Search

Begin New Search Topic International Order Political Geography China

11. 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

12. China and Russia's Far East

Author:
Richard Holwill
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Ambassadors Review
Institution:
Council of American Ambassadors
Abstract:
In February 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin crowed about his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, saying that China and Russia have forged a “friendship without limits.” So far, the Chinese President has backed Putin’s attacks on Ukraine. This agreement serves China’s foreign policy goals, at least for now. China hopes to build an international order in which it supplants the United States as a leader of the international community. Because Putin’s Russia supports that goal, China supports Russia. But make no mistake, this friendship does have limits. At some point, China will have reasons to break with Russia and could do so in a dramatic fashion. The break will be driven by another of China’s foreign policy goals: the desire to regain all of the territory and dominance that it enjoyed prior to its “hundred years of humiliation,” which is how Chinese scholars and officials describe the period from 1839 and 1949, during which the Western powers, along with Japan and Russia, seized Chinese territory. Through that period, China agreed to a series of unequal treaties that allowed those powers to “pick China’s bones.” In 1839, China lost Hong Kong to the British. The Portuguese took Macau in 1887. Following the Sino-Japanese War in 1895, the Empire of Japan took Dalian and Taiwan. The Germans seized Jiqozhou Bay and Tsingtao in 1898. China ceded Zhanjiang to France in 1898.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, International Order, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and Asia

13. Before Zero Day: Taiwan’s Evolving Defense Strategy and the Struggle for Peace

Author:
Eric Lee, Ian Easton, Grace Price, Colby Ferland, Cathy Fang, Mark Stokes, and Alice Cho
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
The invasion of Ukraine has upended long-held assumptions of the liberal international order, and as tensions rise in the Taiwan Strait, Taiwanese leaders are watching Ukraine with their futures in mind. The objective of this report is to provide insights into how Taiwanese policymakers, military officers, diplomats, strategists, and everyday citizens are responding to the evolving threat picture in the Taiwan Strait and offer ideas for the policy debate in Washington. This report examines leadership speeches, strategy reports, military writings, and media articles, as well as recounts findings from interviews with Taiwanese and U.S. government officials, military officers, and civil society.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Peace, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and Asia

14. Eight Contradictions of the Imperialist ‘Rules-Based Order’

Author:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Case Study
Institution:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Abstract:
We are now entering a qualitatively new phase of world history. Significant global changes have emerged in the years since the Great Financial Crisis of 2008. This can be seen in a new phase of imperialism and changes in the particularities of eight contradictions.
Topic:
Economics, Human Rights, Imperialism, Financial Crisis, Capitalism, Global South, Socialism, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Asia, Global Focus, and United States of America

15. After Hegemony: Japan’s role and dilemma in maintaining the rules-based order

Author:
Yu Inagaki
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
The phrase “rules-based order” has recently become a recurring theme in the Japan-US alliance . This is based on the recognition that the liberal international order (LIO)—which the United States built and maintained, and that Japan has significantly benefited from—is now being challenged. While the war in Ukraine has heightened the sense of crisis over global power dynamics, China has been considered the main threat to the LIO. The United States has identified China as not just a security threat but a “ most consequential strategic competitor and the pacing challenge ,” and Japan has come to view the current international environment from a larger perspective, international order. In fact, Japan has expected to play a leading role in maintaining the LIO as US international engagement weakened under the Trump administration. However, is it possible for Japan, a constrained middle power, to maintain the existing order in the face of a declining hegemon and rising challengers? This raises a classic question in international relations: What will happen to the international order after hegemony; and what can and will Japan, occupying a particular place and role in the international system, be able and willing to do regarding international order?
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Politics, Hegemony, and International Order
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

16. China’s Global Vision Vacuum: An Opportunity and Challenge for Europe

Author:
Tim Rühlig
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
China seems to strive to redefine the global order around sovereignty and a strong state. Yet is China engaging in a constitutive process shaped by the global economy; or is it an imperial power pursuing national sovereignty at any cost? In the West, there are very different answers to this question. This ambiguity is not by design but rather indicates that China lacks a coherent vision for the world. If the EU is to exploit this, it needs to understand why.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Economy, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and Asia

17. China, the West, and the Future Global Order By Julian Lindley-French and Franco Algieri

Author:
Julian Lindley-French and Franco Algieri
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
The primary purpose of this article is to respectfully communicate to a Chinese audience a Western view of the future world order. China needs the West as much as the West needs China. However, the West has awakened geopolitically to the toxic power politics that Russia is imposing on Ukraine and China’s support for it. China is thus faced with a profound choice: alliance with a declining and weak Russia or cooperation with a powerful bloc of global democracies that Russia’s incompetent and illegal aggression is helping to forge. The West is steadily morphing into a new global Community of Democracies with states such as those in the G7, Quads, and Quints taking on increasing importance as centers of decisionmaking.2 All three groupings reflect an emerging implicit structure with the United States at their core, European democracies on one American geopolitical flank, with Australia, Japan, South Korea, and other democracies in the Indo-Pacific region on the other American geopolitical flank. The force that is forging such a community is China as it morphs into a superpower. Specifically, China is choosing to be an aggressive putative superpower. President Xi Jinping’s aggressive worldview is of a China defined by its opposition to the United States and, by extension, America’s democratic allies and partners. A new world is being forged from within the increasingly hot cauldron of U.S.-Chinese strategic competition. However, does that mean this new world is inevitably now set on a crash course to conflict, something akin to a re-run of the collapse of pre–World War I Europe into systemic war? Or is it not too late for both sides to forge a pragmatic peace—a peace forged from respect, rather than destructive and disrespectful confrontation? On the face of it, President Xi seems to have made his choice, but in some very important respects siding with Russia in geopolitical conflict with the community of democracies seems counterintuitive when we look at China from a Western perspective (as this article does). This perspective also implies China’s “choice” might not be as firm as some would have it—a profound but essentially simple choice between siding with Vladimir Putin and confrontation with the West or continued growth, wealth, and power through collaboration with the West? The facts speak for themselves. Using the most favorable economic statistics for the combined Chinese and Russian economies—purchasing power parity—their combined economies are worth some $27 trillion in 2022. Using the same data for G7 countries, the core of the emerging Community, the total is $39 trillion.3 Add Australia and South Korea to the aggregate and the figure is $42 trillion. If nominal gross domestic product (GPD) is compared, the contrast is even more striking with the combined GDPs of China and Russia in 2022 totaling $20.2 trillion, while the combined GDPs of the G7 countries amount to $45.2 trillion, which when Australia and South Korea are added increases to $48.8 trillion.4 Critically, China’s trade with the democracies is over 10 times greater than that with Russia,5 while in 2020, China’s merchandise trade surplus with the rest of the world totaled $535 billion, with much of that figure due to surpluses with both the United States and Europe.6
Topic:
Security, Geopolitics, Strategic Competition, International Order, and Superpower
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, and United States of America

18. No One is Satisfied: Two Theories of the US-China Global Rivalry and the International Order

Author:
Younn Shwe Sin Htay
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
A remarkable shift is underway in the geostrategic relations between the United States, long a dominant global power, and China, a relentless economic engine with a rapidly growing military. Their competition promises to change the face of global politics in the 21st century. This paper examines that conflict from the perspectives of two discrete political theories: power transition theory and hegemonic stability theory, which come to different conclusions when applied to China and the United States separately. However, taken together with both nations in mind, they arrive at six possible futures, including regional warfare and a wholesale overhaul of the existing international order.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Hegemony, Strategic Competition, Strategic Stability, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

19. Russian Foreign Policy in 2020: Strengthening Multi-vectorialism

Author:
András Rácz and Milan Nič
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
In 2020, DGAP’s Strategy Group on Russia focused on Moscow’s long-term efforts to diversify its foreign policy portfolio, turn away from Europe, and build-up other non-Western vectors in its diplomacy. Against this background, this report assesses Russia’s relations with the EU, China, and the United States. While Russian relations with the West are unlikely to improve in 2021 – especially ahead of this fall’s Duma election – there is still a chance for limited engagement on issues of mutual interest.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, European Union, Democracy, and International Order
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Eurasia, and United States of America

20. Climate Politics and the Crisis of the Liberal International Order

Author:
Felipe Leal Albuquerque
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Contexto Internacional
Institution:
Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract:
The election of Donald Trump brought disarray to the climate change regime. The changes in what was up to then a promoter of the liberal international order (LIO) exacerbated existing tensions while creating new ones. This paper investigates how that challenge impacted the behaviours of Brazil, China and the European Union (EU) by comparatively analysing their dissimilar positions with respect to three indicators before and after Trump’s coming into power. These indicators are individual pledges and climate-related policies; approaches to climate finance; and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC). The analysis first shows how the US started eroding the broader LIO and the climate change regime to then delve into the behaviours of the three respective key players concerning climate talks. I sustain that the EU, despite its inner divisions, is already counteracting Washington, whereas China is combining a pro-status quo position based on a rhetorical condemnation of the United States. Brazil, in turn, had a transition towards a climate-sceptic government, shifting from being a cooperative actor to abdicating hosting the COP25.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Liberal Order, Multilateralism, and International Order
Political Geography:
China, Asia, Brazil, South America, North America, and United States of America