Pub Date : 2023-08-30DOI: 10.1177/00207020231195631
Lloyd Cox, Danny Cooper, B. O'connor
In September 2021, Australia, the US, and the United Kingdom entered into a new trilateral security pact, AUKUS. Central to AUKUS is Australia acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, scheduled to begin delivery in the 2030s. AUKUS was announced by Australia's previous conservative government, but it has also won the strong support of the new Labor government. The rationale behind AUKUS emphasizes growing security challenges in the Indo-Pacific and the advantages of joint capabilities and interoperability in the context of China's growing assertiveness in the region. This article examines AUKUS through the lens of China's rise and the contradictory economic and security imperatives that the agreement poses for Australia. We argue that AUKUS is the latest expression of Australia's strategic culture, which is premised on a fear of abandonment and a conviction that Australia's core security interests can only be guaranteed by the support of the US. Yet this position harbours risks that are not widely acknowledged. These include risks to Australia's sovereignty and other risks arising from the uncertainties of the US position in Asia and the volatility of US domestic politics.
{"title":"The AUKUS umbrella: Australia-US relations and strategic culture in the shadow of China's rise","authors":"Lloyd Cox, Danny Cooper, B. O'connor","doi":"10.1177/00207020231195631","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231195631","url":null,"abstract":"In September 2021, Australia, the US, and the United Kingdom entered into a new trilateral security pact, AUKUS. Central to AUKUS is Australia acquiring nuclear-powered submarines, scheduled to begin delivery in the 2030s. AUKUS was announced by Australia's previous conservative government, but it has also won the strong support of the new Labor government. The rationale behind AUKUS emphasizes growing security challenges in the Indo-Pacific and the advantages of joint capabilities and interoperability in the context of China's growing assertiveness in the region. This article examines AUKUS through the lens of China's rise and the contradictory economic and security imperatives that the agreement poses for Australia. We argue that AUKUS is the latest expression of Australia's strategic culture, which is premised on a fear of abandonment and a conviction that Australia's core security interests can only be guaranteed by the support of the US. Yet this position harbours risks that are not widely acknowledged. These include risks to Australia's sovereignty and other risks arising from the uncertainties of the US position in Asia and the volatility of US domestic politics.","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"307 - 326"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47244551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-29DOI: 10.1177/00207020231197761
Christina Lai
In 2021 the US, UK, and Australia established a trilateral security partnership known as AUKUS. This new security arrangement carries strategic implications for Taiwan's national security and prospects for regional order in Asia. It also leads to empirical puzzles: how will members of multiple alliances respond to rising threats? Under what conditions can a patron state avoid unwanted entrapment and imperial overstretch? This article contributes to existing scholarship in US foreign policy and alliance management in Asia. It offers concrete thoughts on how a US policy of strategic clarity toward Taiwan and its contingency would enhance AUKUS's resilience, while US allies in Asia and Europe could maintain a collective stance of strategic ambiguity that would lessen internal tensions among the member states. Such an arrangement could not only help stabilize Asia's regional order, but also secure Taiwan's autonomy against Beijing's forced reunification.
{"title":"Bound to Lead: US-Taiwan Relations, Security Networks, and The Future of AUKUS","authors":"Christina Lai","doi":"10.1177/00207020231197761","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231197761","url":null,"abstract":"In 2021 the US, UK, and Australia established a trilateral security partnership known as AUKUS. This new security arrangement carries strategic implications for Taiwan's national security and prospects for regional order in Asia. It also leads to empirical puzzles: how will members of multiple alliances respond to rising threats? Under what conditions can a patron state avoid unwanted entrapment and imperial overstretch? This article contributes to existing scholarship in US foreign policy and alliance management in Asia. It offers concrete thoughts on how a US policy of strategic clarity toward Taiwan and its contingency would enhance AUKUS's resilience, while US allies in Asia and Europe could maintain a collective stance of strategic ambiguity that would lessen internal tensions among the member states. Such an arrangement could not only help stabilize Asia's regional order, but also secure Taiwan's autonomy against Beijing's forced reunification.","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"417 - 434"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48019738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-29DOI: 10.1177/00207020231198035
P. M. Boehm
work could benefit from a few concepts from Political Science. While historians are typically allergic to causal analysis, certain analytical possibilities should not be elided so easily. Finally, we come to the keyword in the title: “confronting” SaddamHussein. In the conclusion, Leffler makes a provocative argument that Bush “decided to confront Hussein— not invade Iraq.” However, the distinction between “confrontingHussein” and “not invading Iraq” goes unexplained. Moreover, it carries major implications that raise more questions than Leffler answers. When did confronting Hussein become invading Iraq? When did invasion become inevitable? Why did the US invade Iraq in March 2003 and not some other time? Did Bush take the prospect of war seriously? If the intention was to confront Saddam, and not invade Iraq, then what accounts for invasion? This opens the possibility that invading happened by accident, or at least, for reasons that are not explained in this book. Clearly, Confronting Saddam Hussein will not be the last word on the Iraq War. Twenty years after the event, it stands as a valuable reminder of what we know and of what remains unknown.
{"title":"Book Review: People, Politics and Purpose: Biography and Canadian Political History","authors":"P. M. Boehm","doi":"10.1177/00207020231198035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231198035","url":null,"abstract":"work could benefit from a few concepts from Political Science. While historians are typically allergic to causal analysis, certain analytical possibilities should not be elided so easily. Finally, we come to the keyword in the title: “confronting” SaddamHussein. In the conclusion, Leffler makes a provocative argument that Bush “decided to confront Hussein— not invade Iraq.” However, the distinction between “confrontingHussein” and “not invading Iraq” goes unexplained. Moreover, it carries major implications that raise more questions than Leffler answers. When did confronting Hussein become invading Iraq? When did invasion become inevitable? Why did the US invade Iraq in March 2003 and not some other time? Did Bush take the prospect of war seriously? If the intention was to confront Saddam, and not invade Iraq, then what accounts for invasion? This opens the possibility that invading happened by accident, or at least, for reasons that are not explained in this book. Clearly, Confronting Saddam Hussein will not be the last word on the Iraq War. Twenty years after the event, it stands as a valuable reminder of what we know and of what remains unknown.","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"481 - 483"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41562166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-27DOI: 10.1177/00207020231198058
Gloria Novovic
initiative when cautionary flags are raised at both the political and bureaucratic levels. Second, Ryan Touhey’s piece on former practitioner John Hadwen, “A Journey Without Maps: John Hadwen in India 1979–83,” assesses the policy impact of a foreign service officer who through an illustrious career became high commissioner to India at a time when improved relations with the world’s largest democracy mattered and access to the top was key. Hadwen recognized the importance of commercial relations, the need to get beyond India’s weaponization of Canadian nuclear technology for its own ends, and used his impressive access to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to great effect, even when Ottawa seemed to drop the ball. Yet in this volume, P.E. Bryden and P. Whitney Lackenbauer bring out the humanity that can both characterize and take biography to a new, expanded level of which John English would be proud. In their respective contributions on “Scandal and the Decentring of Canadian Biography: The Case of Gerda Munsinger” and “Competing Biographies: How James Gladstone became Canada’s First Indigenous Senator,” both tell complex and interesting stories of their protagonists. Bryden sets out the compelling story of an immigrant who found herself in the centre of an early 1960s political sex scandal that in the end had no great national security implications but served to titillate the ruling class in Ottawa and those paying attention across the country. It simply and compellingly offers biography as a window into an ordinary life. Lackenbauer describes a story dear to me as I pass by James Gladstone’s bust every day as I enter the Senate. His analysis of how Gladstone came to be chosen over other leading indigenous personalities by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker is a story of noble intentions, the difficulty of a selection process, regional politics, testing the public pulse, and dignity for Indigenous peoples. It is a fascinating read. In his conclusion, John Milloy refers to biography as being “relatable, respectful, realistic, and relevant.” The authors of the essays in this interesting and very readable volume achieve this. They readily demonstrate that modern Canadian biography can easily follow these guidelines and can move into newer analytical paradigms. In many ways, John English has blazed a trail for others to follow, encouraging their own passion for reason in the treatment of their subjects.
{"title":"Book Review: Socialist Yugoslavia and the Non-Aligned Movement: Social, Cultural, Political, and Economic Imaginaries","authors":"Gloria Novovic","doi":"10.1177/00207020231198058","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231198058","url":null,"abstract":"initiative when cautionary flags are raised at both the political and bureaucratic levels. Second, Ryan Touhey’s piece on former practitioner John Hadwen, “A Journey Without Maps: John Hadwen in India 1979–83,” assesses the policy impact of a foreign service officer who through an illustrious career became high commissioner to India at a time when improved relations with the world’s largest democracy mattered and access to the top was key. Hadwen recognized the importance of commercial relations, the need to get beyond India’s weaponization of Canadian nuclear technology for its own ends, and used his impressive access to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to great effect, even when Ottawa seemed to drop the ball. Yet in this volume, P.E. Bryden and P. Whitney Lackenbauer bring out the humanity that can both characterize and take biography to a new, expanded level of which John English would be proud. In their respective contributions on “Scandal and the Decentring of Canadian Biography: The Case of Gerda Munsinger” and “Competing Biographies: How James Gladstone became Canada’s First Indigenous Senator,” both tell complex and interesting stories of their protagonists. Bryden sets out the compelling story of an immigrant who found herself in the centre of an early 1960s political sex scandal that in the end had no great national security implications but served to titillate the ruling class in Ottawa and those paying attention across the country. It simply and compellingly offers biography as a window into an ordinary life. Lackenbauer describes a story dear to me as I pass by James Gladstone’s bust every day as I enter the Senate. His analysis of how Gladstone came to be chosen over other leading indigenous personalities by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker is a story of noble intentions, the difficulty of a selection process, regional politics, testing the public pulse, and dignity for Indigenous peoples. It is a fascinating read. In his conclusion, John Milloy refers to biography as being “relatable, respectful, realistic, and relevant.” The authors of the essays in this interesting and very readable volume achieve this. They readily demonstrate that modern Canadian biography can easily follow these guidelines and can move into newer analytical paradigms. In many ways, John English has blazed a trail for others to follow, encouraging their own passion for reason in the treatment of their subjects.","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"483 - 486"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44847682","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-27DOI: 10.1177/00207020231197767
A. Umar, Yulida Nuraini Santoso
What does AUKUS mean for Southeast Asia? While some Southeast Asian countries are critical of the new pact, others appear to be more positive or, at least, neutral towards it. We argue that Southeast Asian responses to AUKUS are characterised by a new ontological security dilemma with three different characteristics. First, Southeast Asian countries—particularly Indonesia and Malaysia—face the dilemma of maintaining a balance of power and regional stability amid an environment of increasing engagement with extra-regional actors. A second dilemma relates to the region's need for security against extra-regional threats, primarily from China, which led several Southeast Asian countries—such as Singapore, Vietnam, and the Philippines—to support AUKUS, either explicitly or implicitly. Third is ASEAN's organisational dilemma of how to strategically utilise its regional frameworks to respond to AUKUS amid the divergent views of major Southeast Asian countries. We then address efforts to mitigate the regional security dilemma by reconsidering ASEAN regional frameworks and rethinking the role of the ASEAN chairman to deal with major regional security issues.
{"title":"AUKUS and Southeast Asia's Ontological Security Dilemma","authors":"A. Umar, Yulida Nuraini Santoso","doi":"10.1177/00207020231197767","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231197767","url":null,"abstract":"What does AUKUS mean for Southeast Asia? While some Southeast Asian countries are critical of the new pact, others appear to be more positive or, at least, neutral towards it. We argue that Southeast Asian responses to AUKUS are characterised by a new ontological security dilemma with three different characteristics. First, Southeast Asian countries—particularly Indonesia and Malaysia—face the dilemma of maintaining a balance of power and regional stability amid an environment of increasing engagement with extra-regional actors. A second dilemma relates to the region's need for security against extra-regional threats, primarily from China, which led several Southeast Asian countries—such as Singapore, Vietnam, and the Philippines—to support AUKUS, either explicitly or implicitly. Third is ASEAN's organisational dilemma of how to strategically utilise its regional frameworks to respond to AUKUS amid the divergent views of major Southeast Asian countries. We then address efforts to mitigate the regional security dilemma by reconsidering ASEAN regional frameworks and rethinking the role of the ASEAN chairman to deal with major regional security issues.","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"435 - 453"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41465295","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-27DOI: 10.1177/00207020231198023
Aaron Ettinger
{"title":"Book Review: Confronting Saddam Hussein: George W. Bush and the Invasion of Iraq","authors":"Aaron Ettinger","doi":"10.1177/00207020231198023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231198023","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"479 - 481"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43999992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-21DOI: 10.1177/00207020231195633
Maxandre Fortier, Justin Massie
The intensification of rivalries between the US and China, and, in recent years, between the US and Russia, has deeply affected how middle powers relate to these great powers. Scholars have argued that middle powers are increasingly adopting “hedging” strategies to maximize their benefits and limit the consequences of the great power competition for their security and status. This paper revisits the concept of hedging and assesses whether two prominent US allies—Australia and Canada—have resorted to hedging in place of conventional alternatives like bandwagoning and balancing. The paper systematically compares Australia's and Canada's threat perceptions and defence policies to ascertain whether they have shifted their policies in the wake of the US's relative decline. Since our study began, in 2008, we have found instances where the two allies resorted to hedging. However, evidence shows that when pressured to make a choice, Australia and Canada have closed ranks with the US against revisionist powers. Our paper suggests that threat perceptions play a fundamental role in this. Going forward, it would suggest that the US is in a stronger position than commonly assumed. As the competition between Washington and revisionist great powers increases, the former's ability to build credible coalitions is expected to improve as it will rely on more dependable allies.
{"title":"Strategic hedgers? Australia and Canada's defence adapation to the global power transition","authors":"Maxandre Fortier, Justin Massie","doi":"10.1177/00207020231195633","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231195633","url":null,"abstract":"The intensification of rivalries between the US and China, and, in recent years, between the US and Russia, has deeply affected how middle powers relate to these great powers. Scholars have argued that middle powers are increasingly adopting “hedging” strategies to maximize their benefits and limit the consequences of the great power competition for their security and status. This paper revisits the concept of hedging and assesses whether two prominent US allies—Australia and Canada—have resorted to hedging in place of conventional alternatives like bandwagoning and balancing. The paper systematically compares Australia's and Canada's threat perceptions and defence policies to ascertain whether they have shifted their policies in the wake of the US's relative decline. Since our study began, in 2008, we have found instances where the two allies resorted to hedging. However, evidence shows that when pressured to make a choice, Australia and Canada have closed ranks with the US against revisionist powers. Our paper suggests that threat perceptions play a fundamental role in this. Going forward, it would suggest that the US is in a stronger position than commonly assumed. As the competition between Washington and revisionist great powers increases, the former's ability to build credible coalitions is expected to improve as it will rely on more dependable allies.","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"463 - 478"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48285384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-21DOI: 10.1177/00207020231195629
N. Pearce
The idea of a transoceanic ‘Indo-Pacific’ region has a long historical lineage in British political thought and practice, one whose roots lie in processes of imperial colonisation, conquest and trade in Asia and Australasia. Recent discourses of a return ‘East of Suez’ and the UK's ‘Indo-Pacific Tilt’ cannot be understood as mere imperial nostalgia or post-imperial over-reach, however. Instead, there are historical political imaginaries of Britain's global role which are being put to work in the contemporary politics of shaping an Indo-Pacific strategy for the UK. British policy in the Indo-Pacific has been marked by a consistent awareness of multi-polarity and strategic vulnerability, hierarchies of alliances that give a privileged place to the US and the countries of the ‘Anglosphere’, and the recurrence of maritime, ‘blue water’ conceptions of British identity and interests. These are now being tested by the war in Ukraine and other developments.
{"title":"‘East of Suez’ and the ‘Indo-Pacific’ in British Politics: Some Lessons of History","authors":"N. Pearce","doi":"10.1177/00207020231195629","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020231195629","url":null,"abstract":"The idea of a transoceanic ‘Indo-Pacific’ region has a long historical lineage in British political thought and practice, one whose roots lie in processes of imperial colonisation, conquest and trade in Asia and Australasia. Recent discourses of a return ‘East of Suez’ and the UK's ‘Indo-Pacific Tilt’ cannot be understood as mere imperial nostalgia or post-imperial over-reach, however. Instead, there are historical political imaginaries of Britain's global role which are being put to work in the contemporary politics of shaping an Indo-Pacific strategy for the UK. British policy in the Indo-Pacific has been marked by a consistent awareness of multi-polarity and strategic vulnerability, hierarchies of alliances that give a privileged place to the US and the countries of the ‘Anglosphere’, and the recurrence of maritime, ‘blue water’ conceptions of British identity and interests. These are now being tested by the war in Ukraine and other developments.","PeriodicalId":46226,"journal":{"name":"International Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":"345 - 358"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42211994","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：