The competition over soft power between China and the United States: an analysis of how East Asians view a rising China

2019 ◽  
pp. 258-276
Author(s):  
Yun-han Chu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
East Asians ◽  
Rising China

Where Great Powers Meet

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Shambaugh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Stable Region ◽  
Power Transition ◽  
Global Power ◽  
Sphere Of Influence ◽  
The Cold War

After the end of the Cold War, it seemed as if Southeast Asia would remain a geopolitically stable region within the American imperious for the foreseeable future. In the last two decades, however, the re-emergence of China as a major great power has called into question the geopolitical future of the region and raised the specter of renewed great power competition. As this book shows, the United States and China are engaged in a broad-gauged and global competition for power. While this competition ranges across the entire world, it is centered in Asia, and here this text focuses on the ten countries that comprise Southeast Asia. The United States and China constantly vie for position and influence in this enormously significant region, and the outcome of this contest will do much to determine whether Asia leaves the American orbit after seven decades and falls into a new Chinese sphere of influence. Just as important, to the extent that there is a global “power transition” occurring from the United States to China, the fate of Southeast Asia will be a good indicator. Presently, both powers bring important assets to bear. The United States continues to possess a depth and breadth of security ties, soft power, and direct investment across the region that empirically outweigh China’s. For its part, China has more diplomatic influence, much greater trade, and geographic proximity. In assessing the likelihood of a regional power transition, the book looks at how ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and the countries within it maneuver between the United States and China and the degree to which they align with one or the other power.

scholarly journals Introduction to the Special Issue: Soft Power of Civil Society in International Relations

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-476
Author(s):  
TAKASHI INOGUCHI
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Policy Makers

This special issue focuses on the role of civil society in international relations. It highlights the dynamics and impacts of public opinion on international relations (Zaller, 1992). Until recently, it was usual to consider public opinion in terms of its influence on policy makers and in terms of moulding public opinion in the broad frame of the policy makers in one's country. Given that public opinion in the United States was assessed and judged so frequently and diffused so globally, it was natural to frame questions guided by those concepts which pertained to the global and domestic context of the United States.

scholarly journals FUTURE OF US HEGEMONY

2019 ◽  
pp. 4-12
Author(s):  
A Subotin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Social Power ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
Us Hegemony

Abstract. The demise of the bipolar system of international politics has revived interest in such closely related and contested terms as "superpower", "hegemon", "empire" and "imperialism". This article represents an attempt to define the most probable trend in the future evolution of the international system with regard to the role of the United States of America as the most prominent state power of today's world. This article seeks to analyse the US power posture in today's world politics by comparing its core capabilities to those of the classical empire of the previous century - the British Empire - with analytical emphasis on both the "hard power" and the "soft power" dimensions. The author maintains that the notion of US hegemony or even American Empire is still relevant despite a clear historic tendency of hegemonic decline seen throughout the second part of the 20th century. The United States still ranks high on the scale of most traditional power factors and, what is by far more important, they continue to be able to shape and control the scale and the volume of international exposure of all other major players within the framework of contemporary global international system. The relative decline of US influence upon world politics at the beginning of the new millennia has been effectively off-set by the profound change in the nature of American power which is now assuming the form of a structural dominance. The author's personal view is that US hegemony is not doomed to wane, given the enormous impact the United States have already made economically, politically and intellectually upon the post World War II international relations. The continuance of the US playing the pivotal role in the international politics of the 21st century will be dependent on the ability of the US political class to adapt to and to harness the social power of numerous non-state international actors that are due take over the leading role in the future world's politics.

Taiwan–Myanmar Relations within the Framework of the New Southbound Policy

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Kristina Kironska
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Transformation ◽  
Military Rule ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
Trade War ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Insight Into

Abstract This article combines the study of Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy with a case study of Taiwan–Myanmar relations from a perspective of political relations, economic cooperation, and Taiwan’s (un)recognisability in Myanmar—i.e. Taiwan’s soft power in Myanmar. The first part of the paper introduces the policy and compares it with the previous ones, and sheds light on Taiwan’s motivation to engage with Myanmar. It considers the ongoing trade war between the United States and China, due to which investment relocation from China is expected to sharply increase. The second part of the paper provides an insight into the relationship between Taiwan and Myanmar after Myanmar’s state-led political transformation from military rule and economic liberalisation since approximately 2010. It explains the main aspects and determinants of the relationship between two countries that share a neighbouring potential hegemon which they both wish to balance against.

Abu Dhabi will pivot to ‘soft power’ security policies

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Red Sea ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Security Policies ◽  
Abu Dhabi ◽  
Special Forces ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Military Engagement

Significance UAE military engagement abroad since the 1990s has earned it the nickname ‘Little Sparta’. Its activities included a lengthy mission alongside NATO forces in Afghanistan and special forces-led interventions in Libya and Yemen. Impacts Increased COVID-19 vaccine diplomacy could be an important component of the Emirati soft power approach. UAE purchases of expensive weapons and maintenance of Red Sea basing options will focus on the Iran threat. Defence industrial ties will strengthen with the United States and Israel.

scholarly journals Why East Asians but not South Asians are underrepresented in leadership positions in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (9) ◽  
pp. 4590-4600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackson G. Lu ◽  
Richard E. Nisbett ◽  
Michael W. Morris
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chief Executive Officers ◽  
South Asians ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
The United States ◽  
Leadership Positions ◽  
East Asians ◽  
Cultural Fit ◽  
Bamboo Ceiling ◽  
Executive Officers

Well-educated and prosperous, Asians are called the “model minority” in the United States. However, they appear disproportionately underrepresented in leadership positions, a problem known as the “bamboo ceiling.” It remains unclear why this problem exists and whether it applies to all Asians or only particular Asian subgroups. To investigate the mechanisms and scope of the problem, we compared the leadership attainment of the two largest Asian subgroups in the United States: East Asians (e.g., Chinese) and South Asians (e.g., Indians). Across nine studies (n= 11,030) using mixed methods (archival analyses of chief executive officers, field surveys in large US companies, student leader nominations and elections, and experiments), East Asians were less likely than South Asians and whites to attain leadership positions, whereas South Asians were more likely than whites to do so. To understand why the bamboo ceiling exists for East Asians but not South Asians, we examined three categories of mechanisms—prejudice (intergroup), motivation (intrapersonal), and assertiveness (interpersonal)—while controlling for demographics (e.g., birth country, English fluency, education, socioeconomic status). Analyses revealed that East Asians faced less prejudice than South Asians and were equally motivated by work and leadership as South Asians. However, East Asians were lower in assertiveness, which consistently mediated the leadership attainment gap between East Asians and South Asians. These results suggest that East Asians hit the bamboo ceiling because their low assertiveness is incongruent with American norms concerning how leaders should communicate. The bamboo ceiling is not an Asian issue, but an issue of cultural fit.

Foreign Policy of Saudi Arabia

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Nuruzzaman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Purchasing Power Parity ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Power Parity ◽  
Military Support

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a major actor in Middle Eastern as well as global politics. Founded in 1932 by King Abd al-Aziz Al Saud, commonly known as Ibn Saud, the kingdom rests on an alliance between the Al Saud royal family and the followers of 18th-century Islamic revivalist Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The strategic and geo-economic significance of the kingdom originates from its location and possession of huge oil resources. It borders the world’s two immensely significant strategic sea trade routes—the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea, boasts of being the world’s largest oil exporter, and is home to Islam’s two holiest sites—Mecca and Medina. Though not a militarily significant power, the kingdom’s vast oil wealth has gradually and greatly elevated its status as an influential global economic and financial power. Currently, it is the world’s seventeenth largest economy ($1.774 trillion, 2017 estimate based on purchasing power parity, or PPP) and a member of the elite G20 club of world economic powers. The economic good fortune notwithstanding, the Saudis have traditionally depended on the United States, especially after World War II, for security guarantees and pursued a foreign policy of restraint guided by preferences for soft power tools like mediation in regional conflicts, financial aid and investments, and diplomatic influence. Relations with the United States, mostly smooth but occasionally rocky (for example, the 1973 Saudi-led oil embargo on the West and the 9/11 attacks), has remained the cornerstone of Saudi foreign policy. A series of recent developments, most notably the rise of regional rival Iran following the 2003 American invasion of Iraq, the contagious effects of Arab pro-democracy movements, and the proclamation of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in the summer of 2014 forced a major overhaul in Saudi foreign policy. A fundamental shift from the traditional policy of restraint to a proactive foreign policy took root from the early 2010s. King Abdullah bin Abd al-Aziz sent troops to Bahrain in March 2011 to stifle the Shiʿa -led pro-democracy movements; incumbent King Salman bin Abd al-Aziz, soon after ascending the throne in January 2015, launched a massive air attack on Yemen to punish the allegedly pro-Iran Houthi rebels, and doubled down financial and military support for the pro-Saudi rebel groups fighting against the Iran- and Russia-backed Bashar Al-Assad government in Syria. The kingdom has justified this proactive foreign policy approach as a necessary response to force Shiʿa powerhouse Iran to scale back its presence in Arab countries and to keep Iranian power under check. Lately, the kingdom is pursuing policies to court Israel to jointly square off with their common enemy Iran and weaken pro-Iran Lebanese militia group Hezbollah’s military capabilities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document