Search

Begin New Search Topic Rivalry Political Geography Asia

1. China Building Up BRICS as Important Foreign Policy Tool

Author:
Marcin Przychodniak
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
BRICS is useful for China in its rivalry with the U.S., mainly as a tool to influence developing countries. It is also an important element of strategic cooperation with Russia and a platform for dialogue with India. China does not care about BRICS integration, instead it wants to consolidate the group’s participants to further China’s goals.. The EU’s response to this should include effective support for developing countries and a subjective approach to their demands for global governance.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, European Union, BRICS, Rivalry, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and United States of America

2. Averting AI Armageddon: U.S.-China-Russia Rivalry at the Nexus of Nuclear Weapons and Artificial Intelligence

Author:
Jacob Stokes, Colin H. Kahl, Andrea Kendall-Taylor, and Nicholas Lokker
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
In recent years, the previous bipolar nuclear order led by the United States and Russia has given way to a more volatile tripolar one, as China has quantitatively and qualitatively built up its nuclear arsenal. At the same time, there have been significant breakthroughs in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, including for military applications. As a result of these two trends, understanding the AI-nuclear nexus in the context of U.S.-China-Russia geopolitical competition is increasingly urgent. There are various military use cases for AI, including classification models, analytic and predictive models, generative AI, and autonomy. Given that variety, it is necessary to examine the AI-nuclear nexus across three broad categories: nuclear command, control, and communications; structural elements of the nuclear balance; and entanglement of AI-enabled conventional systems with nuclear risks. While each of these categories has the potential to generate risk, this report argues that the degree of risk posed by a particular case depends on three major factors: the role of humans, the degree to which AI systems become a single point of failure, and the AI offense-defense balance. As Russia and China increasingly aim to modernize their nuclear arsenals and integrate AI into their militaries, it is essential for policymakers to be aware of the risks posed by the AI-nuclear nexus. Dealing with China and Russia on issues at this nexus is likely to be difficult in the current diplomatic and military context, characterized by increasingly strained bilateral relationships between the United States and both China and Russia, along with an uptick in coordination between Beijing and Moscow. Nonetheless, there are still various steps that U.S. policymakers could take to bolster deterrence and stability with respect to these issues. These include: building knowledge and competency around issues at the AI-nuclear nexus; integrating AI into diplomatic initiatives related to nuclear and other strategic risks, and vice versa; establishing and promoting norms for the safe use of AI in relation to nuclear arsenals and other strategic capabilities; developing policy and technical criteria for assessing exactly how and when to keep humans in the loop on all nuclear-related processes; including AI technologies as a factor in oversight and reviews of the U.S. nuclear arsenal; investing in AI-enabled cyber and space capabilities to enhance defense and resilience, reduce incentives to attack those areas, and mitigate entanglement risks; consulting closely with U.S. allies about how AI will shape extended deterrence calculations related to both nuclear and conventional capabilities; and pursuing a comprehensive set of risk reduction and crisis management mechanisms with China and Russia while recognizing the obstacles to progress. Failing to take these steps could leave the country and the world dangerously exposed to risks and ill-prepared to seize any opportunities arising from the increasingly salient AI-nuclear nexus.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Cybersecurity, Artificial Intelligence, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

3. Astropolitics and USA-China’s New Geopolitical Rivalry Area

Author:
Seyedmohammad Seyedi Asl
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
Space has always been a place for geopolitical competition, and concepts such as astropolitics have even emerged in the scientific world. However, in the last two decades, technological advances have led to an increase in interest in space activities and new global space competition involving many public and private organizations. In addition to political and commercial competition in the world, China and America have expanded the scope of their competition to somewhere outside the world, that is, outer space, and they are trying not to lag behind their competitors in this field. A new round of competition between China and the United States to return to space was formed, which was reminiscent of the space program competition between the United States and the former Soviet Union. The purpose of this research is to analyze the space competition between America and China from the perspective of space geopolitics, using the concept of Astropolitics. Therefore, this study illustrates the role of contemporary geopolitics in today’s space based on the dynamic nature of astropolitics, and assesses the emerging geopolitical competition behind the rise of international interest in space.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Space, Strategic Competition, Rivalry, and Astropolitics
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and United States of America

4. Aimless Rivalry: The Futility of US–China Competition in the Middle East

Author:
Jon Hoffman
Publication Date:
07-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Fear in Washington over China’s expanding regional presence is quickly becoming a new rationale for an expansive US foreign policy in the Middle East. But China remains an opportunistic actor in the Middle East, driven by practical needs, not by aspirations to dominate the region. Beijing lacks the ability and desire to assume a dominant position in the Middle East, and its ability to jeopardize US regional interests is limited.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Strategic Competition, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

5. Tailored Deterrence Strategy on the Korean Peninsula

Author:
Gary Samore
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
Over the last decade, the most significant change in the international strategic environment has been the reemergence of a great power rivalry between the U.S. and its European and Asian allies on one hand and Russia and China on the other. This trend began in the second term of President Obama, with the Russian invasion of Crimea in early 2014 and the Chinese construction of a network of military bases in the South China Sea beginning around 2013. Since then, the trend has sharpened. The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has locked the U.S. and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies against Russia in a long-term struggle for the survival of Ukraine and future of European security. In Asia, tensions between Beijing and Washington have become worse, as both the Trump and Biden admіnistrations pursued economic measures against China, and as China appears to be building military options to unify Taiwan and the mainland by force. The reemergence of great power rivalry has important nuclear dimensions, increasing concerns about “strategic stability” – the nuclear balance among the great powers – and the risk of nuclear conflict. The Ukraine war has lowered the nuclear threshold. Russia has deployed tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus and threatened to use tactical nuclear weapons to discourage NATO intervention or assistance to Ukraine. The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) - the last remaining arms control treaty limiting U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals - expires in February 2026, and Russia has refused U.S. offers to negotiate a new treaty as long as the U.S. is assisting Ukraine. In the meantime, Russia continues to develop an array of exotic nuclear delivery systеms intended to overcome U.S. missile defenses, including hypersonic reentry vehicles, nuclear-armed submarine drones, and nuclear anti-satellite weapons. China is pursuing an unprecedented nuclear build-up, including new strategic bombers, more advanced nuclear-armed submarines, and three new missile bases with more than 300 silos for solid fuel ICBMs with multiple reentry vehicles. According to U.S. Department of Defense estimates, China has more than 500 operational nuclear warheads as of May 2023 and will “probably have over 1,000 operational nuclear warheads by 2030” (U.S. Department of Defense 2023a). Like Russia, China is also pursuing hypersonic reentry vehicles, anti-satellite weapons, and strategic cyber operations. Some analysts fear that China’s nuclear build-up will make it more confident that it can deter U.S. intervention in the face of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or increase the risk that a U.S.-China confrontation over Taiwan will escalate to nuclear use. To address the reemergence of great power threats, the U.S. has introduced the concepts of “tailored deterrence” and “integrated deterrence” into its nuclear doctrine. According to the Trump admіnistration Nuclear Posture Review, released in February 2018, The United States will apply a tailored and flexible approach to effectively deter across a spectrum of adversaries, threats, and contexts. Tailored deterrence strategies communicate to different potential adversaries that their aggression would carry unacceptable risks and intolerable costs according to their particular calculations of risk and cost (Office of the Secretary of Defense 2018). The tailored deterrence concept was also adopted by the Biden admіnistration in its October 2022 Nuclear Posture Review, saying, Central to U.S. deterrence strategy is the credibility of our nuclear forces to hold at risk what adversary leadership values most. Effectively deterring – and restoring deterrence if necessary – requires tailored strategies for potential adversaries that reflect our best understanding of their decision-making and perceptions (Office of the Secretary of Defense 2022). Building on the concept of tailored deterrence, the Biden admіnistration Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) also introduced the concept of “integrated deterrence,” which is based on the idea that traditional nuclear deterrence can be reinforced by non-nuclear capabilities. According to the NPR, The role of nuclear weapons is well established and embedded in strategic deterrence policy and plans. Non-nuclear capabilities may be able to complement nuclear forces in strategic deterrence plans and operations in ways that are suited to their attributes and consistent with policy on how they are to be employed. A pragmatic approach to integrated deterrence will seek to determine how the Joint Force can combine nuclear and non-nuclear capabilities in complementary ways that leverage the unique attributes of a multi-domain set of forces to enable a range of deterrence options backstopped by a credible nuclear deterrent (Ibid.).
Topic:
Foreign Policy, National Security, Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and United States of America

6. Beijing Moderates Criticisms Selectively

Author:
Robert G. Sutter and Chin-Hao Huang
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Comparative Connections
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
Beijing in this reporting period moderated often shrill rhetoric of the past two years criticizing Joseph Biden administration advances and regional governments cooperating with the US. Emphasizing China’s positive contributions to regional economic growth, Beijing stressed its flexibility, said to be different from Washington in not pressing regional states to choose between the US and China, even as it demonstrated ambitions to develop a new regional and global order favorable to itself. Nevertheless, glaring exceptions included egregious pressures to compel deference to China’s claims in the South China Sea, harsh criticism of the Philippines and Japan cooperating closely with the United States, as well as authoritative foreign policy statements giving regional governments little choice between two paths forward: cooperation with an avowedly beneficial China or America’s purported exploitative, divisive and destructive initiatives. Regarding the Philippines, an unprecedented show of support by the US for the territorial claims of its treaty ally resulted in an equally unprecedented pushback from Beijing.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Rivalry, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Southeast Asia

7. Securitization of China Pakistan Economic Corridor Amid India China Rivalry

Author:
Muhammad Babar and Muhammad Umar
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
South Asian Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
China Pakistan economic corridor (CPEC) is the flagship project of the Belt and Road initiative (BRI). The project has been considered the guarantor of Pakistan‟s economic development and has the potential to significantly improve the Pakistan gross domestic product and to transform Pakistan economy from import driven to export driven. Since the project has been under various impediments particularly in the domain of security, there have been several attacks on the Chinese personal working on the projects and its installations, majorly prompted by the Indian backed proxies and non-state actors in Pakistan. The Potential threats to the success of CPEC have been enhanced due the growing and intensifying India china rivalry. The securitization of the CPEC from all potential threats is a matter of national interest and ensuring national and economic security. This paper highlights the importance of CPEC for Pakistan‟s economy, potentials threats to the CPEC emanating from the Indian backed-proxies, discuss security measures taken to address these concerns and suggests a strategic path forward for the project securitization.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Non State Actors, Borders, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Exports, Economic Development, Rivalry, Securitization, and Proxy Groups
Political Geography:
China, South Asia, India, and Asia

8. The Next U.S. Administration and China Policy

Author:
International Crisis Group
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
The world’s two most powerful countries – the U.S. and China – are increasingly at odds over several issues. The winner of November’s U.S. presidential election should strive to contain the tensions in this difficult relationship in service of stability in the wider world.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Elections, Donald Trump, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

9. Not Just Boots on the Beach: How China Can Use Deception, Confusion, and Incrementalism to Change the Status Quo on Taiwan

Author:
Jude Blanchette and Hal Brands
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
Edited by Jude Blanchette of CSIS and Hal Brands of SAIS, the Marshall Papers is a series of essays that probes and challenges the assessments underpinning the U.S. approach to great power rivalry. The papers will be rigorous yet provocative, continually pushing the boundaries of intellectual and policy debates. In this Marshall Paper, Jude Blanchette and Hal Brands explore four coercive approaches that Beijing could use to change the status quo around Taiwan short of outright invasion or blockade. The paper also highlights the serious challenges Washington and Taipei must address to have a ready response to these scenarios.
Topic:
International Security, Territorial Disputes, Geopolitics, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and Asia

10. The European Union between the United States and China: should we choose between equidistance and following?

Author:
Philippe Etienne
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
The competition between the world's two major powers structures all international relations and influences the choices made by all other countries. The latter fear the consequences of tensions between the two giants and, in the main, want to avoid having to choose. But the problem is not the same everywhere. To put it simply, China benefits in the "global South" from a certain hostility towards the West, while the United States can play on the fear aroused by the emergence of Chinese power, which no longer hesitates to resort to power relations, especially in Eastern Asia[1]. Against this backdrop, Europe is in a delicate situation. It must contend with its assimilation to the United States as being part of the “West” which is increasingly rejected. Although it shares much with its American ally, particularly the values of democracy and security arrangements, it does not always have the same interests as the United States and must preserve its room for manoeuvre if it is not to be dragged into decisions in which it has no part. Before examining how the European Union is facing up to this challenge, and how it should behave in the future, the driving forces and prospects of the Sino-American rivalry require exploration.
Topic:
International Relations, Globalization, European Union, Global South, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America