scholarly journals China’s Partnership Network Versus the U.S. Alliance System: Coexistence or Conflict?

2017 ◽  
Vol 03 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yiqi Zhou
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
External Threats ◽  
Partnership Network ◽  
Alliance System ◽  
Geographical Locations ◽  
The U.S

One interesting fact to note about China’s expanding partnership network is the inclusion of many security allies of the United States. China’s partnership network (CPN) and the U.S. alliance system (UAS) are quite different in nature, with the former emphasizing economic cooperation and the latter focused on security deterrence. Due to such factors as the geographical locations of U.S. allies, strategic positions, and perceptions of external threats, China’s partnerships with U.S. allies are generally more successful in Europe than in the Asia-Pacific. Based on an analysis of the dynamics of interaction between CPN and UAS, this article categorizes their past interaction into two basic models: coexistence (both easy and hard) and confrontation. With regard to the growing uncertainties in the global economy and global politics, the interaction between CPN and UAS may either create a platform for enhanced cooperation or an arena for escalating contention among related countries. To avoid the latter scenario, China must remain prudent in expanding its partnership network, and try to strengthen mutual security reassurance with the United States and its allies through more win-win cooperation in all areas.

scholarly journals The U.S.-China technological war through the prism of techno-nationalism

2021 ◽  
pp. 29-43
Author(s):  
I. Danilin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
The United States ◽  
Market Situation ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China ◽  
The U.S

The “technological war” between the United States and China that started in 2017–2018 raises a number of questions about the future role of technological development as a factor in relations between superpowers. Analysis shows that for the United States this conflict is caused by changing balance of risks and benefits of the liberal model of globalization due to the rise of China`s power and growing geopolitical tensions between the two nations. In this context, emerging, especially digital, technologies appear to be a new battlefield between superpowers. Within the realist framework, actors consider emerging technologies as a key factor for strengthening their global postures. This, among other things, contributes to securitized technological agenda and strengthens its geopolitical dimension. Neo-technonationalism has become the platform that integrates different processes and goals into new U.S. policy. Although historically neo-technonationalism took its roots in Asia, the evolving market situation prompted the United States to rethink existing approaches and to upgrade the techno-nationalist dimension of its policy. Considering similar policies of China and the EU (i. e. the European digital sovereignty policy), this trend shapes new realities of technological “blocs”, the struggle for expansion of technological platforms, and technological conflicts. Taking into account prospective development needs of the global economy and future specification of mutual interest areas, as new digital technologies mature, the ground for normalizing the dialogue between the superpowers will emerge. However, at least in the U.S.–China case, this issue will be complicated by geopolitical contradictions that leave little room for any serious compromise.

The United States in the Global Economy

2020 ◽  
pp. 11-34
Author(s):  
Douglas A. Irwin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Production Costs ◽  
Basic Facts ◽  
Fragmentation Of Production ◽  
The U.S

This chapter sets out basic facts about international trade and the U.S. economy. It describes how world trade has expanded rapidly in the recent decades and explains how the development provides the context in which to consider trade policy. The chapter discusses the reasons for the increase in trade and how trade has changed with the fragmentation of production and the increase in trade of intermediate goods. It talks about the state of public opinion on the question of globalization. It also analyzes protectionist policies that directly harm employment in domestic industries by raising production costs in addition to forcing consumers to pay higher price for the products they buy.

scholarly journals Obama and Transformation Strategy from the Middle East to the Asia – Pacific Region

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Mohamed Kamal ◽  
Khalid Hashim Mohammed
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
East Region ◽  
The Us ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Middle East Region

The Middle East region is no longer enjoys the relative importance for the United States. This was due to the massive discoveries of Shale oil in the United States. Many analysts believe that such discovery led to the decline of the US interest in the Middle East and shifting the orientation towards Asia because of the growing importance of the Southeast Asia in the global economy. The United States, in return, has re-defined the role and the size of involvement in the Middle East by adopting a new strategy based on reducing economic and military consequences resulting from the direct investment in the region, which is rejected by US public opinion.

scholarly journals Danger Zones Dead Ahead For The U.S. And China: Prospects And Challenges

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 1013
Author(s):  
Linnea B. McCord ◽  
Terry Young ◽  
Peggy J. Crawford
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
The United States ◽  
Danger Zone ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
External Threats ◽  
The People ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
The U.S

To be successful and remain independent, every country must create a prosperous economy, keep peace among its people, maintain political stability, and ensure the security of the people and the country from internal and external threats. Doing all four at the same time is never easy and in a time of economic volatility, change, and uncertainty juggling all four becomes more difficult. This is when countries enter the danger zone where hidden cracks and fissures in a countrys organization and structure could become destabilizing. In this paper we will compare the challenges and prospects for the United States and China as both countries enter the danger zone. The purpose of this paper is to examine how each countrys unique attributes are likely to impact its ability to succeed. We will examine their political, economic and legal systems to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each. We will also assess the role of corruption in each society. Both the United States and China have serious economic, social, political and security issues on the horizon. To solve the problems will require serious sacrifices and pain for a large portion of the populations in both countries. Which form of government will best be able to adapt quickly to the constantly changing environment? Will a serious economic slowdown topple the Communist dictatorship in China? Will gridlock and distrust in the U.S. prevent Americans from adapting fast enough to make the necessary changes in time to save its financial system and economy? Time will tell.

What the US Should Learn from China for a More Balanced and Peaceful World

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 50-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Massimo Parenti
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
International Monetary System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Governance ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Monetary System ◽  
The Us ◽  
The U.S

The growing importance of China in the global economy affects the reconfiguration of the international geography of power. In this scenario, the geopolitical order will be significantly redefined by the evolution of relations between China and the U.S. Based on the outcome of previous studies, and on the extensive efforts made by some social scientists, this paper provides a systematic analysis of the complexity and strategic implications of China–US relations. To make sense of these multivalent relations, after an initial introduction the paper is organized in three sections. The first section explores the structurally asymmetrical nature of relations between China and the US, focusing on economic policy decisions made by national elites. The second section focuses on the deepening U.S. debt, also underscoring the latest transformation trends experienced by an international monetary system that is still dollar–centred, and which several parties deem to be unsustainable. Lastly, the third section tries to provide evidence that growing instability in the global geopolitical order is intimately related to the economic and financial unbalances between China and the U.S. Hence, promoting more effective cooperation between China and the United States seems to be a priority. As substantiated in this paper, cooperation should, however, make the most of the Chinese developmental path, compared to that adopted by the United States – in terms of economic governance and geopolitical developmental path.

scholarly journals Global Fiscal Consolidation

2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warwick J. McKibbin ◽  
Andrew B. Stoeckel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fiscal Consolidation ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
Fiscal Adjustment ◽  
The World ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Domestic Economies ◽  
The U.S

The buildup in government debt in response to the “great recession,” has raised a number of policy dilemmas for individual countries as well as the world as a whole. The recent need for a change of fiscal policy stance has fuelled debates about the impact of fiscal consolidation on domestic economies that are tightening, the flow-on effects to the world economy, and also about how much tightening there should be and how quickly it should happen. This paper explores these issues in a global framework focusing on the national and global consequences of coordinated fiscal consolidation. It explores the implications this fiscal adjustment might have on country risk premia and what happens if all countries coordinate their fiscal adjustment except the United States. A coordinated fiscal consolidation in the industrial world that is not accompanied by U.S. actions is likely to lead to a substantial worsening of trade imbalances globally as the release of capital in fiscally contracting economies flows into the U.S. economy, appreciates the U.S. dollar, and worsens the current account position of the United States. The scale of this change is likely to be sufficient to substantially increase the probability of a trade war between the United States and other economies. To avoid this outcome, a coordinated fiscal adjustment is clearly in the interest of the global economy.

scholarly journals The U.S. policy towards Indo-Pacific region and Mongolia-U.S. strategic partnership

2020 ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
Zolboo Dashnyam ◽  
Byambakhand Luguusharav
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The U.S

Mongolia’s security primarily depends on how the country develops respective bilateral relations with its neighbors and great powers including the United States. In this sense, it is important to examine U.S. foreign policy, in particular, its Asia policy as well as interests pursued by Washington while promoting bilateral relations with Mongolia, as the nexus between those parties should be considered in foreign policymaking of Mongolia. On the other hand, relations with Mongolia has been a part of U.S. policy towards the Asia-Pacific region. However, under the leadership of President Trump, the U.S. administration re-defined its policy towards the region by replacing Asia-Pacific with the label of Indo-Pacific. Only two years later since Mongolia and the United States marked the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations, the two countries elevated their ties to a strategic partnership in 2019. In this article, the authors seek to explain what is the Indo-Pacific partnership and express their views. Энэтхэг-Номхон далайн бүс дэх АНУ-ын гадаад бодлого ба Монгол Улс, АНУ-ын стратегийн түншлэл   Хураангуй: Монгол Улсын аюулгүй байдалд эерэг, сөрөг нөлөө бүхий байдал үүсэх нь хоёр хөрш болон АНУ-тай харилцаагаа хэрхэн төлөвшүүлэх, тэдгээрийн ашиг сонирхлын шүтэлцээнд хэрхэн оролцохоос хамаарна. Иймээс Америкийн гадаад бодлого, харилцаа холбоог судлах нь түүний Азид явуулж буй бодлого, түүний дотор Монголтой харилцаж буй ашиг сонирхлын уялдааг судлах, улмаар Монгол Улсын АНУ-тай харилцах бодлогыг тодорхойлоход чухал. Нөгөө талаар, Монгол Улстай харилцах нь АНУ-ын Ази, Номхон далайн бүс нутагт чиглэсэн бодлогын нэг хэсэг байсаар ирсэн. Ерөнхийлөгч Д.Трампын засаг захиргаа дээр дурдсан бүс нутгийн нэршил, ойлголтыг өөрчлөн энэ бүс нутагт чиглэсэн бодлогоо Энэтхэг-Номхон далайн стратеги хэмээн тодорхойлох болов. 1987 онд дипломат харилцаа тогтоон, гурван жилийн өмнө дипломат харилцаа тогтоосны 30 жилийн ойг өргөн хүрээнд тэмдэглэсэн Монгол-АНУ-ын харилцаа 2019 онд шат ахин “Стратегийн түншлэл” болон хэлбэржлээ. Энэхүү өгүүллийн эхний хэсэгт АНУ-ын дэвшүүлсэн Энэтхэг-Номхон далайн стратеги гэгч юу болох, энэхүү стратегийн хүрээнд Монгол-АНУ харилцааны онцлог байдлын талаар судлаачийн байр сууриа илэрхийлэв. Түлхүүр үгс:  АНУ, Энэтхэг-Номхон далай, Монгол Улс, гуравдагч хөршийн бодлого, стратегийн түншлэл 

Powerplay: Origins of the U.S. Alliance System in Asia

2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor D. Cha
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
East Asia ◽  
The United States ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Republic ◽  
A Chain ◽  
Alliance System ◽  
Postwar Planning ◽  
Security Structure ◽  
The U.S

In East Asia the United States cultivated a “hub and spokes” system of discrete, exclusive alliances with the Republic of Korea, the Republic of China, and Japan, a system that was distinct from the multilateral security alliances it preferred in Europe. Bilateralism emerged in East Asia as the dominant security structure because of the “powerplay” rationale behind U.S. postwar planning in the region. “Powerplay” refers to the construction of an asymmetric alliance designed to exert maximum control over the smaller ally's actions. The United States created a series of bilateral alliances in East Asia to contain the Soviet threat, but a congruent rationale was to constrain “rogue allies”—that is, rabidly anticommunist dictators who might start wars for reasons of domestic legitimacy and entrap the United States in an unwanted larger war. Underscoring the U.S. desire to avoid such an outcome was a belief in the domino theory, which held that the fall of one small country in Asia could trigger a chain of countries falling to communism. The administrations of Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower calculated that they could best restrain East Asia's pro-West dictators through tight bilateral alliances rather than through a regionwide multilateral mechanism. East Asia's security bilateralism today is therefore a historical artifact of this choice.

The United States and Asia in 2014

Asian Survey ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-20
Author(s):  
William T. Tow
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Regional Trade ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
The U.S

Visible U.S. efforts to sustain influence in the Asia-Pacific met with mixed success. President Barack Obama’s visit to the region reinforced alliance commitments, but U.S. policy momentum on regional trade and diplomacy remained sluggish. Washington’s effective management of its relations with Beijing remains the key factor to how well the U.S. will fare with other regional actors and issues.

scholarly journals South Korea’s Geoeconomic Response to the United States’ Geopolitical Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Ki-Su Kim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Northeast Asia ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
President Obama ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
The U.S

The United States “Indo-Pacific strategy” itself entails geopolitics. Since 2017, the Indo-Pacific has emerged as a major strategic region for America’s diplomacy and security. Against this backdrop, the Indo-Pacific strategy extends both the “Asia Rebalancing Strategy” and the “Asia-Pacific Security Alliance” regime to the Indian Ocean, while seeking to bring emerging countries, such as China and India, into the U.S.-led international order. Major East Asian countries are actively employing economic means to advance their geopolitical goal -- reshaping the regional order in their own favor. The U.S. has shown a confrontational and exclusionary attitude toward China in terms of politics, economy and security, while the ASEAN has sought to promote inclusiveness by publicly expressing opposition to the exclusion of China. The ASEAN highlighted economic cooperation with China, while the U.S. focused on military and security aspects. The Indo-Pacific strategy will not be able to succeed without the participation of the ASEAN that serves as a crucial geopolitical link between the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Another important factor is that unlike former U.S. President Obama, who championed the Asia-Pacific rebalance, President Donald Trump does not show keen interest in the Indo-Pacific strategy. At the same time, President Moon Jae-in has been cautious about engaging in security issues that go beyond the Korean Peninsula or the Northeast Asia -- namely joining in any collective move to contain China. Currently, South Korea is grappling with the geopolitical challenges by expressing support for the ASEAN's geoeconomic approach. Instead of choosing whether to participate in the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy, South Korea is seeking common ground between the strategy and its “New Southern Policy.” In other words, the New Southern Policy is a kind of buffer zone. South Korea is taking a geoeconomic response that focuses on developing the regional economy rather than adhering to the strategic and military role of the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document