scholarly journals Between the bear and the dragon: multivectorism in Kazakhstan as a model strategy for secondary powers

2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (4) ◽  
pp. 975-993
Author(s):  
Rachel Vanderhill ◽  
Sandra F Joireman ◽  
Roza Tulepbayeva
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Secondary Powers ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China

Abstract Kazakhstan has followed a foreign policy of multivector diplomacy since its independence from the former Soviet Union. While multivectorism was a strategy of necessity in its early years, it has evolved to empower Kazakhstan to effectively protect its independence and negotiate its relationship with the great powers on its borders and further afield. After the 2014 Russian seizure of Crimea it is noteworthy that Kazakhstan has maintained positive relations with Russia while asserting its sovereignty and independent foreign policy. In this article we investigate how Kazakhstan has negotiated the rise of China, taking advantage of the economic opportunities it presents. We trace the foreign policy of Kazakhstan from independence forward, examining its relationships with its Great Power neighbours and its role in international organizations and negotiations. We posit that multivectorism is similar to the strategy of omni-enmeshment and complex balancing seen in south-east Asia. Both are effective methods for secondary powers to protect their sovereignty and to coexist with Great Powers without becoming their client states. Kazakhstan's approach to foreign policy is an exemplar for secondary states. This article contributes to the literature on the strategic decision-making of secondary powers and to the theoretical analysis of the foreign policy of Kazakhstan during a critical moment of transition from the long-time rule of Nursultan Nazarbayev to the presidency of Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.

Hegemony in Foreign Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Ned Lebow ◽  
Simon Reich
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Policy Support ◽  
Economic Stability ◽  
American Hegemony ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China ◽  
Established Role

American realists, liberals, journalists, and policymakers speak of American hegemony as if it were an established role, although a threatened one given the rise of China. They describe hegemony as essential to international political and economic stability, and a role that only America can perform. These claims are highly questionable, as there is no evidence that the United States is a hegemon nor that it has provided the benefits American international relations theorists attribute to a hegemon. To the extent these benefits are provided, it is the result of the collective efforts of numerous states, by no means all of them great powers. American assertions of hegemony are viewed with jaundiced, if not hostile, eyes by other states. Hegemony is a fiction, propagated by Americans to gain special privileges, justify an interventionist foreign policy, support the defense industry, and buttress national self-esteem. In practice, the quest for hegemony is a threat, not a prop, to the global order.

Will the Rise of China Transform the International System?

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Fall 2021) ◽  
pp. 231-258
Author(s):  
Kemal İnat ◽  
Melih Yıldız
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Political System ◽  
International System ◽  
Military Policy ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Global Status ◽  
Chinese Policy ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China ◽  
The U.S

In this article, the rise of China is discussed in the light of economic and military data, and what the challenge from China means for the global leadership of the U.S. is analyzed. Changes in the indicators of the U.S. and China’s economic and military power over the last 30-40 years are examined and an answer is sought for the following question: What will the consequences of China’s rise be in terms of the international political system? To answer this question, similar ‘rise and challenge’ precedents are discussed to contextualize and analyze and the present challenge China poses. This article concludes that while improving its global status, China has been taking the previous cases’ failed challenges into consideration. China, which does not want to repeat the mistakes made by Germany and the Soviet Union, is hesitant to pursue an aggressive military policy and tries to limit its rivalry with the U.S. in the economic area. While Chinese policy of avoiding direct conflict and focusing on economic development has made it the biggest economic rival of the U.S, the rise of China initiates the discussions about the end of the U.S. and West-led international system.

scholarly journals Future of US-China Relations: Conflict, Competition or Cooperation?

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Syed Muhammad Saad Zaidi ◽  
Adam Saud
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Eastern Hemisphere ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China

In contemporary times, the geo-political agenda and geo-economic strategy of the world is being dominated by the ongoing US-China hegemonic competition. Where the United States is trying to prolong the ‘unipolar moment’ and deter the rise of China; China is trying to establish itself as the hegemon in the Eastern hemisphere, an alternate to the US. The entirely opposite interests of the two Great Powers have initiated a hostile confrontational competition for domination. This paper seeks to determine the future nature of the US-China relations; will history repeat itself and a bloody war be fought to determine the leader of the pack? or another prolonged Cold War will be fought, which will end when one side significantly weakens and collapses? Both dominant paradigms of International Relations, Realism and Liberalism, are used to analyze the future nature of the US-China relations.

22. The future of US foreign policy

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anatol Lieven
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
Far East ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
Transatlantic Relationship ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
East Russia

This chapter examines possible futures for American foreign policy in terms of the interests and ideology of the U.S. elites (and to a lesser extent the population at large), the structures of U.S. political life, and the real or perceived national interests of the United States. It first provides an overview of the ideological roots of U.S. foreign policy before discussing key contemporary challenges for U.S. foreign policy. In particular, it considers American relations with China, how to mobilize U.S. military power for foreign policy goals, and the issue of foreign aid. The chapter proceeds by analysing the most important features of America’s future foreign policies, focusing on the Middle East, the Far East, Russia and the former Soviet Union, and Europe and the transatlantic relationship. It concludes by describing some catastrophic scenarios that could accelerate the decline of US power.

14. US foreign policy in Russia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Rutland
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Bill Clinton ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
The North ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Vladimir Putin

This chapter examines US foreign policy in Russia. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 raised a number of questions that have profound implications for American foreign policy; for example, whether the Russian Federation, which inherited half the population and 70 per cent of the territory of the former Soviet Union, would become a friend and partner of the United States, a full and equal member of the community of democratic nations, or whether it would return to a hostile, expansionary communist or nationalist power. The chapter considers US–Russia relations at various times under Bill Clinton, Boris Yeltsin, George W. Bush, Vladimir Putin, Barack Obama, Dmitry Medvedev, and Donald Trump. It also discusses a host of issues affecting the US–Russia relations, including the enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the crisis in Kosovo and Ukraine, and the civil war in Syria.

Russian policymakers will await new US president

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Russian Military ◽  
Vladimir Putin ◽  
Military Campaign ◽  
The Military ◽  
Offensive Strategies

Subject Russian foreign policy in 2016. Significance Russian foreign policy is driven by an amalgam of realpolitik, nationalism and anti-Western ideology, and consists of both defensive and offensive strategies. The robust, confrontational approach championed by President Vladimir Putin in recent years has produced successes in such areas as the military campaign in Syria, but an undecided outcome in Ukraine and mixed results in other parts of the former Soviet Union. Impacts A NATO summit this July may result in a tougher, more coordinated stance on Russia. Following its official partial withdrawal from Syria, the Russian military will conduct selective attacks. Russia will need careful diplomacy to keep Belarus and Kazakhstan from drifting away as allies.

Japan will move to counter China's rise

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Policy Strategy ◽  
China’S Rise ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
China's Rise ◽  
Defence Cooperation ◽  
The Rise Of China

Subject Japan's foreign policy strategy. Significance Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has changed core structures and frameworks within which Japan's foreign and defence policies are made. These changes can be seen as responses to the rise of China. Impacts Japan will use aid to counter China's influence, competing on quality and a record of delivering on promises. Laws passed under Abe could allow much greater defence cooperation with Australia and India. India is a future partner in Japan's developing relationship with Africa to compete with China’s Africa strategy.

Russia and the Use of Trade Policy: Concentration with Soviet Successor States

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 20170068 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Lutz ◽  
James Lutz
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Policy Position ◽  
Trade Patterns ◽  
Baltic Countries ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Central Asian ◽  
The Baltic

Economic policy has often been an integral part of foreign policy usage by governments. Many states will use trade, aid, and investment as instruments to attain other objectives deemed to be in the national interest. Albert Hirschman in an early and classic study suggested that governments in the Weimar Republic and Nazi Germany consciously attempted to dominate the trade of weaker states in Europe as a means of enhancing the German foreign policy position. Russian trade policy since the breakup of the Soviet Union has followed a similar policy, especially in regard to the other successor states of the former Soviet Union. Patterns were different for the Baltic countries, other European successor states, the Transcaucasian states, and Central Asian countries. Notwithstanding differences that were present, there was evidence in the trade patterns to indicate that Moscow was using trade policy to gain influence in the successor states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document