One of the main tenets of geopolitics is the assertion that the geopolitical position of a state is much more important than the features of the political structure of this state. Politics, culture, ideology, the nature of the ruling elite and even religion are considered in geopolitical optics as important, but secondary factors compared with the fundamental geopolitical principle, the attitude of the state to space. Often (especially in Russia), such specifics of geopolitics as science are considered almost a "cynicism" or even an "anti-national" approach. This, of course, is completely untrue. Geopolitics simply does not pretend to be the only and highest authority in determining the state and political interests of a nation. Geopolitics is one of several basic disciplines that make it possible to adequately formulate the international and military doctrine of the state along with other equally important disciplines. As physics, in order to be an exact science, must abstract from chemistry and its laws (this does not mean that physics denies chemistry), so geopolitics, in order to be a strict discipline, must leave aside other, non-geopolitical approaches ,which can and should be taken into account in the final conclusions regarding the fate of the state and people along with geopolitics.
One of the most urgent geopolitical requirements of Russia is the "gathering of the Empire." No matter how we relate to “socialism”, the USSR, the Eastern bloc, the Warsaw Pact countries, etc., no matter how we evaluate the political and cultural reality of one of the two superpowers, from the geopolitical point of view, the existence of the Eastern bloc was clearly a positive factor for a possible Eurasian unification, for continental integration and the sovereignty of our Great Space. It was geopolitical logic that made Belgian theorist Jean Tiriar speak of the need to create a "Euro-Soviet empire from Vladivostok to Dublin." Only the Eastern bloc could become the basis for the unification of Eurasia into the Empire,although the division of Europe and the inconsistency of Soviet politics in Asia were serious obstacles to this goal. According to many modern geopolitics, the collapse of the USSR was largely due to its strategic vulnerability on the western and eastern borders of the United States controlled Rimland West and East so skillfully and consistently that, ultimately, they did not allow continental integration and contributed to the collapse of Eastern block. The end of the bipolar world is a strategic blow to Eurasia, a blow to continentalism and possible sovereignty of all Eurasian states.
The imperative of Russia's geopolitical and strategic sovereignty is not only to restore the lost regions of the “near abroad”, not only to renew allied relations with the countries of Eastern Europe, but also to include the states of the continental West (first of all, in the new Eurasian strategic bloc) , the Franco-German bloc, which gravitates towards the liberation from the Atlantic guardianship of pro-American NATO) and the continental East (Iran, India and Japan).
For Russia, the geopolitical “gathering of the Empire” is not only one of the possible ways of development, one of the possible relations of the state to space, but a guarantee and necessary condition for the existence of an independent state, and, moreover, an independent state on an independent continent .
If Russia does not immediately begin to recreate the Great Space, i.e. to return the temporarily lost Eurasian expanses to the sphere of its strategic, political and economic influence, it will plunge itself into a catastrophe and all the peoples living on the World Island.
The course of possible events is easy to foresee. If Russia chooses some other way than the "way of gathering the Empire," the new powers or blocs of states will begin to take on the Heartland continental mission. In this case, the vastness of Russia will be the main strategic goal for those forces that declare themselves the new "citadel of Eurasia." This is completely inevitable, since control over the continent is inconceivable without control over the space of the "geographical axis of History." Either China will take a desperate rush to the North to Kazakhstan and Eastern Siberia, or Central Europe will move to the Western Russian lands of Ukraine, Belarus, Western Great Russia, or the Islamic bloc will try to integrate Central Asia, the Volga region and the Urals, as well as some territories of Southern Russia. This new continental integration cannot be avoided,since the geopolitical map of the planet itself resists its unipolar, atlantist orientation. In geopolitics, the sacred law "a holy place does not exist is empty" is quite competent. Moreover, the expansion into Russian lands by other Eurasian blocs is prompted not by "territorial egoism" or "Russophobia", but by the implacable logic of space and Russia's geopolitical passivity. In the area of continental strategy, it is foolish to expect other nations to stop territorial expansion into Russian lands only out of respect for the "originality of Russian culture." In this area, there are only territorial power impulses and positional advantages. Even the fact of hesitation in the matter of the immediate "gathering of the Empire" is already a sufficient challenge, a sufficient basis forso that alternative geopolitical Large Spaces move into Russian borders. Naturally, this will provoke a reaction of the Russians and entail a terrible and unpromising intra-Eurasian conflict; unpromising because it will not even have a theoretically positive solution, since in order to create non-Russian Eurasia it is necessary to completely destroy the Russian people, and this is not only difficult, but actually impossible, as history shows. On the other hand, such a conflict will pave the front line between neighboring states of a continental and anti-Atlantic orientation, and this will only strengthen the position of a third force, i.e. USA and their colleagues on mondialist projects. Lack of action is also a kind of action, and behind the delay in the "gathering of the Empire"(not to mention the possible abandonment of Russia's geopolitical expansion) inevitably, great Eurasian blood will follow. The events in the Balkans provide a terrible example of what can happen in Russia on an incomparably more grandiose scale.
The reunification of Eurasian territories under the auspices of Russia as the “axis of History” is fraught with certain difficulties today, but they are insignificant in the face of the catastrophes that will inevitably come if this “gathering of the Empire” does not begin immediately.