Search

Begin New Search Topic Strategic Competition Political Geography North America

101. Cooperation and Hedging: Comparing US and South Korean Views of China

Author:
Karl Friedhoff, Dina Smeltz, J. James Kim, Kang Chungku, and Scott A. Snyder
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
While Seoul and Washington currently agree on using high-level diplomacy to encourage North Korea to denuclearize, South Korean and US approaches toward China differ and could become a source of friction between the two allies. Under President Donald Trump, the United States has confronted China through tariffs on Chinese imports and identified China as a near-peer adversary. Meanwhile, South Korean President Moon Jae-in has made efforts to end a dispute with China over the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system and indicated openness to China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Public preferences in both the United States and South Korea are not necessarily aligned with their own governments’ policies toward China. Chicago Council and Asan Institute surveys conducted in 2019 find that both South Koreans and Americans see a strengthened US-ROK alliance as an asset in dealing with China, suggesting that Washington and Seoul can afford to strengthen coordination between their policies toward China.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Geopolitics, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

102. Chicago’s Global Strategy Part II: A Blueprint for Implementation

Author:
Juliana Kerr
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
Chicago’s Global Strategy Part II: A Blueprint for Implementation APRIL 1, 2019 By: Juliana Kerr, Director, Global Cities In 2017, a task force of Chicago’s leading business, civic, and cultural leaders came together to outline a global strategy for Chicago that coordinates the broad range of international activities and steers major efforts toward improving the city’s economic well-being and quality of life for all residents. These leaders recognized that Chicago has many global interactions across many sectors and institutions, but they “stop far short of a well-designed, coherent global engagement strategy.” The task force’s report, Chicago’s Global Strategy, laid out the broad vision. To meet it, representatives of more than 60 museums, universities, civic organizations, chambers of commerce, business associations, and other groups came together to identify specific actions they could take to help advance the overall strategy. This report summarizes their findings.
Topic:
International Relations, Cities, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

103. Addressing China's Rising Influence in Africa

Author:
Michael Tiboris
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
Addressing China's Rising Influence in Africa MAY 21, 2019 By: Michael Tiboris, Nonresident Fellow, Global Water Key facts and figures China is now the largest trading partner for the African continent, and China’s Export-Import Bank aims to invest more than $1 trillion in the continent by 2025. In addition, China has now surpassed the United States government in total agriculture R&D funding. China has increased its presence in African development—a trend that will persist because its model is extremely attractive to both China and many African nations. China’s growing contributions to African development should not automatically be feared, but their increased presence should create a recalibration in US approaches to development. Current US National Security Advisor and former Ambassador John Bolton in his announcement of the administration’s Prosper Africa initiative cast China’s presence in Africa as a strategic challenge for the United States. The market opportunities on the African continent are enormous. Consumer expenditure is expected to reach $2.1 trillion by 2025 and $2.5 trillion by 2030. The World Bank estimates that the African food market alone could be worth $1 trillion by 2030, more than tripling the current $300 million market. China’s ability to directly finance and construct infrastructure projects with fewer conditions is unique and has raised worries in some quarters about the expropriation of natural resources, environmental hazards, labor displacement, unstable debt burdens, and land grabs. In addition, China’s investment strategy leaves notable gaps that the United States, leaning on its expertise, can fill. The most direct and sustainable mechanism for moving people out of poverty is investment in agriculture—in particular, smallholder agriculture. US leadership on global water, food, and nutrition security is essential to catalyze the innovations and development necessary to achieve US foreign policy and development goals on the continent. To maintain its global leadership in this strategically important continent, the United States should consider prioritizing technical assistance for water sustainability and thereby support sanitation and agricultural growth. The United States must also continue to find ways to deepen its relationships with African partners to demonstrate US commitment to building resilience and self-reliance in these communities for the long term. Simultaneously, the United States and its allies should work through international institutions to encourage China to adopt policies that achieve shared global objectives in economic development, security, human welfare, and sustainability.
Topic:
Infrastructure, Banks, Trade, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Africa, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

104. China’s Economic Slowdown: Root Causes, Beijing’s Response and Strategic Implications for the US and Allies

Author:
John Lee
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
This monograph attempts to argue and/or demonstrate three main points. First, it looks at why there were credible fears about the stability and viability of the Chinese economy — especially the financial and banking system — leading up to the end of the Twelfth Five Year Plan (2011–15), and what these were. To understand why Beijing was so concerned, the monograph draws out the serious structural problems that were leading inevitably to a permanent slowdown from the double-digit growth rates of the first three decades of reform. Second, the monograph looks at what occurred from 2015 to the present, and how China apparently overcame its economic difficulties. In fact, it has not overcome its problems, but deferred them to a future time in ways that only its unique authoritarian political economy is able to do.Third, it is clear the Communist Party is not passively awaiting an unhappy economic fate in connection with its mounting imbalances and domestic economic dysfunction. In many respects, its leaders have been highly creative in seeking solutions that do not entail a weakening of the party’s hold on economic power. On the contrary, the party has been busily shaping and pursuing grand strategic policies such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Made in China 2025 (MIC 2025) to solve or alleviate many of its domestic political-economic problems. This monograph argues that these and other outward-focused initiatives stem most fundamentally from Chinese weaknesses and vulnerabilities but are being remade and recast into initiatives that will strengthen the position of the CCP domestically, ensure greater resilience for its political economy, and advance its ambitious strategic and international objectives at the same time. In summary, it is about the Communist Party cleverly transforming domestic vulnerability into grand strategy and using economic approaches to gain pre-eminence and “win without fighting.”
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, National Security, Geopolitics, Economy, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

105. Research Collaboration in an Era of Strategic Competition

Author:
Stephanie Segal and Dylan Gerstel
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
There is a growing concern in Washington that certain aspects of international scientific collaboration pose a risk to U.S. economic and national security, making it the latest front in rising U.S.-China competition. At the same time, the U.S. innovation ecosystem depends greatly on foreign scientists and partnerships with foreign research institutions. A well-calibrated strategy to manage these risks will maximize openness while protecting intellectual property, research integrity, and national security. These efforts should preserve the ability of the United States to attract top talent, including by maintaining a welcoming environment for foreign researchers, while improving domestic investment in science, technology, engineering, and math outcomes. This report outlines the vulnerabilities arising from foreign research collaboration, the risks of policy overreach, and recommendations to manage risks while maintaining scientific openness.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Innovation, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

106. American Grand Strategy and the Rise of Offensive Realism

Author:
Ionut Popescu
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Political Science Quarterly
Institution:
Academy of Political Science
Abstract:
Ionut Popescu outlines the principles of a new American grand strategy grounded in an offensive realist theoretical framework. He argues that offensive realism is better suited to the new era of geopolitical competition with China and Russia.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Grand Strategy, Political Science, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Russia, China, North America, and United States of America

107. Journal of Advanced Military Studies: Great Power Competition

Author:
Christopher C. Harmon, T. J. Linzy, Jack Vahram Kalpakian, Bruce I. Gudmundsson, Ryan Burke, Jahara "Franky" Matisek, Zsofia Budai, Kevin Johnston, Blagovest Tashev, Michael Purcell, David McLaughlin, Kashish Parpiani, Daniel De Wit, and Timothy Chess
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Advanced Military Studies
Institution:
Marine Corps University Press, National Defense University
Abstract:
In this issue of MCU Journal, the authors discuss various concepts of power and great power competition. For generations, scholars have debated changes in power and how that evolution could potentially impact the United States, its allies, and those hovering on the edge of greatness in whatever form that may take. The concept of power has taken on many meanings as the character of warfare has adapted to the time—hard power, soft power, sea power, airpower, space power, great power, combat power, etc. So how do we define such an abstract concept as power? The Department of Defense (DOD) defines combat power as “the total means of destructive and/or disruptive force which a military unit/formation can apply against the opponent at a given time.” Clearly, power must be projected; and for our purposes, that means an entity has the “ability . . . to apply all or some of its elements of national power—political, economic, informational, or military—to rapidly and effectively deploy and sustain forces in and from multiple dispersed locations to respond to crises, to contribute to deterrence, and to enhance regional stability.”
Topic:
Security, NATO, Climate Change, International Cooperation, Migration, History, Power Politics, Armed Forces, Navy, Populism, Grand Strategy, Alliance, Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Strategic Competition, Geography, Ottoman Empire, Information Technology, and Clash of Civilizations
Political Geography:
Africa, Russia, China, Europe, Sudan, India, Norway, Asia, France, North America, Egypt, Arctic, United States of America, and Antarctica

108. Bridging the divide: new evidence about firms and digitalisation

Author:
Reinhilde De Veugelers
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Using new evidence on the digitalisation activities of firms in the European Union and the United States, we document a trend towards digital polarisation based on firms’ use of the latest digital technologies and their plans for future investment in digitalisation. A substantial share of firms are not implementing any state-of-the-art digital technologies and do not have plans to invest in digitalisation. However, there is also a substantial share of firms that are already partially or even fully implementing state-of-the-art digital technologies in their businesses and that plan to further increase their digitalisation investments. Small Manufacturing firms and old small firms in services are significantly more likely to be and remain non-active in terms of digitalisation. Our results do not provide any evidence that EU firms are more likely than their US counterparts to be stuck on the wrong side of the digitalisation divide. Taking into account firm size and firm age, there are no significant differences between the EU and the US in terms of having more or fewer persistently non-digital firms. As persistently digitally-inactive firms are also less likely to be innovative, to add employees or to command higher mark-ups, it is important for policymaking to remove barriers that trap these firms in persistent digital inactivity. Lack of access to finance is a major barrier for EU firms compared to their US counterparts, particularly for the EU’s persistently non-digital firms, and especially for older, smaller companies in services. Improving their access to finance might therefore go a long way towards addressing the corporate digitalisation divide in the EU.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Innovation, Strategic Competition, and Digital Revolution
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

109. Opinion: What Is China’s Core Economic Interest in Trade War?

Author:
Qiyuan Xu
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Abstract:
The trade conflict between China and the U.S. has lasted for more than half a year. The two sides have held several rounds of consultations, but agreements were later broken and tensions have only intensified. The spat will likely be protracted, with frictions to continue and possibly escalate for a period of time, given the two countries’ diverging interests, public opinions and historical experiences. A broad range of issues are involved in the trade dispute. For example, the U.S. has pressured China on forced technology transfer, talent strategy and industrial policy issues, as well as issues the two sides have long been at odds over, such as intellectual property rights, labor, environmental protection, stateowned enterprise reform and foreign exchange rates. Meanwhile, the U.S. has targeted products and sectors that go well beyond those in which China has a competitive advantage. The U.S. tariffs also target industries that the country plans to focus on for future development.
Topic:
Development, Tariffs, Trade Wars, Trade, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

110. Now I Know my ABCs: U.S.-China Policy on AI, Big Data, and Cloud Computing

Author:
Wenhong Chen
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Artificial Intelligence (AI), Big Data, and Cloud Computing (ABC) have generated unprecedented opportunities and challenges for economic competitiveness, national security, and law and order, as well as the future of work. ABC policies and practices have become contentious issues in U.S.-China bilateral relations. Pundits see a U.S.-China AI race and are already debating which country will win. Kaifu Lee, the CEO of Sinovation Ventures, believes that China will exceed the United States in AI in about five years. Others argue that China will never catch up. This essay focuses on two issues: the comparative ABC strengths of the United States and China in data and research and development (R&D); and the emerging ABC policies and practices in the two nations. Empirical analysis suggests that the United States and China lead in different areas. Compared to China’s top-down, whole-of-government, national- strategy approach, the U.S. ABC policy has been less articulated but is evolving.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, Strategic Competition, Data, and Cloud Computing
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America