Global East Asia response paper

Vince Scappatura (2014)

March 21 Wed. recitation � Steger, chap. 4 “The political dimension of

globalization” (2017) � Scappatura, “The US Pivot to Asia, the

China spectre, and the Australian-American Alliance” (2014)

� McCormack, “North Korea and a rules- based order for the Indo-Pacific, East Asia, and the world” (2017)

Eurasian landmass separated from North America

Pacific Ocean joins Asia & N. America

WW2 history links EA with US

Regional Security 1. In the short term

� Achieved by maintaining status quo 2. In the long term

� May require structural changes

Review: Steger, chap 4

Steger: challenges to nation-state

� State power has devolved to regional/local governments, supranational and sub-national institutions.

� NGOs outside the nation state system are willing to challenge nation-states

Globalization processes lead to diffusion of power centers

Global governance

National sovereignty

Globalization processes lead to diffusion of power centers

Global governance

National sovereignty

Local governance

Chart: Diffusion of power centers

Global & Regional

governance

National sovereignty NGO

Local governance

Diffusion of power centers Nation-States compete with other power centers: 1. Global, Regional (supra-state), and Local

(sub-state) inter-governmental organizations within the Nation-State System

2. Economic & Civic organizations (TNCs, NGOs) outside the Nation-State System

Steger: The nation-state is still central in some areas—such as 1. Nations can still take measures to make

themselves more or less attractive to global investors

2. Nations retain control over education, infrastructure, and immigration

3. Nations can assert themselves militarily

Electronic devices OFF

March 6, 2018 The Sun “OUTGUNNED China hell bent on becoming the world’s most powerful country as it boosts military spending to a whopping £127 billion”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5727150/china-military- news-power-budget-spending-weapons/amp/

Top Ten Big Spenders China: $161.7bn U.S.: $587.8bn

Asia-Pacific Trilateral $675.4bn � U.S., Japan, South Korea

Indo-Pacific Quadrilateral : $726.4bn � U.S., Japan, South Korea, India

Organization of Scappatura’s essay 1. Developments in Obama’s “Pivot to Asia”

2. Official pretexts and imaginary threats

3. American dominance versus Chinese survival

4. “Internationalizing” the East and South China Sea

disputes

5. Keeping Asia divided and dependent

6. A most special relationship for the 21st century

7. Places are bases

8. Australia risks martyrdom

9. Challenging the Australian-American alliance

Obama administrations two- pronged strategy to contain China 1. Military “Pivot to Asia” 2. Trade “TPP—Trans-Pacific Partnership”

� Excluded China

two prongs (fork)

Trump administration’s one- pronged strategy to contain China 1. Military “Pivot to Asia” 2. Trade “TPP—Trans-Pacific Partnership”

� Creates new opportunities for China to expand its role in regional trade agreements

one prong (ice pick)

Conventional wisdom US geopolitical primacy in East Asia serves to maintain peace.

� Prevents rise of Japan’s militarism � Offsets China’s growing power � Deters North Korea’s ambitions

Scappatura’s thesis (counter-thesis)

US hegemony is incompatible with the emergence of a peaceful and stable Asia.

Group discussion � Do you accept the conventional wisdom:

that U.S. geopolitical primacy in East Asia serves to maintain peace in the region?

� Or, do you agree with Scappatura’s counter- thesis: that U.S. hegemony is incompatible with the emergence of a peaceful and stable Asia?

Explain.

Group discussion A. I accept the conventional wisdom: that

U.S. geopolitical primacy in East Asia serves to maintain peace in the region.

B. I agree with Scappatura’s counter-thesis: that U.S. hegemony is incompatible with the emergence of a peaceful and stable Asia.

Conventional wisdom US geopolitical primacy in East Asia serves to maintain peace.

� Prevents rise of Japan’s militarism � Offsets China’s growing power � Deters North Korea’s ambitions

üShort-term view of regional security üreinforces the status quo

Scappatura’s thesis (counter-thesis)

US hegemony is incompatible with the emergence of a peaceful and stable Asia.

üLong-term view of regional security üargues that structural changes are needed

Pivot to Asia, announced 2011 � Plan: Deploy military resources to Asia-

Pacific for three branches of the US military � US Navy � US Marines � US Air Force

Two aims of Pivot to Asia:

� Constrain China and thereby protect U.S. national security

� Preserve U.S. hegemony/geopolitical primacy in the region by preventing emergence of an independent coalition of states

Scappatura’s thesis The US is secure � “Dirty little secret of US defense politics” (p.

3)

Scappatura’s thesis China is vulnerable � Recall Mathews & Tan’s article “China’s

renewable energy revolution”

[Question: What motivates China’s commitment to green energy?] A. Renewables are less costly B. Green energy provides security and industrial

development C. Oil and coal are too expensive

Scappatura’s thesis China is vulnerable along its maritime approaches � As China’s economy has grown over recent

decades, it has begun to attempt to redress its historic vulnerability to military intervention from the sea

According to Scappatura, what is one reason why China poses no threat to U.S. security? A. Because China has no experience fighting

foreign wars. B. Because the U.S. and Chinese economies

are closely integrated. C. Because the U.S. has military bases and

allies surrounding China.

US military allies and bases US has a strong military, spending $600 billion, over 5 times more than China, and complemented by: 1. allies who surround China—Japan, South

Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Philippines 2. a global network of military bases

Another reason: Nuclear capacity– Federation of American Scientists Chinese-US nuclear power is disproportionately in favor of the US and will remain so. � The US has had extensive nuclear strike plans

against Chinese targets for more than half a century, but China has never responded by building large nuclear forces of its own

� As a result, Chinese nuclear weapons are fewer and smaller than the US counterparts

Contrasting China/U.S. military focus U.S. military goal: To project U.S. power globally

� Has over 1000 foreign military bases

� Elite troops are deployed to 134 countries

� Annually conducts 170 military exercises and 250 port visits in the Asia-Pacific region

� No powerful neighbors to contend with (Canada, Mexico)

� Bordered by vast oceans (Atlantic & Pacific)

Contrasting China/U.S. military focus China’s military goal: To defend its borders � For internal security � Has no foreign military bases

� 2017 Djibouti, Africa

Djibouti, Africa

Pivot to Asia vs. Rebalancing � Obama administration prefers to call it

“rebalancing” to Asia � Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used the

term “Pivot to Asia” in an article for Foreign Policy, and it stuck.

Pivot to Asia/Rebalance to Asia � US Navy f leet in Asia-Pacific is currently 50%, will

increase to 60%

� 50 ships will increase to 67 ships � Majority of US aircraft carriers

� Cruisers

� Destroyers � Submarines

� Littoral Command Ships (LCSs) � designed for operations close to shore

� up to 4 will be deployed to Singapore’s Changi naval base

Will the Pivot succeed?

Plans for Pivot to Asia may not be realized � Inability to sustain strategic vision � lack of budgetary resources � events in Middle East (ISIS) & Ukraine

Pivot’s Australian connection � US Marine Air-Ground Task Force

(MAGTF) � Based in Darwin

� 2,500 marines by 2016 � Available for rapid deployment in combat

� Estimated cost: $1.6 billion � Much of the cost borne by Australia

Timing of the US Pivot � Increasing militarization in the Asia-Pacific

� Arms imports to East Asia increased 25% from 2012-2013 � $9.8 billion (2012) to $12.2 billion (2013)

� Rise in regional tensions � China has recently clashed with Japan, Philippines,

Vietnam, and US � Japan has increased its military presence in region

� Patrol boats to Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia � Military alliances with Australia, India

Why pivot to Asia? � Ans. To maintain U.S. hegemony in the

region

Scappatura quotes Mark Beeson:

� American strategic involvement in the region “is expressly designed (1) to keep East Asia divided and (2) [to keep] its security orientation firmly oriented towards Washington.”

Beeson quotes Michal Mastanduno � “Since the US does not want to encourage a

balancing coalition against its dominant position, it is not clear that it has a strategic interest in the full resolution of differences between, say, Japan and China or Russia and China. Some level of tension among these states reinforces their individual need for a special relationship with the United States.”

US system of alliances in Asia

� Bilateral, hub-and-spokes system � Designed to prevent regional integration

and inter-dependence