Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Indo-Pacific Publication Year within 3 Years

131. New Opportunities for the United States-Kingdom of Thailand Alliance in the Indo-Pacific

Author:
Lance D. Jackson
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
In March 2022, the East-West Center in Washington (EWCW), in collaboration with the Royal Thai Embassy, Washington, DC, convened a two-day seminar in which experts from Thailand and the United States discussed issues and opportunities for the US-Thailand alliance. The workshop included a diverse array of discussants hailing from government, military, academic, think tank, and private sector backgrounds. This report, which adheres to the “Chatham House Rule” under which observations referred to in the report are not attributed to any individual participant, is a summary of the group discussions and the key themes from the seminar. The recent signing of the United States-Thailand Communique on Strategic Alliance and Partnership and a memorandum of understanding (MOU) focused on promoting supply chain resilience on July 10, 2022, highlight the pertinence of this report and the associated seminar. The topics detailed in this report aligned with many of the pressing issues addressed in the Communique and MOU, including expanding law enforcement cooperation, deepening cybersecurity collaboration, supporting resilient transportation corridors, advancing military modernization, and catalyzing Thailand’s bio-circular-green (BCG) economy. The report also covered topics and key themes from a series of jointly produced public webinars and an Asia Pacific Bulletin series of policy briefs on US-Thai affairs.
Topic:
International Relations, Climate Change, Economics, Education, Environment, Politics, Science and Technology, Governance, Population, Leadership, Public Health, and Travel
Political Geography:
Asia, North America, Thailand, Southeast Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

132. The challenges of protecting Europe’s maritime areas of common interest, from the Atlantic to the Indo-Pacific

Author:
Hervé Hamelin
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
The geostrategic environment is currently replete with confrontations and "fait accompli" policies, set against a backdrop of national power reassertion and conflicting competitive interest[1]. Maritime spaces are also increasingly embroiled in this tension as economic, commercial and even strategic issues remain inextricably linked to the maintenance of good order at sea. Consequently the world faces two strategic paradoxes. The first of these is the tension between national and global interests. The interdependence of world economies and the pressing issue of climate change require a global approach to problem resolution. Indeed it is from this imperative that the notion of common spaces was born, initially in the maritime domain before being extended to the air, space and cyber domains. Freedom of navigation enabling the ability to trade in the maritime environment is therefore a fundamental element of collective wealth. The second paradox is the contradictory pressure between the maintenance of the international framework and the law of the strongest. Some States increasingly uses intimidation and coercion as the transactional mode of choice. This challenge to the role of the international community is contributing markedly to increased instability and regional tensions. Certain stakeholders are attempting to appropriate maritime areas over which they claim sovereignty. The European Union (EU) must take account of this evolving ominous change to the stability of geostrategic environment. While the extent of the EU maritime domain is synonymous with major opportunities, it also brings with it a corresponding level of challenges to be met, first and foremost that of the security of these maritime areas of common interest. Accordingly, to ensure continuity of the work undertaken within the framework of the Strategic Compass, the theme of "maritime issues" must be taken into account in the Member States' discussions. The French Presidency of the Council, which lasts until 30 June 2022, should also provide an opportunity to capitalise on the relative consensus of the collective opinion concerning the importance of the "maritime factor". This would allow us to further promote the EU to assume a broader remit, both as a security provider with a global vocation and as an actor that invests and innovates in this crucial strategic area.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, European Union, Maritime, Strategic Stability, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Europe, Atlantic Ocean, and Indo-Pacific

133. The Geopolitics of Hydrogen in the Indo-Pacific Region

Author:
Jane Nakano
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
Large energy consumers in the Indo-Pacific region and their traditional energy suppliers are examining the potential role of clean hydrogen in energy systems as well as their own potential roles in hydrogen supply chains. Several Asian governments are leading the charge in creating a clean hydrogen economy by releasing and executing hydrogen strategies and funding new projects, while others are beginning to articulate visions and strategies. This report surveys national visions and strategies of leading Asian economies and their traditional energy suppliers and presents key implications of clean hydrogen development in the Indo-Pacific region. The report further offers recommendations on the role the United States could play in this rising market, including ensuring resilience and robustness in clean hydrogen supply chains, recognizing the energy security benefit of clean hydrogen exports from the United States, and ensuring the environmental sustainability in hydrogen value-chain creation.
Topic:
Security, Energy Policy, Environment, Sustainability, and Hydrogen
Political Geography:
Indo-Pacific

134. A Green-Blue Alliance in Motion: Pacific Island Countries and Europe Fighting Climate Change

Author:
Celine Pajon
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
The Pacific Islands Countries (PICs) were the first to ratify the Paris climate agreement in 2015. Indeed, for them, climate change has had very concrete implications for years. Islanders have seen the sea level rising, endangering the very existence of atolls. They have also experienced increasingly violent cyclones and other natural disasters, and must deal with multiple impacts of a changing climate on their everyday lives More than bearing the brunt of such impacts, and they have been calling for the rest of the world to awaken to this existential threat. At the recent UN General Assembly, the government of Vanuatu, supported by other states, led an initiative to ask for the opinion of the International Court of Justice on climate change. The European Union (EU) has been a proactive leader in international negotiations on climate change; it strives to lead by example and do its share to mitigate climate impacts and support adaptation efforts. But it was perhaps on only this past summer that climate change began to feel very real for European public opinion, as the continent was ravaged by a series of heatwaves, major wildfires and droughts that had serious impacts on biodiversity, agriculture, but also human health. Some have said this is the “end of innocence” for the Europeans on climate change. This episode might help bridge the gap and make Europeans better understand what the populations of the Pacific Islands have been enduring, keeping in mind that PICs are more exposed and have fewer financial resources to implement solutions. It might also raise greater interest about the way Oceanians could adapt and provide innovative solutions. This Briefing argues that climate change challenges require an innovative, transformative approach to deliver results on mitigation, adaptation, and compensation for loss and damage. Europe and Oceania are two leading actors that already have a fruitful record of cooperation, and are willing to step up their cooperation to lead this transition to a new model. This paper is based on discussions that took place during the webinar “Climate Change: The Pacific Island Countries, seven years after the Paris Agreement” organized by Ifri’s Pacific Islands Program, in partnership with the Pacific Community, on September 20, 2022.4 Contributions from panelists will therefore be highlighted.
Topic:
Climate Change, European Union, Regional Integration, and Biodiversity
Political Geography:
Europe, Indo-Pacific, and Pacific Islands

135. Engaging the Pacific Islands is no longer about the why, but about the how

Author:
Marie Jourdain and Charles Lichfield
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Over the past year, US and European engagement in the South Pacific has noticeably accelerated. Wooing these islands away from Chinese influence is clearly a priority but there are many dimensions to this. The “Blue Pacific” is more than a consortium of scattered islands. They see themselves as large ocean states, which collectively make up the second-largest Exclusive Economic Zone in the world. While they are important as we game out Taiwan scenarios, the peoples of the South Pacific want their region to remain immune from “great-power games.” This calls for a subtle Transatlantic strategy emphasizing partnership. This report acknowledges the mistakes of past engagement strategies, which didn’t approach the region as a coherent whole, lacked sustained and continuous effort, and always came second to other priorities in the Indo-Pacific region.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, European Union, and Engagement
Political Geography:
Europe, United States of America, Indo-Pacific, and Pacific Islands

136. Russia in the Indo-Pacific: Perspectives from China, Russia, and the United States

Author:
Gaye Christoffersen, Ying Liu, Artyom Lukin, Elena Feditchkina Tracy, and Elizabeth Wishnick
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Weatherhead East Asian Institute, Columbia University
Abstract:
Russia’s role in the Indo-Pacific is an understudied topic—while much of the discussion of Russia in Asia typically focuses on its response to geopolitical rivalries, the volume addresses ideational factors in Russia’s relations with regional and global powers, the domestic drivers of Russia’s Asia-Pacific policy, as well as the complex iteration of regional identities in Asia-Pacific Russia and in the Sino-Russian partnership. Contributors to this volume are based across Russia, China, Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam, and the USA, drawing on a range of multinational perspectives and theoretical approaches. Panelists at this event will present views from Beijing, Vladivostok, and the United States.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Russia, China, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

137. Bridging U.S.-Led Alliances in the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific: An Inter-theater Perspective

Author:
Luis Simon
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
Although U.S. strategic competition with China and Russia is often presented as a challenge with two separate fronts, this brief argues that the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific theaters are increasingly linked. Insofar as preserving a favorable balance of power in these two regions hinges largely on U.S. power, and as long as they both continue to exercise a significant pressure on U.S. defense resources, their alliance and deterrence architectures should be looked at from an inter-theater perspective. Thus, optimally managing atwo-front challenge would require a serious effort to bridge U.S.-led alliances in both regions.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Hegemony, Alliance, Strategic Competition, Rivalry, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Asia, North America, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

138. The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and Digital Trade in Southeast Asia

Author:
Andreyka Natalegawa and Gregory B. Poling
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
In October 2021, the Biden administration announced the development of an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) with partner nations to “define our shared objectives around trade facilitation, standards for the digital economy and technology, supply chain resiliency, decarbonization and clean energy, infrastructure, worker standards, and other areas of shared interest.” Details on the framework are still being worked out, but it now seems that those six areas of focus have been distilled into four negotiating “pillars.” Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Sarah Bianchi said in early February that these would include “fair and resilient trade, supply chain resilience, infrastructure and decarbonization, and tax and anticorruption.” The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) will likely lead negotiations on the first, while it appears that the Commerce Department will take the lead on the other three. The details of each pillar will be worked out in the months ahead, but the Biden administration is certain to face challenges and trade-offs across each, given the diversity of economies and political constraints across the region. USTR has said the trade pillar will be “high-ambition” and include binding commitments. But this will be complicated by the fact that the administration plans to roll out the IPEF through executive action rather than as a traditional trade deal requiring congressional approval. This pathway will help the framework sidestep political obstacles that agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership faced before Congress, but it also means that the administration cannot offer increased market access or any other concessions that would require changes to U.S. law. Moreover, moving forward with the IPEF through executive action has led to concerns among partners that the framework could be vulnerable to U.S. domestic politics or that a future administration may well roll back or abandon the framework. Given these self-imposed constraints, the administration will face headwinds trying to convince countries to sign on to high-standard provisions on digital trade, labor, and environmental standards that might run counter to their perceived short-term political or economic interests. One possible solution would have been to make the involvement in the other three pillars, where there are likely to be more tangible benefits for other countries, contingent on an agreement in the trade pillar. But that would run counter to the desire to get as many countries on board as possible. So, the administration has instead indicated that countries will be invited to engage in each pillar a la carte. And while like-mindedness in and of itself does not immediately guarantee their support for the IPEF, the likely result is that only Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and perhaps South Korea—the most developed economies which already share U.S. standards on digital trade, environment, and labor—will engage with USTR on the trade pillar. But a wider array of economies will likely join the talks with the Commerce Department on the other three.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Digital Economy, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
Asia, Southeast Asia, and Indo-Pacific

139. Regional Perspectives on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework

Author:
Matthew Goodman and Aidan Arasasingham
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
The proposed Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) is the Biden administration’s answer to questions about the United States’ economic commitment to the vital Indo-Pacific region. For this initiative to succeed, it must address concerns among regional partners about the framework’s form, function, benefits, inclusivity, and durability. Based on conversations with representatives from over a dozen regional governments, this brief summarizes Indo-Pacific perspectives on the IPEF.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Regional Cooperation, and Regionalism
Political Geography:
North America, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

140. Battle Networks and the Future Force

Author:
Todd Harrison and Christopher Reid
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
This CSIS brief is the third in a series on the future of battle networks and Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2). The first brief in the series examined the importance of battle networks to modern military operations and presented a framework of five functional elements that make up a battle network. The second brief used lessons learned from previous attempts to improve battle network integration to explore how the Department of Defense (DoD) can properly scope the problem it is trying to solve and organize itself to effectively and efficiently acquire the systems needed to realize its vision for JADC2. This brief focuses on the importance of integrating allies and partners into future battle networks, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region. It explores existing agreements, opportunities for new agreements, and the technical and policy challenges for battle network integration across allied and partner nations. It concludes with an assessment of how combined battle networks with allies and partners can serve as the key enabling technology toward a new offset strategy.
Topic:
Defense Policy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Indo-Pacific