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 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.

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 

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.

Public knowledge and stigma of autism spectrum disorder: Comparing China with the United States

Autism ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 1531-1545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luodi Yu ◽  
Sheri Stronach ◽  
Ashley J Harrison
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
The United States ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Autistic People ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Public Views ◽  
The U.S

Autism spectrum disorder in China differs considerably from autism spectrum disorder in the West in terms of prevalence estimates, education opportunities, and life outcomes of autistic people. The lack of autism spectrum disorder awareness could be a key factor underlying the disparities. To date, there has been no evaluation of autism spectrum disorder knowledge among the general public of China. Using the Autism Stigma and Knowledge Questionnaire developed for use in diverse cultural contexts, this study uncovered profoundly different public views about autism spectrum disorder in China compared with the United States. Determined by cognitive diagnosis modeling, 86%–91% of the surveyed U.S. citizens ( N = 1127) achieved adequate autism spectrum disorder knowledge in diagnosis/symptoms, etiology, and treatment, whereas for the Chinese citizens ( N = 1254) the percentages were only 57%–65%. Moreover, 14% of the participants from the United States were classified to endorse autism spectrum disorder stigma; in comparison, 38% of the Chinese participants endorsed autism spectrum disorder stigma. The Chinese citizens displayed knowledge deficits primarily in the areas of autism spectrum disorder core symptoms, comorbid intellectual impairment, and prognosis. Sociodemographic factors associated with the Chinese citizen’s misconceptions included gender, ethnicity, social economic factors, among others. These results have important implications for increasing public awareness and promoting community participation for autistic individuals in China. Lay abstract ASD in China differs considerably from ASD in the West in terms of prevalence estimates, education opportunities and life outcomes of autistic people. The lack of ASD awareness could be a key factor underlying these disparities. We asked 1127 U.S. citizens and 1254 Chinese citizens about their autism knowledge using the Autism Stigma and Knowledge Questionnaire (ASK-Q).The results indicated profoundly different public views about ASD in China compared to the U.S. Specifically, only 57%-65% of the Chinese citizens demonstrated adequate ASD knowledge compared to 86%-91% in the U.S. citizens. Fourteen percent of the U.S. citizens were shown to hold stigma beliefs towards ASD; in comparison, 38% of the Chinese citizens indicated ASD stigma. The Chinese citizens displayed misconceptions about ASD related to symptoms, causes, and possible long-term outcomes. In China but not in the U.S., male citizens and citizens with lower social economic status were more likely to have misconceptions about ASD than others were. The findings of this research can help increase public awareness about ASD and create a more inclusive environment for autistic people in China.

Deep engagement and public opinion toward the United States: U.S. military presence and threat perceptions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sou Shinomoto
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Security Threats ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Threat Perceptions ◽  
Active Approach ◽  
Military Presence ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Do So

Abstract Under what conditions are a country’s residents likely to express favorable or unfavorable attitudes toward the United States? I discuss this question using survey data from 38 countries, focusing on the possible impacts that the active approach by the United States toward security threats has on the psychology of countries’ residents. The results show that the larger the U.S. military presence in a country, the more likely that its residents are to express negative attitudes toward the United States. Meanwhile, citizens who feel threatened by specific types of global actors that the U.S. government actively confronts as security threats are less likely to express negative attitudes toward the United States, and particularly less likely to do so the larger the U.S. military presence in their country. These findings contribute significantly to understanding the shifts in the socio-political dynamics of regions such as the Asia-Pacific, where the United States has long implemented an active approach.

scholarly journals From “Asia Pacific” to “Indo Pacific”: The Adjustment of American Asia Pacific Strategy from the Perspective of Critical Geopolitics

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zeng Xianghong ◽  
Zhang Shaowen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Belt And Road Initiative ◽  
Critical Geopolitics ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Belt And Road ◽  
The U.S

After taking office, the Trump administration has shifted the U.S. strategy in the Asia Pacific region from “Asia Pacific” to “Indo-Pacific”. This paper attempts to start with critical geopolitics, compare the “Asia Pacific” strategy of the United States with the “Indo-Pacific” strategy, and investigate the changes and dynamics of the geopolitical imagination of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region. Through the investigation, it can be found that the strategic transformation from “Asia-Pacific” to “Indo-Pacific” reflects the transformation of the U.S. strategy towards China from “L-shaped defense” to “half-mouth encirclement”, as well as the Trump government’s attempt to rebuild the U.S. hegemony in various fields through all-round competition, reshape its identity and confidence as a great power by changing its self-identity and consolidating and expanding the alliance of Western style liberal democratic countries by looking for strategic fulcrum to reconstruct the strategic demands of the key geopolitical space. After Biden’s administration took office, it has inherited and strengthened the Trump administration’s “Indo-Pacific” strategy, which means that the strategic game between the United States and China in the “Indo-Pacific” region and even the global stage will continue for a long time. In order to safeguard China’s national interests and effectively respond to the “Indo-Pacific” strategy, China should enhance its influence and maintain the mentality as a great power, adopt social creation strategies to seek identity and recognition, and make plans based on the “Belt and Road Initiative”, “Polar Silk Road”, “Belt and Road Initiative” and other initiatives; if pushed forward smoothly, it will effectively crack down on the U.S.’s attempt to contain China through the “Indo-Pacific” strategy.

The United States and Asia in 2013

Asian Survey ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
William T. Tow
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Recession ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Regional Power ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Future Role ◽  
Global Power ◽  
Strategic Influence ◽  
The U.S

Prospects for a U.S. decline in global power generated by political strife and protracted economic recession at home have affected Washington’s regional diplomatic presence and strategic influence in the Asia-Pacific. Ongoing regional power politics and economic imperatives may constrain the ability of the U.S. to quickly recover from the largely self-imposed damage it has inflicted on its future role as a central regional player.

scholarly journals China as the Strategic Competitor in the Debate on TPP in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-102
Author(s):  
Paulina Matera
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The U.S

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was negotiated with participation of the U.S. representatives from 2008. It was discussed not only in terms of the economic consequences of it. The proponents of signing TPP claimed that it would strengthen the alliances in Asia-Pacific region, curtail the Chinese influences and let the U.S. establish the global trade rules for the future. The debate on this issue took place in the Congress, also the front runners of the presidential elections of 2016 expressed their standpoints. The attitude of public opinion will be also presented as well as the position of Donald Trump which resulted in the withdrawal of the United States from the agreement once he became the President of the U.S.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document