The Asia-Pacific Alliances of the United States
Between Balancing, Neutralization and Hedging
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 23211841 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Artyom Lukin (0000-0001-7252-9905), A L LUKIN, S A KOROTICH |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 61 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 5-15 |
| Publication date | 2017-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | World Economy and International Relations (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0131-2227 • E-ISSN: 2782-4330 |
| Publisher | Primakov Institute of World Economy and International Relations (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.20542/0131-2227-2017-61-4-5-15 |
| OpenAlex | W2604456176 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 12 |
The U.S.- led alliances in the Asia-Pacific, also known as the San Francisco System, serve as a foundation of America’s political-military hegemony in this region as well as one of its global primacy pillars. Yet, the future of the System is uncertain. It faces the biggest challenge since its establishment in the early 1950s, the chief reason being the changing balance of power between the United States and China. Washington expects that the logic of balancing will be pushing its Asian allies and partners, wary of a rising China, closer to the United States. Japan and Australia are currently the American allies most engaged in anti-China balancing. Beijing’s strategy appears to be aimed at neutralizing the U.S. alliances so that they cease containing China and show deference to its security interests. Thailand, South Korea and Taiwan have been the most pronounced cases of neutralization. Caught between the intensifying Sino-American competition, most Southeast Asian states have chosen the path of hedging, seeking to diversify their strategic links and maximize space for maneuver. Among the U.S. allies in Asia, Singapore has been the most skilful practitioner of hedging, while the Philippines under Rodrigo Duterte has become another prominent case of the hedging strategy. The combination of neutralization and hedging may prove the best solution to the Asia-Pacific’s security dilemma, as it allows China to satisfy its basic security concerns while sparing its East Asian neighbors the fate of becoming frontline states in the U.S. – China strategic rivalry. The ongoing tendencies towards neutralization and hedging are generally consistent with Russia’s interests. The key East Asian countries leaving Washington’s sphere of political-military influence will weaken America’s regional and global hegemony, thus contributing to the formation of polycentric world order. Moreover, the desire of a number of East Asian states to hedge their bets and diversify strategic relationships gives Russia more opportunities to raise its profile in the region.
Alliance · Beijing · Business · China · Development economics · Dilemma · Economics · Economy · Hegemony · International trade · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Security Dilemma · European and Russian Geopolitical Military Strategies · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Military and Defense Studies
Strategic Asian Triangles
The Logic of Collective Action
The National Security Strategy
The origin of trilateralism? The US–Japan–Australia security relations in the 1990s
Japan's strategic pivot south
Exclusive Minilateralism
Japan and East Timor
Japan–Australia security ties and the United States
The False Promise of International Institutions
The “East Wind” and Australia’s Alliance Politics
Global Policy and the Future of the United Nations
Australia and Southeast Asia
| Citations per year | 0.75 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |