US perspectives on the power shift in the Indo-Pacific

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Pacific Review Pub Date : 2022-12-26 DOI:10.1080/09512748.2022.2160793
Zack Cooper, Emily Young Carr
{"title":"US perspectives on the power shift in the Indo-Pacific","authors":"Zack Cooper, Emily Young Carr","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2022.2160793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay examines four schools of thought about US strategy in Asia, particularly regarding China. These four viewpoints—here termed the responsible stakeholder, communist collapse, constructive cooperation, and managed competition schools—are determined largely by the answers to two questions. First, to what degree should US policies focus on integrating China into the international order, versus mitigating the consequences of China’s rise? Second, should US policy makers seek a specified end state with China, or simply focus on achieving a stable steady state? Based on a detailed analysis of existing commentary, we assert that most debates about US objectives vis-à-vis China revolve around these questions. This essay concludes that US policies are likely to incorporate aspects of all four theories, which will make it difficult—if not impossible—for the United States to adopt any clear and sustained strategy across administrations. Barring a major breakthrough or breakdown in US–China relations, Washington is destined for a muddled debate on China that will make it difficult to achieve strategic consensus. And this strategic confusion on China will have substantial implications for US regional strategy more broadly.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2160793","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This essay examines four schools of thought about US strategy in Asia, particularly regarding China. These four viewpoints—here termed the responsible stakeholder, communist collapse, constructive cooperation, and managed competition schools—are determined largely by the answers to two questions. First, to what degree should US policies focus on integrating China into the international order, versus mitigating the consequences of China’s rise? Second, should US policy makers seek a specified end state with China, or simply focus on achieving a stable steady state? Based on a detailed analysis of existing commentary, we assert that most debates about US objectives vis-à-vis China revolve around these questions. This essay concludes that US policies are likely to incorporate aspects of all four theories, which will make it difficult—if not impossible—for the United States to adopt any clear and sustained strategy across administrations. Barring a major breakthrough or breakdown in US–China relations, Washington is destined for a muddled debate on China that will make it difficult to achieve strategic consensus. And this strategic confusion on China will have substantial implications for US regional strategy more broadly.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国对印太地区权力转移的看法
摘要本文考察了美国对亚洲战略,特别是对中国战略的四个学派。这四种观点——这里称之为负责任的利益相关者、共产主义崩溃、建设性合作和有管理的竞争学校——在很大程度上取决于两个问题的答案。首先,美国的政策应该在多大程度上侧重于将中国融入国际秩序,而不是减轻中国崛起的后果?第二,美国决策者应该寻求与中国的特定最终状态,还是仅仅专注于实现稳定稳定的状态?基于对现有评论的详细分析,我们断言,关于美国对中国目标的大多数辩论都围绕着这些问题展开。这篇文章的结论是,美国的政策可能包含了所有四种理论的各个方面,这将使美国很难——如果不是不可能的话——在各个政府之间采取任何明确和持续的战略。除非美中关系出现重大突破或破裂,否则华盛顿注定会就中国问题展开混乱的辩论,难以达成战略共识。这种对中国的战略困惑将对美国更广泛的地区战略产生重大影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pacific Review
Pacific Review Multiple-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Pacific Review provides a major platform for the study of the domestic policy making and international interaction of the countries of the Pacific Basin. Its primary focus is on politics and international relations in the broadest definitions of the terms, allowing for contributions on domestic and foreign politics, economic change and interactions, business and industrial policies, military strategy and cultural issues. The Pacific Review aims to be global in perspective, and while it carries many papers on domestic issues, seeks to explore the linkages between national, regional and global levels of analyses.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Blue Pacific’ strategic narrative: rhetorical action, acceptance, entrapment, and appropriation? Beyond the ‘North’-’South’ impasse: self-effacing Japan, emancipatory movements of the Global South and West-Engineered aid architecture Deter together or deter separately?: time horizons and peacetime alliance cohesion of the US-Japan and US-ROK alliances The Technopolitics of THAAD in East Asia Informal governance and China’s influence in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1