Search

Begin New Search Topic Science and Technology Political Geography Asia

271. China’s Smart Cities: The New Geopolitical Battleground

Author:
Alice Ekman
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
“Smart city” development has become a fashionable policy and research topic. A growing number of central and local governments in Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America, in partnership with companies from diverse sectors (construction, transport, energy, water, etc), consulting firms, NGOs and experts, are now developing smart-city-related projects. This report looks at the smart city from a broader, geopolitical perspective, and considers it, for the first time, as a potential area of geopolitical competition between countries. This approach is relevant given the strategic nature of the infrastructure involved in smart-city development (telecommunication and energy grids, mobile networks, data centers, etc). It is also relevant at a time of prolonged tensions between China and the United States – a period during which 5G and other technologies that are key to developing smart cities are generating global debate and diverging positions across countries.
Topic:
Development, Science and Technology, Urbanization, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Smart Cities
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

272. China’s Military Biotech Frontier: CRISPR, Military-Civil Fusion, and the New Revolution in Military Affairs

Author:
Elsa Kania and Wilson VornDick
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
China’s national strategy of military-civil fusion (军民融合, junmin ronghe) has highlighted biology as a priority. [1] It is hardly surprising that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is looking to leverage synergies among defense, scientific, and commercial developments in biological interdisciplinary (生物交叉, shengwu jiaocha) technologies. Chinese military scientists and strategists have consistently emphasized that biotechnology could become a “new strategic commanding heights of the future Revolution in Military Affairs” (军事革命, junshi geming) (PLA Daily, October 2015). Certainly, the PRC is not alone in recognizing the potential of biotechnology on the future battlefield, but the ways in which Chinese research is seeking to integrate developments among industry, academic institutions, and military-oriented programs—including through research collaborations and the procurement of dual-purpose commercial technologies—may prove striking. In particular, China is at the forefront of today’s breakthroughs in CRISPR-Cas, a new technique for gene editing that has demonstrated unique potential and precision despite its current limitations.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, and Weapons
Political Geography:
China and Asia

273. Arrests in Poland Contribute to the International Controversies Surrounding Huawei

Author:
John Dotson
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
China Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
The December 1, 2018, arrest of Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou, and the arrest of another Huawei employee in Poland, come on the heels of a series of escalating measures—or measures under consideration—by governments in North America and the Pacific Region to restrict the use of Chinese-manufactured telecommunications equipment. Such measures are now increasingly under consideration in Europe, as well, with major implications not only for the international profile of companies such as Huawei, but also for the construction of advanced communications infrastructure throughout much of the world.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, Economy, and Research
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, Poland, North America, and United States of America

274. U.S. Trade Policy in North America, China, and Beyond

Author:
Andy Green and Daniella Zessoules
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
In recent decades, economic, political, and technological barriers to international trade and investment have collapsed around the world. This rapid globalization of commerce has lifted many out of poverty in developing countries, but due in part to a lack of meaningful labor and environmental standards and enforcement, it has also resulted in an outsourcing of production and jobs as well as downward pressure on workers’ real wages in developed countries such as the United States.1 The key trade agreements and international institutions put in place to manage globalization, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO), have failed to rebalance the rules to enable globalization to work on behalf of all workers—not just in the United States, but in Mexico, China, and more broadly. And in many cases, the trade rules have exacerbated economic pressures on many U.S. workers.2 For years, progressive voices in the United States have called for efforts to make globalization work better for working families, communities, and the environment.3 Now, the Trump administration has sought claim to the trade reform mantle. Those claims, however, should be met with skepticism. The 2017 congressional Republican tax law slashed taxes for corporations and the wealthy on the false promise of raising wages for workers.4 Corporate profits, share buybacks, and mergers and acquisitions have all boomed, but working-class wages have barely budged.5 The international provisions of the 2017 tax law further incentivize offshoring operations at the expense of domestic investments and sourcing.6 The Trump administration’s domestic economic agenda of financial deregulation, budget cuts, and attacks on workplace safety and labor rights protections will simply make matters worse for working families. The administration’s record on trade policy has been mixed and largely incoherent. The president railed against NAFTA and other trade agreements for harming workers and U.S. jobs yet renegotiated a new NAFTA deal that fails to make labor and environmental standards meaningfully enforceable.7 His administration has slapped tariffs on adversaries and allies alike with little strategy—often in the name of national security and without addressing the root causes of the problem. Threatening further tariffs, the administration now is engaged in negotiations with China over intellectual property theft, market access for foreign multinationals, and a state-led industrial strategy.8 The president announced a delay in the additional tariffs, suggesting a deal with China is coming together, but concerns have long existed that the administration may settle for high-profile spot sales of U.S. commodities while effectively letting structural impediments and China’s industrial policies continue.9 The cost of what may be President Donald Trump’s high-profile deal with China could be real concessions for the United States, including in the technology and national security space, without providing lasting, solidly enforceable benefits more broadly.10 As U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer makes his first appearance this week before the new U.S. House of Representatives, the Trump administration will finally have to answer for its approach. Here are several questions that Congress should ask in order to hold the administration accountable to the American people.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, and Science and Technology
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

275. Whither US-China Trade War? Impacts on global trade, technology and finance, and strategies to mitigate risks

Author:
Lia Valls Pereira, Tatiana Rosito, and Gabriel de Barros Torres
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Brazilian Center for International Relations (CEBRI)
Abstract:
For its twelthth meeting, CEBRI's China Analysis Group organized discussions on the economic and geopolitical causes and consequences of trade frictions between China and the United States, considering its impact on different actors and on the multilateral trading system at large. Despite the original focus on trade imbalances, participants noted that the bilateral rivalry’s underlying drivers relate to competition for leadership in high-tech sectors and, fundamentally, to the conciliation of practices associated with different development models. Notwithstanding the uncertainty surrounding the next steps in the dispute, there was a consensus among participants that a complete decoupling between both economies is virtually unfeasible in the short-term and not likely in the long-term. The speakers at the event were Marcos Troyjo, Jin Canrong, Kellie Meiman and Niu Haibin and comments were made by Lia Valls and Tatiana Prazeres. The event was coordinated by CEBRI Senior Fellow Tatiana Rosito.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Bilateral Relations, Finance, Trade Wars, Risk, and Trade
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

276. China’s Race to Global Technology Leadership

Author:
Alessia Amighini
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
The current trade war between the US and China looks like a small piece in a much larger puzzle over world leadership in which China plays the part of the ascending challenger seeking to upset the existing balance of power. Technology and innovation seem to be Beijing’s weapons of choice in its frontal assault on Washington in sectors traditionally led by the US. China is not only acquiring technology. Its ambitions include the regulation of international trade and global governance. Just what a China-led global order would look like is still unclear, but the inherent dangers of technology need to be meticulously assessed, as they have the potential to alter the core values of modern societies. To what extent will technology facilitate China’s rise?
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, Governance, Leadership, and Trade Wars
Political Geography:
China and Asia

277. China's Global Power and Development: The Made in China 2025 Policy

Author:
Diego Pautasso
Publication Date:
08-2019
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:
The purpose of this article is to analyze the relationship between development and global power of China. And, more specifically, how the Made in China 2025 policy is designed to deepen China’s development by driving strategic sectors of smart manufacturing and other innovations. To do so, it needs to understand how China has taken advantage of systemic changes since the 1970s to unleash a cycle of comprehensive reforms mobilizing industrial, commercial and technological (ICT) policies. That is, without state emulation there is no economic complexity or expansion of the country’s presence in the world. The proposed argument is that the interweaving between the internal and international dimensions compose the key of the rise of the powers - imperative underestimated by the narratives of liberal globalization - whose epicenter remains the national development.
Topic:
Development, Globalization, Science and Technology, Hegemony, Manufacturing, and Industrialization
Political Geography:
China and Asia

278. Behind the Myth of the National Bourgeoisie: A Comparative Analysis of the Developmentalist State in Brazil and South Korea

Author:
Pedro Brites and Bruna Coelho Jaeger
Publication Date:
08-2019
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:
Since the 1990s, many analysts have sought to explain the differences in development paths between Brazil and South Korea, the latter often being pointed as an example of success. As a highly industrialized economy focused on international trade, the South Korean case stood out as a way of overcoming the backwardness of developing countries. However, there is a need for analysis that point to the specificities of the developmental state in South Korea, whose interventionist action was decisive in leveraging the country’s industrial production in accordance with internal business groups, as well as the geopolitical context favorable to outward-oriented industrialization. The Brazilian process, in turn, due to the wealth of natural resources and the large domestic market, has made the induction of the state in industrialization more artificial, whose policy supposes an element of coercion, induction and control. This research, therefore, seeks to analyze the specific dimensions of each case, highlighting the role of the state and its relationship with the internal bourgeoisie in the construction of an industrial policy. The trajectories of rise and decline of Brazilian and South Korean developmental state will be analyzed, including the current crisis of reconfiguration of political power that both countries are going through.
Topic:
Development, Science and Technology, Governance, and Industrialization
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, Brazil, and South America

279. Geo4Nonpro 2.0

Author:
Melissa Hanham
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Abstract:
The most impressive discovery was North Korea’s Kangson uranium-enrichment facility. CNS believes it to be the first time this facility has been identified or analyzed in the open-source literature. It represents the possibility that North Korea has been producing—and can continue to produce—as much, if not more, fissile material for nuclear weapons than it could have using the only previously known enrichment site at Yongbyon. The first section of this report discusses the evolution of the platform: from the conception of Geo4Nonpro 1.0 and the initial training of G4N team members, to the lessons learned during the first phase of the project and how these lessons fed into the platform’s continued development. The second section describes the launch of Geo4Nonpro 2.0, its new features, and highlights news stories that featured Geo4Nonpro and the central role that it played in many of these discoveries. This is followed by an analysis of each campaign. Lastly, the team proposes the next steps and future applications for this innovative platform.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Science and Technology, Nuclear Power, and Emerging Technology
Political Geography:
Asia and North Korea

280. North Korea’s International Scientific Collaborations: Their Scope, Scale, and Potential Dual-Use and Military Significance

Author:
Joshua Pollack and Scott LaFoy
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Abstract:
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has described research and development as crucial to his regime’s efforts to overcome the international sanctions regime. By developing key technologies indigenously, North Korea seeks to reduce its need to import sensitive goods that might otherwise be denied to it through export controls, sanctions enforcement, or lack of funds. Direct collaboration between North Korean and foreign scientists is playing an expanding role in the regime’s pursuit of technological advancement. To assess the extent of this activity, and to identify collaborative research involving dual-use technologies and other technologies of potential military significance, the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS) of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey developed a new dataset capturing publications coauthored by North Korean scientists and foreign scientists between 1958 and April 2018.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Asia and North Korea