Halford John Mackinder was a British geographer who hypothesized in his 1904″ tractate”. The Geographical Axis of History that whoever holds control over the Eurasian heartland, which stretches through the Volga up the Yangtze and the mountains of the Himalayas through the Arctic, will also have sway over the rest of the world. Mackinder’s idea is usually seen as obsolete in the era of contemporary warfare. He solely considered world history in terms of battle among both maritime and terrestrial powers when he first put forward his theory, arguing that countries with sizable ships had a leg up over those unable to successfully cross the oceans. Of course, the deployment of aeroplanes in the contemporary period has significantly altered the capacity to control areas and offer defence capabilities. Halford extended his geopolitical thesis to be applied to involve the entire world. Any territorial power which controlled the world would control more than 50% of humanity’s resources. The Heartland’s size and strategic position enabled it the key to having control of the world island. Nicolas Spyman quickly responded with the claim that whoever held control over the Eurasian periphery would also have power over its interior and the rest of the world. These views had a significant impact on Adolf Hitler’s judgment to launch the Eastern Europe Front against the communist bloc and the Cold War struggle for possession of the Central and Eastern Front. NATO expanded eastward after the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 as the United States of America consolidated its worldwide hegemony. After its devastating 2003 invasion of Iraq, America’s unipolar moment (1992-2003) began to deteriorate. Power has since shifted in favour of central Eurasia. The rapprochement between the medieval time archrivals, Saudi Arabia and Iran, will have a significant impact on how the future world order may look like. The recent growth of Beijing’s diplomatic footprint is the primary cause of this change. No country in history has ever lifted as numerous individuals out of dire straits as fast as Beijing. It will soon have the second-largest military and economy in the world. At the same time, Russia has emerged triumphant. NATO, the prevailing and influential force in Central Asia as well as a significant player in the Persian Gulf region and eventually in South Asia, is once again a military contender. An important strategic alliance between China and Russia has been formed, symbolized by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), whose most recent summit meeting took place in India (Goa). The heartland powers wanted to spread their dominance across the rest of Eurasia by moving it westward. Hungary, Poland, Greece, Italy, and Austria are among the European nations that want to have better ties with Russia. To encourage commercial collaboration with Beijing under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) (which also would include European seaports on the Atlantic), seventeen European nations have created a group. Now China and Russia have the heartland verily under their control; a thorough Eurasian socio-economic hub of southern Europe, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and South Asia, is the focus on diplomatic competition with the US. The American defence order’ buried European power pillar is in chaos. The UK has left the European Union, the single currency is unpopular in southern Europe, Turkey is cut off from NATO and the EU, the EU’s expansion has been stopped, bigotry is back, and a huge influx from the Middle East and Africa is undermining European unity. The US is moving toward a conflict zone with Iran that might involve the entire region, driven by Israel. No matter what happens, the US is going to get further entangled in the Middle East mess. China and Russia will inevitably benefit. They might be able to bring back some kind of order in the surrounding area if they can cooperate with Tehran, Tel Aviv, and Riyadh. The US and China are becoming more competitive in East Asia. The US has refused China’s invitation to the yearly multi-nation Pacific Border naval drills while asking for its assistance in denuclearizing North Korea (for putting missiles on one of its disputed South Chinese Sea territories). South Asia’s competition, however, is very intricate, China and Pakistan have had a strategic alliance for many years, which has helped to keep the subcontinent’s balance of power. The US has been attempting to enlist Delhi as an ally to counter China’s burgeoning strength in Asia since 2005. The Trump administration’s South Asia policy aims to advance an Indo-US geopolitical order in South Asia while preserving the US military and geopolitical involvement in Afghanistan. The goal of China and Russia is to stop India from fully aligning its military potential with that of the US. India has tried to take a balanced approach. While supporting the equality of navigation theory at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Prime Minister Modi also emphasized the significance of India’s cooperation with China. The US has changed the name and its Pacific Command to the Indo-Pacific Control to recognize India’s importance. Beijing and Moscow undoubtedly believe that Pakistan and India joining the SCO as full members will help to normalize their relations and bring Delhi towards the Sino-Russian area and away from the US. This will be a drawn-out, unsettled contest. Beijing and Moscow surely feel that India and Pakistan becoming members of the SCO would aid in normalizing their relations and move New Delhi away from the US and toward the Sino-Russian region. This will be a protracted, uncertain battle. The world of rival empires in Mackinder’s time is very different from the interdependent one we live in now. The following global and shared challenges will have a significant impact on the current geopolitical rivalry: unprecedented technological advancement, fresh weapons sophisticated and the concepts the artificial intelligence of warfare, the emerging relevance of non-state actors, the rapidly growing population, climate change, and the glaring inability of regional and global institutions to address these challenges. The rapprochement between the medieval time archrivals, Saudi Arabia and Iran will have a significant impact on how the future world order may look like. Collaboration rather than conflict can best serve their national interests. Sino-US strategic cooperation may speed up trade, investment, global growth, and prosperity for all ethnic groups: in the heartland, along the Eurasian Rim, and beyond. Their strategic conflict could cause instability in multiple regions if not a worldwide catastrophe. The writer is a freelance columnist.