Clashing Geostrategic Choices in East Asia, 2009-2015: Re-balancing, Wedge Strategy, and Hedging

IF 0.1 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Korean Journal of International Studies Pub Date : 2020-04-30 DOI:10.14731/kjis.2020.04.18.1.33
J. Chun, Yan Ku
{"title":"Clashing Geostrategic Choices in East Asia, 2009-2015: Re-balancing, Wedge Strategy, and Hedging","authors":"J. Chun, Yan Ku","doi":"10.14731/kjis.2020.04.18.1.33","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to analyze a reshaping of the geopolitical dynamics in the East Asian region during the 2009-2015 period, which was mainly derived from the rapid growth of Chinese power. What strategies did the three major powers in East Asia—the U.S., China, and South Korea—adopt to maintain and promote their own and their collective interests? What impact did these strategies bring to East Asian international relations? What implications do these strategies have for the future East Asian regional order? In response to these questions, this article mainly argues that during the 2009-2015 period, the U.S., China, and South Korea took three geostrategic choices—rebalancing, wedge strategy, and hedging, respectively. In particular, this study creates the concept of a historical alliance between China and South Korea against their former common adversary, Japan. As part of China’s wedge strategy, the formation of such historical alliance played a role in weakening the U.S.-ROK-Japan security triangle. These clashing strategies have produced unstable conditions in East Asia, including intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, continuity of China-Japan and Japan-ROK tensions, and an ambivalent South Korean stance. A most important measure to alleviate these volatile conditions is for the U.S. and China to not intensify their rivalry, and instead maximize mutual cooperation in dealing with various challenging global issues, such as pandemics, global economic/ financial instability, climate change, nuclear proliferation, and war on terror. This article also suggests that under the condition of the intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, South Korea should","PeriodicalId":41543,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of International Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of International Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14731/kjis.2020.04.18.1.33","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study aims to analyze a reshaping of the geopolitical dynamics in the East Asian region during the 2009-2015 period, which was mainly derived from the rapid growth of Chinese power. What strategies did the three major powers in East Asia—the U.S., China, and South Korea—adopt to maintain and promote their own and their collective interests? What impact did these strategies bring to East Asian international relations? What implications do these strategies have for the future East Asian regional order? In response to these questions, this article mainly argues that during the 2009-2015 period, the U.S., China, and South Korea took three geostrategic choices—rebalancing, wedge strategy, and hedging, respectively. In particular, this study creates the concept of a historical alliance between China and South Korea against their former common adversary, Japan. As part of China’s wedge strategy, the formation of such historical alliance played a role in weakening the U.S.-ROK-Japan security triangle. These clashing strategies have produced unstable conditions in East Asia, including intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, continuity of China-Japan and Japan-ROK tensions, and an ambivalent South Korean stance. A most important measure to alleviate these volatile conditions is for the U.S. and China to not intensify their rivalry, and instead maximize mutual cooperation in dealing with various challenging global issues, such as pandemics, global economic/ financial instability, climate change, nuclear proliferation, and war on terror. This article also suggests that under the condition of the intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, South Korea should
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
2009-2015年东亚冲突的地缘战略选择:重新平衡、楔形战略和对冲
本研究旨在分析2009-2015年期间东亚地区地缘政治动态的重塑,这主要源于中国实力的快速增长。东亚的三个大国——美国、中国和韩国——采取了什么战略来维护和促进他们自己和他们的集体利益?这些战略对东亚国际关系产生了什么影响?这些战略对未来东亚地区秩序有何影响?针对这些问题,本文主要认为,在2009-2015年期间,美国、中国和韩国分别采取了三种地缘战略选择——再平衡战略、楔子战略和对冲战略。特别是,这项研究创造了中国和韩国之间对抗他们以前共同对手日本的历史联盟的概念。作为中国的楔子战略的一部分,这种历史同盟的形成对削弱美日韩安全三角起到了作用。这些冲突的战略在东亚造成了不稳定的局面,包括美中竞争加剧,中日和日韩紧张局势持续,以及韩国的矛盾立场。缓解这种不稳定状况的最重要措施是美国和中国不加剧竞争,而是在应对各种具有挑战性的全球问题上最大限度地开展相互合作,例如流行病、全球经济/金融不稳定、气候变化、核扩散和反恐战争。本文还建议,在美中竞争加剧的情况下,韩国应该
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
Korean Journal of International Studies
Korean Journal of International Studies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
CRUDE POWER: How Oil Affects Military Capacity and Institutions The Moderating Effects of Official Development Assistance on the Relationship between Foreign Direct Investment and Human Development The Nord Stream pipe dream: How an outdated Ostpolitik misguided Germany’s foreign policy toward Russia Why Restrict Emigration: Autocrats’ Economic Ideas in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan Supply Chain Security in the Age of Techno-Geopolitics: ‘Fab 4’ Case in the Semiconductor Industry
×
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