Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategic Realignments in Asia

  • Chapter
Book cover The Economic and Strategic Rise of China and India

  • 92 Accesses

Abstract

By 1953, as the Korean War ground to a halt, the current security architecture for the East Asian region began to take shape.1 After some ambivalence in the late 1940s, the United States had projected its power across the Pacific with strong bilateral ties to Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea and with multilateral treaties in Southeast Asia (SEATO) and with Australia and New Zealand (ANZUS).2 Although SEATO did not last, the United States subsequently established bilateral security treaties with Thailand and the Philippines and numerous executive agreements with other East Asian states.3 This “hub-and-spokes” set of American commitments created links directly to Washington and has lasted, with minor adjustments, for 50 years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. For an overview of the security situation on the Korean Peninsula and in East Asia in 1953, see D. Oberdorfer, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1997), pp. 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  2. For a perspective on how Americas Asian allies viewed the U.S. cooperation with China, see T. Inoguchi, Japans Foreign Policy in an Era of Global Change (London: Pinter, 1993), pp. 159–178.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kurth, J., “The Pacific Basin vs. the Atlantic Alliance: Two Paradigms of International Relations,” Annals 505, September 1989, pp. 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  4. For a summary of this debate, see C. Hughes, Japans Re-emergence as a “Normal” Power (London: Adelphi paper no. 368–369, International Institute of Strategic Studies, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  5. For a fuller elaboration of these issues, see D. Denoon, Real Reciprocity: Balancing U.S. Economic and Security Policies in the Pacific Basin (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1993), pp. 10–44.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Curtis, G., The Logic of Japanese Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), pp. 7–22.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Katzenstein, P. Cultural Norms and National Security: Police and Military in Postwar Japan (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1996); and

    Google Scholar 

  8. T. Christensen, “Posing Problems without Catching Up: Chinas Rise and Challenges for U.S. Security Policy,” International Security 25, no. 4, Spring 2001, pp. 5–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Goldstein, A., “The Diplomatic Face of China’s Grand Strategy: A Rising Power’s Emerging Choice,” China Quarterly 168, December 2001, p. 862.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Denoon, D., and S. Brams, “Fair Division: A New Approach to the Spratly Islands Controversy,” International Negotiation 1, no. 2, 1997, pp. 303–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. For a statistical review of the growth performance and a discussion of changes in policy that led to the region-wide surge in growth, see the World Bank’s report, The East Asian Miracle (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Patrick, H., and H. Rosovsky, eds., Asia’s New Giant (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Okita, S., “Pacific Development and Its Implications for the World Economy,” in J. Morley, ed., The Pacific Basin: New Challenges for the United States (New York: Academy of Political Science, 1986), pp. 11–22.

    Google Scholar 

  14. For an early assessment of how this would affect the rest of Asia, see W. Overholt, The Rise of China: How Economic Reform Is Creating a New Superpower (New York, Norton, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bracken, P., Fire in the East: The Rise of Asian Military Power and the Second Nuclear Age (New York: Harper Collins, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rosecrance, R., and A. Stein, eds., The Domestic Bases of Grand Strategy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  17. For a comprehensive summary of this debate, see A. I. Johnston, “Is China a Status Quo Power?” International Security 27, no. 4, Spring 2003, pp. 5–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gong, G., ed., Remembering and Forgetting: The Legacy of War and Peace in East Asia (Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shambaugh, D., Modernizing Chinas Military: Progress, Problems, Prospects (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), pp. 284–327.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ayres, A., “Introduction,” in A. Ayres and P. Oldenburg, eds., India Briefing: Quickening the Pace of Change (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 2002), pp. 12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  21. For an overview of the changed working relationships, see R. Ellings and A. Friedberg, “Introduction,” in R. Ellings and A. Frieberg, eds., Asian Aftershocks: Strategic Asia 2002–2003 (Seattle, WA: National Bureau of Asian Research, 2002), pp. 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  22. In the 1990s American military commitments in Asia were designed to convince allies and cooperating states that the United States was not leaving the region, despite the end of the Cold War. The Nye Initiative, launched by Joseph Nye when he was assistant secretary of defense, explicitly committed the United States to keeping 100,000 troops in the Asian theater. For background, see J. Nye The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 17–35.

    Google Scholar 

  23. For a discussion of whether Asian states are likely to “bandwagon” or “balance,” see R. Betts, “Wealth, Power, and Instability: East Asia after the Cold War,” International Security 18, no. 3, Winter 1993/1994, p. 60.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Brooks, S. and W Wohlforth, “Power, Globalization and the End of the Cold War: Reevaluating a Landmark Case for Ideas,” International Security 25, no. 3, Winter 2000/2001, pp. 5–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Not only did the Pakistani ISI support the Taliban financially, but it also recruited Pathan guerilla fighters in Afghanistan and Northwest Frontier Province to carry out attacks in Kashmir. See J. Stern, “Pakistan’s Jihad Culture,” Foreign Affairs 79, no. 6, November/December 2000, pp. 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. For background, see O. B. Jones, Pakistan: Eye of the Storm (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  27. For an assessment of the cross-pressures inside Pakistan, see S. P. Cohen, “The Nation and the State of Pakistan,” Washington Quarterly 25, no. 3, Summer 2002, pp. 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Risen, J., State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration (New York: Free Press, 2006) pp. 61–84.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Jha, P.S., Kashmir, 1947: Rival Versions of History (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1996). There are three definitions of Kashmir: (1) the Kashmir Valley, (2) the current Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, and (3) the former princely state of Kashmir.

    Google Scholar 

  30. For an overview of the entire period, see S. Ganguly, Conflict Unending: India-Pakistan Tensions since 1947 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  31. For an overview of U.S.-Pakistani relations, see D. Kux, Disenchanted Allies: The United States and Pakistan, 1945–2000 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  32. For the best summary of the foreign policy thinking behind George W. Bush’s electoral campaign, see C. Rice, “Promoting the National Interest,” Foreign Affairs 79, no. 1, January/February 2000, pp. 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Huntington, S., “Why International Primacy Matters” International Security 17, no. 4, Spring 1993, p. 70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Bacevich, A., American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002), pp. 43–54.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Snyder, J., “Imperial Temptations,” National Interest 71, Spring 2003, pp. 29–40.

    Google Scholar 

  36. For an early critique of the global preeminence strategy, see C. Layne, “The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Arise,” International Security 17, no. 4, Spring 1993, pp. 5–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kupchan, C., The Vulnerability of Empire (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  38. For a discussion of these goals, see T. Christensen, “China,” in R. Ellings and A. Friedberg, eds., Strategic Asia: Power and Purpose, 2001–2002 (Seattle, WA: National Bureau of Asian Research, 2001), pp. 30–33. “Territorial integrity” means keeping control of Tibet and Xinjiang, and ensuring that Taiwan does not declare independence.

    Google Scholar 

  39. See, for example, M. Swaine and A. Tellis, Interpreting Chinas Grand Strategy: Past, Present, and Future (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2000),

    Google Scholar 

  40. L. Wortzel, ed., The Chinese Armed Forces in the 21st Century (Carlisle Barracks, PA: U.S. Army War College, 1999), and

    Google Scholar 

  41. M. Pillsbury, ed., China Debates the Future International Security Environment (Washington, DC: National Defense University Press, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Shambaugh, D., “Sino-American Strategic Relations: From Partners to Competitors,” Survival 42, no. 1, Spring 2000, pp. 97–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ross, R., “The Geography of the Peace: East Asia in the 21st Century,” International Security 23, no. 4, Spring 1999, pp. 81–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. For an overview of the backgrounds of the new politburo, see A. Nathan and B. Gilley, Chinas New Rulers: The Secret Files (New York: New York Review Press, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Cohen, S. P., India: Emerging Power (Washington, DC: Brookings, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  46. For an overview of differences among Indian strategists, see K. Bajpai, “India’s Strategic Culture,” ms. (New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru University, June 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Mukherjee, J., “India’s Long March to Capitalism,” India Review 1, no. 2, April 2002, pp. 29–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Srivastava, A., “India’s Growing Missile Ambitions: Assessing the Technical and Strategic Dimensions,” Asian Survey 40, no. 2, March/April 2000, pp. 311–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. For an overview about Indian strategy and the role of its military, see S. P. Cohen and R. Park, India: Emergent Power (New York: Crane Russak, 1978). For developments in the 1990s, see

    Google Scholar 

  50. A. Tellis, Stability in South Asia (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  51. For examples of the earlier enthusiasm, see E. Vogel, Japan as Number One: Lessons for America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979), and

    Book  Google Scholar 

  52. C. Prestowitz, Trading Places: How We Allowed Japan to Take the Lead (New York: Basic Books, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Johnson, C., “Japan in Search of a ‘Normal’ Role,” Daedalus 121, Fall 1992, pp. 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Denoon, D., “Japan and the United States: The Security Agenda,” Current History 82, no. 487, November 1983, pp. 353–394.

    Google Scholar 

  55. International institute for Strategic Studies, Strategic Survey 2002/2003 (London: IISS, 2003), pp. 253–262.

    Google Scholar 

  56. For a debate on these issues, see P. Desai, “Russian Retrospectives on Reforms from Yeltsin to Putin,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 19, no. 1, Winter 2005, pp. 87–196, and

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. A. Shleifer and D. Treisman, “A Normal Country: Russia after Communism,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 19, no. 1, Winter 2005, pp. 151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Bermudez, J., A History of Ballistic Missile Development in the DPRK (Monterey, CA: MIIS Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Moltz, J. C, and A. Mansourov, eds., The North Korean Nuclear Program: Security, Strategy, and New Perspectives from Russia (New York: Routledge, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  60. For an advocate of U.S. disengagement from the Korean Peninsula, see S. Harrison, Korean Endgame (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Denoon, D., “Competing Views on Taiwan’s Foreign Investments,” American Foreign Policy Interests 25, no. 4, October 2003, pp. 425–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Christensen, T., “Theater Missile Defense and Taiwan’s Security,” Orbis 44, no. 1, Winter 2000, pp. 79–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Hefner, R., “Indonesian Islam at the Crossroads,” Van Zorge Report on Indonesia 4, no. 3, February 2002, pp. 12–20.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Grey, C., The American Revolution in Military Affairs (Camberley, UK: Strategic and Combat Studies Institute, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Dibb, P., “The Revolution in Military Affairs and Asian Security,” Survival 39, no. 1, Spring 1997, pp. 65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. For a differing interpretation of this phenomenon, see S. Simon, “Southeast Asia: Whither Security Regionalism?” forthcoming in R. Ellings and M. Wills, eds., Strategic Asia, 2003–2004 (Seattle, WA: National Bureau of Asian Research, 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Rosen, S. P., “An Empire If You Can Keep It,” National Interest 71, Spring 2003, pp. 51–61.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Changing hierarchies is not the same as instability. Leadership changes could be either violent or peaceful. See K. Eikenberry, “Does China Threaten Asia-Pacific Regional Stability?” Parameters 25, no. 1, Spring 1995, pp. 82–99.

    Google Scholar 

  69. For a discussion of the collapse of North Korea, see N. Eberstadt, The End of North Korea (Washington, DC: AEI Press, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Tang Shiping, “A Neutral Reunified Korea: A Chinese View,” Journal of East Asian Affairs 13, no. 2, Fall/Winter 1999, pp. 464–483.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. David B. H. Denoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2007 David B.H. Denoon

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Denoon, D.B.H. (2007). Strategic Realignments in Asia. In: The Economic and Strategic Rise of China and India. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230606869_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation