Foreign Policy In Asia Research Articles

A hierarchical vision of order: understanding Chinese foreign policy in Asia; China's asymmetric statecraft: alignments, competitors, and regional diplomacy; The authoritarian century: China's rise and the demise of the liberal international order

A hierarchical vision of order: understanding Chinese foreign policy in Asia; China's asymmetric statecraft: alignments, competitors, and regional diplomacy; The authoritarian century: China's rise and the demise of the liberal international order

Türkiye’s “-lateralisms” in Asia: A Multi-Vectorial Analysis

This study aims to illustrate that multi-vectorial approaches in foreign policy could not only be practical but also productive for middle powers. With this aim, the study conceptualizes Turkish foreign policy in Asia with multi-vectorism, a foreign policy behavioral pattern that has been mainly utilized for post-Soviet countries’ concurrent interactions with the West (the EU, the U.S.) and the non-West (Russia). The study, firstly, argues that Asian international relations require a more composite re-definition of multi-vectorism, since in Asia, due to the intra-regional fragmentations and diversions, there are more than the conventional two vectors, the West and the non-West. By considering this argument the study applies multi-vectorism to Türkiye’s foreign policy in Asia by comparing the practicability of different interaction patterns, e.g., multilateralism, minilateralism, and bilateralism. The study, secondly, argues that Türkiye’s multi-vectorial foreign policy in Asia is particularly successful in its bilateral relations and less so in its multilateral and minilateral interactions.

The China in foreign policy of the US president Richard Nixon administration (january-february 1969)

The article investigates the formation of the foreign policy course of US President Richard M. Nixon on China in January-February 1969. The practical implementation of pre-election initiatives by the administration of President Richard M. Nixon in the Chinese direction in January-February 1969 was studied. There were analyzed reasons, course and consequences of the intensification of Washington's foreign policy strategy toward Beijing during the investigated period. The role of various groups in the American establishment in the process of forming the foreign policy course of the new administration towards China in January-February 1969 is outlined. It describes the specific US foreign policy actions towards communist China at the beginning of Richard M. Nixon's presidential period. Despite the presence in the political, academic, and social circles of the United States of certain attitudes in favor of the recognition of the People's Republic of China as the political reality of international life, the question of the legal recognition of China in the second half of the 1960s constantly moved to the background. The victory of Richard М. Nixon in the presidential election in 1968 was accompanied by a series of changes in the system of geopolitical and military priorities of the United States. The new administration’s more realistic approach to China was due primarily to the fact that Beijing, which renounced its alliances and claimed the role of a «third force», was a strong player in the international arena. Moreover, the policy of Kennedy–Johnson did not justify itself, as China has intensified its foreign policy, and established relations with many countries, including the US allies. At the beginning of the presidency of Richard М. Nixon, in January-February 1969, his administration managed to quickly develop and begin to implement a holistic concept of «new policy» for China. His Chinese policy was inextricably linked to the US foreign policy in Asia and reflected the clash of American and Chinese interests in the region. At the same time, the representatives of the American establishment had a clear idea of how they could influence Soviet-Chinese relations in order to deepen the rift between the USSR and China and what concrete benefits they could derive from this. A number of objective and subjective factors did not prevent the administration of the 37th President of the United States, Richard М. Nixon, radically changing Washington’s Chinese policy. Communist China continued to be recognized as a powerful factor in the US-Soviet dialogue. In spite of this, in the late 60s of the twentieth century, the objective preconditions began to evolve gradually, which promoted the normalization of US-China relations in the future and allowed to resolve most of the controversial issues that ultimately led to the international recognition of the People’s Republic of China by the United States of America.

The policy of the administration of the US President Richard M. Nixon on PRC (March-July 1969)

The article investigates the formation of the foreign policy course of US President Richard M. Nixon on China in March-July 1969. The practical implementation of pre-election initiatives by the administration of the President Richard M. Nixon in the Chinese direction in March-July 1969 was studied. There were analyzed reasons, course and consequences of intensification of Washington's foreign policy strategy towards Beijing during the during investigated period. The role of various groups in the American establishment in the process of forming the foreign policy course of the new administration towards China in March-July 1969 is outlined. It is described the specific US foreign policy actions towards communist China at the beginning of Richard M. Nixon presidential period. Despite the presence in the political, academic and social circles of the United States of certain attitudes in favor of the recognition of the People's Republic of China as the political reality of international life, the question of the legal recognition of China in the second half of the 1960’s constantly moved to the background. The victory of Richard М. Nixon in the presidential election in 1968 was accompanied by a series of changes in the system of geopolitical and military priorities of the United States. The new administration’s more realistic approach to China was due primarily to the fact that Beijing, which renounced its alliances and claimed the role of a «third force», was a strong player in the international arena. Moreover, the policy of Kennedy–Johnson did not justify itself, as China has intensified its foreign policy, established relations with many countries, including the US allies. At the beginning of the presidency of Richard М. Nixon in March-July 1969, his administration was managed to quickly develop and begin to implement a holistic concept of «new policy» for China. His Chinese policy was inextricably linked to the US foreign policy in Asia and reflected the clash of American and Chinese interests in the region. At the same time, the representatives of the American establishment have a clear idea of how they could influence Soviet-Chinese relations in order to deepen the rift between the USSR and China, and what concrete benefits they could derive from this. A number of objective and subjective factors not prevented the administration of the 37th President of the United States, Richard М. Nixon, radically changing Washington’s Chinese policy. Communist China continued to be recognized as a powerful factor in the US-Soviet dialogue. In spite of this, in the late 60’s of the twentieth century the objective preconditions began to evolve gradually, which promoted to the normalization of US-China relations in the future, and allowed to resolve most of the controversial issues that ultimately led to the international recognition of the People’s Republic of China by the United States of America.

Foreword: Asia Maior in 2017. The unravelling of the US foreign policy in Asia and its consequences

Foreword: Asia Maior in 2017. The unravelling of the US foreign policy in Asia and its consequences

The perspective of US foreign policy rebooting towards South America and Central Asia

In this article we analyze the US-Latin American and US- Central Asian relations in terms of policy reorientation within the contemporary foreign policy analyses (FPA), evoking the conceptual and normative appeal, as they determine an unconventional approach to FPA onto Latin America Central Asia and the US. We research the cycle of US foreign policy towards Latin America and Central Asia with the accent on sheer policy comparison of US-Latin American and Central Asian leaders, their decision-making and implementation mechanisms. In accordance with the methodology, by replacing the deductivism into the inductivism, this approach allow us to research more rigorous comparative policies of the US foreign policies starting from the Cold War till present days and US foreign policy starting from the collapse of USSR. Connecting with the studies of foreign policy and international relations, we examine how Latin American leaders and Central Asian made vigorous impact onto the US foreign policy that gradually influenced the US behavior and changed the hemispheric relations and polarity. Key words: US-Latin American and US-Central Asian foreign policy, USSR, CIS, Eurasia, Central Asia, NAFTA, OAS, Eurasian Economic Union, Monroe Doctrine, BRICS, good neighbor policy.

Hedging and grand strategy in Southeast Asian foreign policy

Abstract This article examines recent interest in hedging as a feature of international politics in the Asia Pacific. Focusing on the small states of Southeast Asia, we argue that dominant understandings of hedging are misguided for two reasons. Despite significant advances in the literature, hedging has remained a vague concept rendering it a residual category of foreign policy behavior. Moreover, current accounts of hedging tend to overstate the strategic intentions of ostensible hedgers. This article proposes that a better understanding of Southeast Asia’s foreign policy behavior needs to dissociate hedging from neorealist concepts of international politics. Instead, we locate the concept in the context of classical realism and the diplomatic practice of second-tier states. Exploring Southeast Asia’s engagement with more powerful actors from this perspective reveals the strategic limitations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the dilemma that Southeast Asian states face from a rising China challenging the status quo in the western Pacific.

Chinese empire or a prototype of responsible global power: discussions on the Great Qing in China and the West

In the light of China’s rise, it is of great interest to consider the views that are widespread in the PRC on the nature of Chinese state and the proper mode of international relations. Considering that Chinese leadership has proclaimed the goal of "rejuvenation" of the Chinese nation, modern assessments of China's historical past allow us to take a fresh look at the prospects for China's internal development as well as Chinese foreign policy in Asia. In this regard the era of the Qing Dynasty is of particular interest. During that period Chinese territory expanded approximately to its modern borders, and the relations with the neighbors underwent a transition from the tributary system to the modern Westphalian type of international relations. There exist various interpretations of Chinese foreign policy’s traditions. Those interpretations are largely determined by the attitude to China's current behavior at the international stage. While the Chinese rulers have adopted the concept of traditional Chinese world order that is of Western origin, many Western researchers nowadays question this concept and tend to describe pre-revolutionary China as one of many expansionist empires in Eurasia. That point of view is subject to sharp criticism from Chinese authors. The portrayal of Qing China as one of the empires can entail serious consequences for international relations as well as the territorial integrity of the PRC. In order to achieve their goals in domestic and foreign policy, Chinese leaders strive to build a historical narrative in such a way that it combines the elements of various historical periods which are most profitable in the current circumstances, including the history of Silk Road.

Formation of the foreign policy course of US president J.F. Kennedy on the Peoples Republic of China (january-october 1961)

The article investigates the formation of the foreign policy course of US President John F. Kennedy on China in January-October 1961. There were characterized the election statements of the US presidential candidate from the Democratic Party J.F. Kennedy on China. The practical implementation of pre-election initiatives by the administration of the President John F. Kennedy in the Chinese direction in January-October 1961 was studied. There were analyzed reasons, course and consequences of intensification of Washington’s foreign policy strategy towards Beijing during the during investigated period. The role of various groups in the American establishment in the process of forming the foreign policy course of the new administration towards China in January-October 1961 is outlined. It is described the specific US foreign policy actions towards communist China at the beginning of J.F. Kennedy presidential period. The victory of J.F. Kennedy in the presidential election in 1960 was accompanied by a series of changes in the system of geopolitical and military priorities of the United States. The new administration’s more realistic approach to China was due primarily to the fact that Beijing, which renounced its alliances and claimed the role of a “third force”, was a weak player in the international arena and therefore minor, insignificant deviations from traditional policies of “containment and isolation” seemed acceptable. Moreover, the policy of “isolation” did not justify itself, as China has intensified its foreign policy, established relations with many countries, including the US allies. Gradually, the number of states that supported China’s demands for a seat in the UN grew, which created a real prospect for broad recognition of communist China. At the beginning of the presidency of J.F. Kennedy in January-October 1961, his administration was unable to quickly develop and begin to implement a holistic concept of “new frontiers” for China. His Chinese policy was inextricably linked to the US foreign policy in Asia and reflected the clash of American and Chinese interests in the region. At the same time, the representatives of the American establishment did not have a clear idea of how they could influence Soviet-Chinese relations in order to deepen the rift between the USSR and China, and what concrete benefits they could derive from this. This was due to a number of reasons. First of all, when he was elected, the administration of J.F. Kennedy joined the more important events at that time in terms of the US military and political interests than the policy towards China (European problems, issues of Atlantic unity, the Berlin crisis). Secondly, Washington still viewed communist China as a state that threatened American interests in Asia and was eager to expand its influence and strengthen its military power. An important influence on the formation of the foreign policy course of the administration J.F. Kennedy also had at the beginning of his presidency the fact that, having won the election with a minimal advantage, he did not risk starting a major change in Chinese policy and abandoning the policy of “containment”. In such way, the 35th President of the United States tried, at first, to show that he respected public opinion within the country, which was negative about communist China. Secondly, by demonstrating his propensity for the heredity of politics, he hoped to strengthen his vulnerable foreign policy position. That is why J.F. Kennedy, who did not rule out the possibility of changing China’s US policy, saw in his own practical actions toward China at the time no reason to abandon the doctrine of “containment”. Particularly, the idea of “containment” of China was the basis of a number of decisions of the John F. Kennedy administration, which eventually led to the escalation of American military intervention in Indochina.

MECHANISM FOR IMPLEMENTING THE NEW «ASIAN POLICY» 
 OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS IN THE 
 CONTEXT OF GLOBAL POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC INSTABILITY

The article considers the main directions and problems of Russia's foreign policy in the Asia-Pacific Region and South-East Asia within the framework of the concept of advanced development of the Russian Far East, building an economy in the Far East focused on exporting goods and services to Asian markets through the implementation of investment projects. The article analyzes the effectiveness of the implementation of Asian foreign policy through cooperation in the main integration structures in the conditions of global political and economic instability.

Divergence amid Consensus in Southeast Asian Foreign Policy: Roll Call Voting Analysis across International Issues in the United Nations General Assembly (1991–2018)

This paper examines the nature of cohesive patterns of roll call voting behavior across international issues among the 10 member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). Existing studies reveal a high level of foreign policy convergence among these countries. By incorporating several international issues, we set out to advance the scholarly understanding of the ASEAN states’ voting convergence in the UNGA. Our bill-level analysis of voting similarity in the post-Cold War period shows that the respective voting patterns vary across issues on arms control and disarmament, colonialism, economic development, human rights, nuclear weapons and nuclear material, as well as the Palestinian conflict. These findings highlight the ideas and interests of Southeast Asian countries across different foreign policy contexts.

Between Russia and a Hard Place: Great Power Grievances and Central Asian Ambivalence

This essay asks how Central Asian states have responded to Russia’s intervention in Ukraine and salvos against the West, as a means to assess how Russia and the Central Asian states understand their national interests and exercise state power. It argues that the post-Soviet region shares a cynical and geopolitically driven view of the exercise of global power. Yet Russia has sometimes deployed its resources to advance short-term ideological objectives, whereas Central Asian foreign policy is pragmatic and opportunistic. The Ukraine crisis threatened to coerce the Central Asian states into conformity with Russia’s interests; ironically, their dependence on Russia has enabled their freedom of action in foreign policy, within limits. The essay highlights the ways that geography enables and constrains the execution of foreign policy, and considers the ambiguous role ideology plays in the formulation of national interests and the prospects for international cooperation.

Canadian provinces and foreign policy in Asia

Non-central governments in Canada have become increasingly active on the world stage, most notably in the Asia Pacific region. The scholarly works on Canada’s foreign policy in Asia tend to focus either on the federal government as the main actor, or on the “other diplomacies” of non-governmental actors; little attention has been paid to the increasing role of non-central governments in Asia. This article, therefore, contributes to the discussion by documenting and evaluating Canadian provinces’ international activities in the Asia Pacific. It also situates these activities within Canada’s foreign policy in the region, and assesses how important provinces have become in Canada–Asia relations. This paper first reviews the literature on non-central governments and foreign policy to expose the key forces pushing and pulling Canadian provinces to be increasingly active internationally. It then details the provinces’ international activities in Asia, and locates them within Canada’s foreign policy in the region.

Bridges over Troubled History: Japan's Foreign Policy in Asia

Bridges over Troubled History: Japan's Foreign Policy in Asia

BILATERAL UKRAINE-CHINA RELATIONS AT THE CURRENT STAGE

Foreign policy is one of the most important directions of sovereign states’ activity. An especially important place in foreign policy shaping is bilateral relations between states. For Ukraine, such vectors of foreign policy as European, Euro-Atlantic, Eurasian and Asian are traditionally important. In particular, the implementation of the Asian foreign policy vector and the establishment of effective relations with the People's Republic of China as one of the leaders of world economic development is a very important task for Ukrainian diplomacy at this time. The analysis of foreign and Ukrainian sources regarding this topic demonstrates the interest of researchers in bilateral Ukrainian-Chinese relations. One of the important trends in world socio-political development is globalization processes. In this article the author examines the state of bilateral Ukrainian-Chinese relations at the present stage characterized by dynamic globalization rate. In the results of the conducted study one can note that currently there are certain obstacles to the effective development of bilateral relations between Ukraine and China, however at the same time there is sufficient potential for further intensification of bilateral relations between the indicated countries. On the basis of the analysis, one can conclude that among the successes of Ukraine's foreign policy over the past few years, one can identify the establishment of a fairly fruitful relationship with the People's Republic of China: cooperation in the agricultural and trade sectors, transport sphere, cultural exchanges. At the same time, it is necessary to strengthen the effective use of the foreign policy resource for more effective cooperation with the People's Republic of China — one of the most powerful current leaders of world economic development. It is important to avoid controversial military and political issues. It is vital to establish effective international cooperation with this country, which would allow achieving mutually beneficial goals. This is related to further research prospects concerning further development of Ukraine's relations with the countries of the Asia-Pacific region, in particular with the states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation).

Great Power Rivalries, Domestic Politics and Southeast Asian Foreign Policy: Exploring the Linkages

ABSTRACTSoutheast Asian states increasingly face a strategic environment characterized by rising Sino-American tensions at the same time that domestic factors are increasingly influencing foreign policy. In recent decades, Southeast Asian states have sought to maintain their strategic autonomy by adopting hedging strategies to secure economic and security benefits from different partners. Since hedging is a rational response to strategic uncertainty, one would predict that as China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea has made clear its intentions to revise the status quo in ways that directly threaten the national interests of the Philippines Vietnam, Malaysia, and Indonesia, that they would begin to balance against China, in part by improving ties with Washington. In contrast to these predictions, no Southeast Asian country is balancing against China today, partly because of the economic incentives offered by China and partly because of the disincentives created by US pressure on democracy and human rights. In the Philippines, Duterte’s strategic re-orientation away from the United States toward China was triggered partly by US condemnation of his bloody war on drugs while US criticism of Thailand’s military coup has weakened the alliance. The unprecedented role of public pressure, interest groups and legislatures is forcing Southeast Asian leaders to publically debate policy decisions long made in private. Public opinion in Southeast Asia has often been anti-American but anti-Chinese sentiment is rising. As domestic and foreign policy becomes increasingly intertwined, Southeast Asian foreign policy is likely to continue to deviate from structurally based alignment predictions and become more erratic.

The Great Game in the North Caucasus

This article concerns imperial Russia’s foreign policy in Asia during the early nineteenth century, specifically the “Great Game” engaged in by Russia and Britain in the North Caucasus.

RUSSIA AND EAST ASIA: NEW OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

The article focuses on major dimensions, achievements, challenges and prospects of relations between Russia and East Asia. Strategic importance of the region is shaped by East Asia's increasing role in world politics and economy as well as by its appeal for Russia's modernization agenda. Russia's great power status rests upon the effectiveness of its East Asian policy and development model of Siberia and the Russian Far East. Russia's positions in East Asia have improved substantially over the 2000s. However, its involvement in regional economic interaction is still insignificant and Russia cannot be regarded as a full-fledged regional player in this domain. Russian-Chinese strategic partnership has been the axis of Russia's East Asian foreign policy, though overdependence on China threatens Russia's independent policy in the region and encourages Russia to search for ways to diversify its ties. Russia's national interests reside in multivector policy, aimed at developing substantive relations not only with China but also with Japan, South Korea, ASEAN (Vietnam in the first place) and India along with Russia's involvement in the resolution of Korean nuclear crisis. The rise of China and the US counter-offensive have resulted in a changing strategic environment in East Asia. A need for balancing between the US and China has brought about ASEAN countries' desire to welcome Russia as a "balancer" or an "honest player" in the region. It corresponds with Russia's course on playing a greater role in regional cooperation and integration. Russia's improving ties in political, economic, energy and security dimensions have the potential to contribute to the stability of the emerging polycentric regional order in East Asia and development of Russia's regions of Siberia and the Far East.

‘Before It Is Too Late’: Land Reform in South Vietnam, 1956–1968

Attempts by the U.S. government to enact land redistribution in the Republic of Vietnam began in the mid-1950s. At that time. land reform was a linchpin of U.S. foreign policy in Asia. Wolf Ladejinsky, author of the legislation that had virtually eliminated tenancy in occupied Japan, encountered political controversy in Washington and administrative challenges in Saigon in his attempt to bring about greater equality of land ownership in South Vietnam. This initial attempt to modify land tenure arrangements failed when redistribution stalled, far from complete, during 1961. Although new land reform legislation did not appear until 1970, the 1960s were by no means years of inaction on land reform. Years of behind-the-scenes efforts by American policymakers in Washington and Saigon culminated in the Land-to-the-Tiller Law, an ambitious but doomed attempt to complete the work that Ladejinsky had begun over a decade earlier. Documents from the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library, many newly declassified, suggest that bureaucratic intrigue and political infighting within the Johnson administration and Congress both hindered and facilitated the emergence of a new land reform program in war-ravaged South Vietnam.

Issues from South Asian Politics: Some Postcolonial Reflections

Making U.S. Foreign Policy Toward South Asia: Regional Imperatives and the Imperial Presidency. Edited by Lloyd I. Rudolph, Susanne H. Rudolph. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2008. 448 pp., $24.95 paperback (ISBN 978-0-253-22000-4). South Asia's Cold War: Nuclear Weapons and Conflict in Comparative Perspective. By Rajesh M. Basrur. New York: Routledge, 2008. 172 pp., $39.95 paperback (ISBN 978-0-415-39194-8). South Asia's Weak States: Understanding the Regional Insecurity Predicament. Edited by Thaza Varkey Paul. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2010. 352 pp., $27.95 paperback (ISBN 978-0-804-76221-2). The reviewed books address South Asia's predicaments pertaining to the region's state capacity, nuclear security, and foreign policy relations with the United States. South Asia's Weak States, edited by T.V. Paul, explains the multifaceted insecurities of South Asia by identifying the presence of weak states and weak cooperative interstate norms in the region. South Asia's Cold War, by drawing on the general characteristics of the US–USSR, US–China, USSR–China, and US–North Korea Cold Wars, studies the Cold War in South Asia (between India and Pakistan) and the possibilities of thawing this war. Making US Foreign Policy Towards South Asia remains an analysis of US foreign policy toward South Asia since the Nixon era with emphasis on the Bush era after 9/11. Barring some excessively descriptive chapters (in Lloyd I. Rudolph and Susanne Hoeber Rudolf), the three books constitute a valuable source of information for scholars, graduate students, and policy practitioners interested in International Relations (IR)/Security, South Asian nuclear security, and issues of US–South Asian foreign policymaking. Rudolph and Rudolph's book is particularly helpful for policy practitioners. Nonetheless, these books (with the exception of some chapters that are mentioned below), and to some extent Basrur's book, explain issues of South Asian security from a conventional/empirical framework of politics. Thus, they preclude the interrogation of how interpretive factors/processes such as the power of discourse, ideology, articulation of identities, international hierarchy, and voices/concerns of the South Asian actors that are vital (when considering politics of the postcolonial world) may implicate South Asian security, state capacities, and US–South Asian foreign policy affairs. Below, I comparatively delineate the core theses, theoretical frameworks, methodologies, and the contributions of these three scholarships. However, considering South Asia's postcolonial location, its colonial experience, and its presence in a hierarchical world of IR, suggest that a more critical line of analysis, …