Search

Begin New Search Topic Strategic Competition Publication Year within 10 Years

91. The South China Sea and Indo-Pacific in an Era of “Multipolar” Competition

Author:
Zachary Paikin, Gilang Kembara, Andrew Mantong, and Steven Blockmans
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
A longstanding territorial dispute between claimants in the South China Sea now finds itself nested within a new imagined ‘Indo-Pacific’ region, which itself has become a key theatre in a deepening great power conflict. The EU is geographically distant and a relative newcomer to the strategic terrain in these two regions, yet it cannot afford to ignore them given their crucial economic and geopolitical importance. While the EU’s ability to reduce the constraints on its freedom of manoeuvre is limited, the Union should nonetheless gradually nurture its strategic autonomy by carving out a delineated hard security role in the South China Sea while maintaining a degree of distance from the US approach towards China and the Indo-Pacific.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, European Union, Strategic Competition, and Multipolarity
Political Geography:
Asia, Indo-Pacific, and South China Sea

92. What Does the US-China Tech Cold War Mean for the Middle East?

Author:
Alistair Taylor and Mohammed Soliman
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:
On this week's episode Alistair Taylor, MEI's editor-in-chief, is joined by Mohammed Soliman, director of MEI's Strategic Technologies and Cyber Security Program, to discuss the US-China tech Cold War and what it means for the Middle East. At the nexus of great power competition and rapid technological advances in areas like semiconductors and AI, the rivalry between Washington and Beijing is fuelling a longer-term process of economic and technological decoupling. Navigating this growing divide will be a key challenge for regional actors across MENA.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, Economy, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
China, Middle East, and United States of America

93. NATO's Strategic Concept: Implications for Greece and Türkiye

Author:
Nikolaos Lampas
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security and Defence Quarterly
Institution:
War Studies University
Abstract:
This article analyses the impact of North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) new strategic concept on its involvement in the Eastern Mediterranean and its implications for Greek-Turkish relations. We analyse the application of NATO’s new strategic concept in the Eastern Mediterranean by focusing on the case study of Greek-Turkish tensions and NATO’s role in de-escalation efforts. The case study of Greek-Turkish relations is vital for two reasons. Firstly, because of NATO’s renewed interest in the Eastern Mediterranean region, and secondly, because the complicated relationship between the two countries has the potential to disrupt NATO’s unity. The findings of this article suggest that while NATO’s intention is to adapt to evolving security challenges, its new strategic concept has done little to de-escalate the tensions between Greece and Türkiye. Despite the Alliance’s commitment to collective defence and conflict resolution, the longstanding disputes in the Eastern Mediterranean have persisted, often with increased intensity. In conclusion, NATO’s new strategic concept acknowledges the burgeoning complexities in the Eastern Mediterranean, yet falls markedly short of introducing effective measures to de-escalate the longstanding tensions between Greece and Türkiye. While the document perceptively addresses the need for heightened engagement in the Eastern Mediterranean and highlights the myriad security challenges, including territorial disputes, migration issues, and the competition for energy resources, it lacks a clear actionable framework for mitigating the discord between these two member states.
Topic:
NATO, International Security, Bilateral Relations, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Turkey, Greece, and Eastern Mediterranean

94. Geopolitical Competition in the Indo-Pacific: Managing Development Cooperation

Author:
Ela Nath and Stephan Klingebiel
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
This Policy Brief examines the geopoliticisation of development cooperation within the Indo-Pacific region. First, we discuss the emergence of Indo-Pacific strategies and how these intersect with geopolitics and development cooperation amongst traditional develop-ment actors such as the United States and the Euro-pean Union. Second, we examine how these narratives have shaped the development cooperation approaches of China and India, both significant geopolitical actors. Third, we look at how these dynamics have played out in key regions of the Indo-Pacific, especially Southeast Asia, South Asia, and the Pacific Islands. We argue that while geopolitical competition brings opportunity to these regions, this opportunity needs to be strategically managed to deliver positive development outcomes. Geopolitics has always been a factor in development debates and development cooperation historically, and we should not expect this to change (Power, 2019; Liao & Lee, 2022). In the last decade, this competition has heightened with China’s global rise – economically, strategically, and geopolitically. As China became perceived as a potential competitor to traditional global and regional powers such as the United States, the European Union, Japan, or Australia, we saw a rise in strategies to manage, balance, or counter this rise. Consequently, emerging Indo-Pacific frameworks and strategies are shaping and dominating the discourse on global geopolitics, including development cooperation. As a result of sharp geopolitical competition, develop-ment cooperation has become a contested space. China’s powerful rise and the subsequent proliferation of Indo-Pacific strategies to counter this rise are key drivers of this dynamic. While this competition can breed division, between and within countries and regions, it can also give rise to increased multipolarity, partner country agency, and positive competition towards development outcomes. Competition and the numerous new strategies, resources, and initiatives that come with it, can offer opportunity for partner countries to secure resources and commitment toward their own development agenda. Rather than being “forced” to choose sides, countries and regions can and are using geostrategic competition to their advantage. Competition provides choice, a seat at the table, and opportunities for decision-making. However, taking ownership and direction over these strategies and resources can challenge partner countries and regions. Hedging is one option but carries risks, especially when politics get in the way, and development gains may be subsequently compromised. While there is a plethora of Indo-Pacific strategies that articulate visions for the region and ways powers should strengthen economic, diplomatic, security, and development ties with the Indo-Pacific countries, Indo-Pacific countries themselves should also have their own strategies, which outline their vision and objectives for engagement with great powers and other actors who seek and vie for their partnership.
Topic:
Development, Geopolitics, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Indo-Pacific

95. Russia’s Relations with China Amidst US-China-Russia Strategic Competition

Author:
Joungho Park, Boogyun Kang, Seung-soo Hyun, and Sunghoon Jeh
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study comprehensively examines the development of Russia's strategic relationship with China amidst intensifying strategic competition among the United States, China, and Russia. Specifically, we analyze the fundamental meaning and direction of Russia's strategy toward China in the process of shaping a new global order, and the key features and characteristics of cooperation between the two countries in a wide range of fields spanning politics, diplomacy, security, military, economy, society, and culture. Accordingly, this research aims to draw valuable policy insights for Korea based on evaluation of the direction and level of Russia-China cooperation from the Russian perspective. In this respect, this study is composed of the following four parts. Part II examines Russia's perception of China and its policy direction, as well as evaluates the prospects of Russia-China relations. Part III conducts an in-depth analysis of the opportunities and constraints associated with Russia-China cooperation in the fields of advanced technology, energy, and finance, which are key strategic areas for strengthening Russia's economic security amidst intense Western sanctions against its economy. In Part IV, we explore the current status and characteristics of cooperation in the fields of education and research, culture and arts, mass media, tourism, etc. Part V presents policy implications for Korea, particularly suggesting promising directions and tasks for the Northern Policy given the major turning point in the changing external environment.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, and International Order
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and United States of America

96. 2023 Annual Estimate of the Strategic Security Environment

Author:
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
The Annual Estimate of the Strategic Security Environment serves as a guide for academics and practitioners in the defense community on the current challenges and opportunities in the strategic environment. This year’s publication outlines key strategic issues across the four broad themes of Regional Challenges and Opportunities, Domestic Challenges, Institutional Challenges, and Domains Impacting US Strategic Advantage. These themes represent a wide range of topics affecting national security and provide a global assessment of the strategic environment to help focus the defense community on research and publication. Strategic competition with the People’s Republic of China and the implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine remain dominant challenges to US national security interests across the globe. However, the evolving security environment also presents new and unconventional threats, such as cyberattacks, terrorism, transnational crime, and the implications of rapid technological advancements in fields such as artificial intelligence. At the same time, the US faces domestic and institutional challenges in the form of recruiting and retention shortfalls in the all-volunteer force, the prospect of contested logistics in large-scale combat operations, and the health of the US Defense Industrial Base. Furthermore, rapidly evolving security landscapes in the Arctic region and the space domain pose unique potential challenges to the Army’s strategic advantage.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Corruption, Migration, Science and Technology, Terrorism, Partnerships, Weapons, Xi Jinping, Strategic Competition, Logistics, People's Liberation Army (PLA), and Democratic Backsliding
Political Geography:
Africa, Russia, China, Europe, Eurasia, Ukraine, Middle East, Asia, Arctic, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

97. Spring 2023 edition of Strategic Visions

Author:
Mitchell Orenstein, Holly Mayer, Alan McPherson, Ryan Langton, Gene Rotberg, and Philip Evanson
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Strategic Visions
Institution:
Center for the Study of Force and Diplomacy, Temple University
Abstract:
Contents: News from the Director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 AHA Reception. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Spring 2023 Colloquium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Army War College Visit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Spring 2023 Prizes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Second CENFAD Emerging Scholar. . . . .5 Thanks to the Davis Fellow. . . . . . . . . . . . .5 News from the CENFAD Community. . . . . . .6 Note from the Davis Fellow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 CENFAD Professor Artemy Kalinovsky Introduces New Course on the War in Ukraine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 CENFAD Community Interviews Dr. Mitchell Orenstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Dr. Holly Mayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Short Essay, “So You Want to Be President,” by Gene Rotberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Short Essay, “The Brazilian Presidential Election of 2022 and the Crisis in Brazilian Democracy,” by Dr. Philip Evanson . . . . . . . .27 Book Reviews The Ghost at the Feast: America and the Collapse of World Order, reviewed by Graydon Dennison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Topic:
Diplomacy, Globalization, History, Elections, Strategic Competition, and Strategy
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

98. Awakening Peripheries in the Great Power Clash Zone: Can Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus, and Central Asia Come Together?

Author:
Jakub Korejba
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
This essay explores the consequences of the fact that states of Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus, and Central Asia face a structural problem of the same nature: they are all located at the periphery of the main centers of global development and, for a major part of their contemporary history, were subject to external structural forces that perceived them as objects of great power rivalry (the “Eurasian Rimland,” as Halford Mackinder put it) and not as subjects of international politics. These countries are or at least should perceive themselves as a bridge between the East, West, North, and South due to their location between the “Eurasian Heartland” (also Mackinder) and the coastal “Sea Powers” (Nicholas Spykman). Unfortunately, this also puts them exactly in the “clash zone” of virtually every potential conflict between maritime and continental powers. This specific position has historically determined conditions for their development (or the lack thereof), and for a long time made the development of direct horizontal ties between them impossible. For most of their history, the political, economic, and cultural ties that they could have potentially maintained with each other were either non-existent or vertical, effectuated through the respective geopolitical center that dominated them. Although now formally independent for more than 30 years, this still remains the case—as most of the countries located in those three areas finds themselves not strong enough to challenge the old, new, or potential hegemon interested in keeping them in a subordinated condition. From the point of view of Moscow, Beijing, Brussels, or Washington, it makes little sense to let Warsaw, Baku, or Astana elaborate the sort of horizontal ties with each other (or others in their respective neighborhoods) that could potentially make each of them more (much less fully) resistant to the pressure of great powers still intent on instrumentalizing as a playground for their ongoing power struggle.
Topic:
History, Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, Rivalry, and Periphery
Political Geography:
Central Asia, Eastern Europe, and South Caucasus

99. Türkiye, Russia, and their Rules-Based Competition

Author:
Daria Isachenko
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
At its summit in Madrid in June 2022, NATO adopted a new Strategic Concept, identifying Russia as “the greatest and most immediate threat to the security of the Allies and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area.” All NATO member states agreed to this, including Türkiye. Yet Ankara is still keen to maintain dialogue with Moscow, while at the same time continuing to obstruct NATO’s northern expansion—despite the West’s need to demonstrate a consolidated front against Russia. This has earned Türkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan the title of “double agent” or even “Trojan horse” in the Western media. Even before the outbreak of Russia’s war in Ukraine on 24 February 2022, Erdogan’s close relationship with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin were a source of irritation for the West. The most notable result of their friendship is Erdogan’s purchase of Russia’s S-400 anti-aircraft missile system in 2017, which raised doubts in the West about Ankara’s loyalty to NATO and led to Türkiye’s exclusion from the co-production of F-35 fighter jets with Ankara’s Western allies. Neither the Kremlin nor the Western capitals concealed their respective (and opposed) preferences for the presidential candidates in Türkiye’s elections in May 2023. Erdogan is a foreign leader whom Putin praises most. Working with Erdogan, as Putin once mentioned during a Valdai Discussion Club meeting in October 2020, is “not only pleasant but also safe.” During the inauguration of the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, built by Rosatom, on 27 April 2023, Putin highlighted the personal engagement of Erdogan that made the realization of this “flagship project” between Russia and Türkiye possible. Putin’s appreciation of the Turkish president is not limited to words, as the Erdogan government expects the p o s t p o n e m e n t of gas payments to Gazprom— amounting to $20 billion—to 2024 and a 25 percent discount on the gas price. The West’s hope, on the other hand, was that with opposition candidate Kemal Kilicdaroglu coming to power in Ankara, the era of personal chemistry between Erdogan and Putin would come to its end and that Türkiye would revert to being a disciplined NATO member state, as it was during the Cold War and its immediate aftermath. After all, the widespread perception of Russian-Turkish relations is that this partnership is underpinned by the personal relations between their respective presidents as well as their anti-Westernism.
Topic:
NATO, Bilateral Relations, Strategic Competition, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Russia and Turkey

100. Central Asia in Contemporary Geopolitics: Between Global Powers and Regional Integration

Author:
Urs Unkauf
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
What is generally true of the Silk Road region is particularly true with respect to its Central Asian part: the region acts as a bridge between geographies, civilizations, resource bases, and power centers. Geopolitically and geo-economically, Central Asia is one of the most important theaters of the twenty-first century. In his referential book The Grand Chessboard, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote back in 1997 about the crucial importance of the Silk Road region (his term was “Eurasia”), and especially Central Asia, for global political supremacy. Nowadays, this region has been pushed back into the focus of geopolitics like no other due to the Russian Federation’s attack on Ukraine that commenced on 24 February 2022 and the resulting, still ongoing war. Indeed, as CoEditor of Baku Dialogues Damjan Krnjević Mišković has stated on various recent occasions, “the global importance of the Silk Road region today is greater than it has been in centuries.” Brzezinski’s key, still-relevant insight is that developments in Central Asia would depend to a large extent on the reciprocal interplay of Western, Russian, Turkish, Iranian, and Chinese interests. In the mirror of current geopolitical processes, Central Asia is of particular importance as a surface of interaction and projection for the global powers— China, Russia, and the United States. Although the EU is trying to act as a shaping actor in the region through the recent launch of programs like Global Gateway, it has so far been of something between secondary and tertiary importance in its political impact, especially given the competition with sources of regional influence such as Türkiye, Iran, and (more and more) India. It has meanwhile become clear that new global and regional power constellations, alliance structures, and economic corridors will emerge. Writing in mid-February 2023, former UN AssistantSecretary-General Michael von der Schulenburg outlined the contours of a new global order in a remarkable article for the German publication Makroskop: Magazine for Economic Policy, in which he sees keystone states in Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico), South and Southeast Asia (India, Indonesia), Africa (Ethiopia, Nigeria, South Africa), and the Middle East (Egypt, Saudi Arabia) as new drivers of an intensifying multipolarity of the world order. Although this order will not develop according to particular or hegemonic claims, one must at least take note of these processes. It is also important to recognize that the current processes of change and transformation are not so much the consequences of intended and planned action, but rather genuinely self-generating processes that reinforce themselves across regions. Schulenburg did not include Central Asia, but he should have. The region and its two keystone states (Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan) can also be included in this series and identified as one of the spaces within this multipolar constellation that can be considered a special arena of cooperation, confrontation, and regional hegemonic aspirations of global powers. Against such a background, this essay aims to provide a snapshot of Central Asia’s present geopolitical allocation in the context of broader international developments and trends. While the ambition of this essay is not to outline all challenges and opportunities, it does focus on the broad points that should be included in any strategic consideration of political and economic action in Central Asia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Power Politics, Geopolitics, Regional Integration, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Central Asia and Silk Road Region