S. military geography, the Department of Defense reassigned senior command authority over American forces in Central Asia from the Pacific Command to the Central Command. This decision produced no headlines or other signs of interest in the United States but nevertheless represented a significant shift in American strategic thinking. Central Asia had once been viewed as a peripheral concern, a remote edge of the Pacific Command's main areas of responsibility (Chinajapan, and the Korean Peninsula). But the region, which stretches from the Ural Mountains to China's western border, has now become a major strategic prize, because of the vast reserves of oil and natural gas thought to lie under and around the Caspian Sea. Since the Central Command already controls the U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf region, its assumption of control over Central Asia means that this area will now receive