Trade and Investment among China, the United States, and the Asia-Pacific Economies: An Invited Testimony to the U.S. Congressional Commission

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

Download Full-text

The United States and Asia in 2014

Asian Survey ◽

10.1525/as.2015.55.1.12 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

Asian Social Science ◽

10.5539/ass.v16n4p25 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Public Health and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

Asian Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s2044251314000186 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 5 (2) ◽

pp. 279-309 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Andrew D. MITCHELL ◽

Tania VOON ◽

Devon WHITTLE

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

United States ◽

Public Health Policy ◽

Access To Medicines ◽

The United States ◽

Asia Pacific ◽

Partnership Agreement ◽

Effective Public Health ◽

The Impact ◽

Trade And Investment

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) has an ambitious agenda and could radically reshape trade in the Asia-Pacific. At the same time, TPP obligations have the potential to significantly restrict the ability of governments to regulate in the interests of public health. This paper examines the impact the TPP could have on two areas of public health regulation—tobacco control and access to medicines. It concludes that a number of legitimate concerns arise from the known content of the TPP, that the inclusion of a general health exception would be the preferable means of safeguarding the regulatory space of governments in relation to public health, and that the United States’ proposals for stronger intellectual property protections be resisted. With negotiations shrouded in secrecy, TPP parties’ desires to promote international trade and investment must not overshadow the need of governments to be able to implement sensible and effective public health policy.

Download Full-text

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

International Relations of the Asia-Pacific ◽

10.1093/irap/lcab018 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

East Asian Affairs ◽

10.1142/s2737557921500091 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

The United States and Asia in 2013

Asian Survey ◽

10.1525/as.2014.54.1.12 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 54 (1) ◽

pp. 12-21 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

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.

Download Full-text

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

International Studies Interdisciplinary Political and Cultural Journal ◽

10.18778/1641-4233.22.06 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

THE U.S. QUEST FOR NEW TECHOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS OF MILITARY SUPERIORITY: DILEMMAS OF THE THIRD OFFSET STRATEGY

MGIMO Review of International Relations ◽

10.24833/2071-8160-2016-3-48-30-42 ◽

2016 ◽

pp. 30-42

Author(s):

V. I. Bartenev

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

The United States ◽

World Politics ◽

Asia Pacific ◽

The Third ◽

Technological Gap ◽

Defense Research ◽

Recent Initiative ◽

The Impact ◽

The U.S

The last decades have witnessed a remarkable surge of interest in studying the influence of science and technology on world politics. However, not all channels of such influence have been examined with equal rigor. Whereas numerous researchers have explored meticulously the impact of technologies on warfare, the issues of using military-technological breakthroughs to achieve political goals have been addressed less frequently. This paper seeks to fill this gaping niche by decomposing the Third Offset Strategy (TOS), a recent initiative of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) aimed at ensuring military-technological superiority of the United States in the XXI century, predominantly, by offsetting the new capabilities of the Russian Federation and the Popular Republic of China. The first section unveils a conceptual framing of the TOS, the second section examines a variety of technological priorities, and the final section identifies key uncertainties around implementation of this initiative in the mid-term and long-term perspective. The conclusion postulates that the emergence of the TOS was determined by both an erosion of the U.S. military superiority and budget constraints, and, therefore, its content might change if budget austerity imperatives will stop dominating the DoD strategists' thinking. The launch of the third offset strategy has also important international-political aspects. First, the TOS fits in the context of the U.S. rebalance to the Asia-Pacific. Second, the American allies in Europe might face a threat of a widening technological gap with the United States and a need to boost their spending on defense research and development, which might be unfeasible in the current fiscal environment. Third, the concentration of the United States on countering high-end opponents might lead to a further marginalization of the Middle East. Fourth, the TOS is likely to contain a disinformation component and aim at dragging the peer competitors of the U.S. into an exhaustive arms race.

Download Full-text

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

China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies ◽

10.1142/s2377740017500075 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 03 (01) ◽

pp. 1-18 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

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.

Download Full-text