scholarly journals South Korea’s Geoeconomic Response to the United States’ Geopolitical Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Ki-Su Kim
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Northeast Asia ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
President Obama ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
The U.S

The United States “Indo-Pacific strategy” itself entails geopolitics. Since 2017, the Indo-Pacific has emerged as a major strategic region for America’s diplomacy and security. Against this backdrop, the Indo-Pacific strategy extends both the “Asia Rebalancing Strategy” and the “Asia-Pacific Security Alliance” regime to the Indian Ocean, while seeking to bring emerging countries, such as China and India, into the U.S.-led international order. Major East Asian countries are actively employing economic means to advance their geopolitical goal -- reshaping the regional order in their own favor. The U.S. has shown a confrontational and exclusionary attitude toward China in terms of politics, economy and security, while the ASEAN has sought to promote inclusiveness by publicly expressing opposition to the exclusion of China. The ASEAN highlighted economic cooperation with China, while the U.S. focused on military and security aspects. The Indo-Pacific strategy will not be able to succeed without the participation of the ASEAN that serves as a crucial geopolitical link between the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Another important factor is that unlike former U.S. President Obama, who championed the Asia-Pacific rebalance, President Donald Trump does not show keen interest in the Indo-Pacific strategy. At the same time, President Moon Jae-in has been cautious about engaging in security issues that go beyond the Korean Peninsula or the Northeast Asia -- namely joining in any collective move to contain China. Currently, South Korea is grappling with the geopolitical challenges by expressing support for the ASEAN's geoeconomic approach. Instead of choosing whether to participate in the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy, South Korea is seeking common ground between the strategy and its “New Southern Policy.” In other words, the New Southern Policy is a kind of buffer zone. South Korea is taking a geoeconomic response that focuses on developing the regional economy rather than adhering to the strategic and military role of the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy.

scholarly journals ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT OF ARCTIC LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS SUPPLIESTO THE ASIAN-PACIFIC REGION COUNTRIES UNDER THE END OF THE “TRADE WAR” BETWEEN THE USA AND CHINA

2020 ◽  
Vol 68 (2/2020) ◽  
pp. 12-21
Author(s):  
M. V. Ulchenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Growth Rate ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
South Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Liquefied Natural Gas ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Russian Arctic ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region

Currently, the Asia-Pacific market is a priority goal for almost all major producers of liquefied natural gas(LNG). This is due to the relatively high price that local consumers are willing to pay, as well as the accelerated growth rate of natural gas consumption. At the same time, China is the main driver of growth in demand for LNGin the world, has concluded a trade agreement with the United States, which involves the purchase of energy resources worth more than $ 52 billion over two years. Given the decline in LNG prices, as well as increased competition, the issue of the prospects for sales of Russian Arctic gas on the market of the Asia-Pacific region becomes particularly relevant.The study provides a generalized assessment of the needs of the main importers of LNG ––China, South Korea and Japan, with a planning horizon of 4–5 years. The relatively high growth rates of the economy, partial rejection of nuclear energy, struggle to improve the environmental situation, as well as the desire to diversify supply routes explain the needs of the countries in the Asia-Pacific region for additional volumes of LNGin the near future. The analysis showed that both Japan and South Korea are interested in increasing the volume of imports of Russian arctic LNG, whose key advantages over most competitors are the price and relative proximity of sales markets. At the same time, the reduction in the number of operating gas drilling rigs in the United States indicates that it will not be possible to maintain the growth rate of LNG production at the level of 2018 and 2019.

scholarly journals VIRTUAL REALITY: U.S. INFORMATION SECURITY THREATS CONCEPT AND ITS INTERNATIONAL DIMENSION

2014 ◽  
pp. 128-136
Author(s):  
E. V. Batueva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Information Security ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Main Task ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
Cyber Space ◽  
National Information ◽  
The U.S

The development of ICT and the formation of the global information space changed the agenda of national and international security. Such key characteristics of cyberspace as openness, accessibility, anonymity, and identification complexity determined the rise of actors in cyber space and increased the level of cyber threats. Based on the analyses of the U.S. agencies' approach, the author defines three major groups of threats: use of ICT by states, criminals and terrorists. This concept is shared by the majority of the countries involved in the international dialogue on information security issues and is fundamental for providing cyber security policy on both national and international levels. The United States is developing a complex strategy for cyber space that includes maximization of ICT's advantages in all strategically important fields as well as improvement of national information systems and networks security. On the international level the main task for the American diplomacy is to guarantee the U.S. information dominance. The United States is the only country that takes part practically in all international and regional fora dealing with cyber security issues. However process of the development of a global cyber security regime is not going to be fast due to countries' different approaches to key definitions and lack of joint understanding of cyber security issues as well as due to the position of the countries, among all the United States, that are not interested in any new obligatory international norms and principles. Such American policy aims at saving the possibility of using cyberspace capacity in reaching political and military goals, thus keeping the global leadership.

The North Caucasus in Contemporary U.S.-Russia Relations: Key Problems and Implications for the Future

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-166
Author(s):  
Maxim A. Suchkov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Present Article ◽  
The United States ◽  
North Caucasus ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
The North ◽  
The Future ◽  
Boston Marathon ◽  
The U.S

The North Caucasus is a most significant but a least understood problem in contemporary U.S.-Russia relations. The United States as one of the prime pace-setters in the region shaped its own attitude towards Russia’s most volatile region. Over more than twenty years, Washington experienced at least three major stages in its “Caucasus strategy”, and each stage had its impact on the North Caucasus. Since the beginning, the two states stuck to conflicting narratives of developments in the region. With time, some of the assessments were re-evaluated, but some continue to impede cooperation on key security issues. The present article explores these phenomena and examines what implications major events like the 9/11 attacks, the Caucasus Emirate enlistment among top terrorist organisations, the Boston marathon bombings, etc. had for the U.S.-Russia joint efforts in fighting terrorism. It also assesses areas of potential disagreement in the North Caucasus between the two countries.

scholarly journals The United States-China Mutually Assured Distrust

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Jalel Ben Haj Rehaiem
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
East Asia ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
People’S Republic Of China ◽  
Military Force ◽  
People's Republic Of China ◽  
President Obama ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
Rising Power

The 21st century geopolitical developments in East Asia have placed the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in aprime position to play a major role in the complexities of Asia-Pacific politics. China is a rising power, but whetherit is going to be a status quo power or a challenging one remains to be seen. With the world’s largest population, theworld second economy and a modernizing military force, China theoretically has room to have a say in the revisionof the security order in East Asia, which has been dominated so far by an already controversial Cold War alliancebetween the United States and Japan and a new American pivot to Asia since former President Obama announced hisnew Asia strategy in Canberra in November 2011.As China’s prowess grows, so do percolating challenges to U.S. prominence in the region. The gap between whatChina intends to do with accumulating power and how it is perceived in Asia and the West alike has created whatthis article calls China’s trust dilemma with the United States.The distrust between Beijing and Washington has ostensibly plagued their relationship and may continue to dominatetheir interaction for the unforeseeable future; an interaction between an already established world hegemon and arising regional player that is allegedly aspiring to challenge and even replace its rival, at least in Asia for the timebeing.As this article seeks to study the implications of the rise of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a world powerand the trust dilemma China’s rising might is incurring, this work,in its attempt to fathom Beijing’s strategic intents,adopts the security dilemma framework whichrefers to a situation wherein two states may be drawn into conflict,possibly even war, over security concerns, even though none of them actually seeks confrontation.

scholarly journals Danger Zones Dead Ahead For The U.S. And China: Prospects And Challenges

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 1013
Author(s):  
Linnea B. McCord ◽  
Terry Young ◽  
Peggy J. Crawford
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
The United States ◽  
Danger Zone ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
External Threats ◽  
The People ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
The U.S

To be successful and remain independent, every country must create a prosperous economy, keep peace among its people, maintain political stability, and ensure the security of the people and the country from internal and external threats. Doing all four at the same time is never easy and in a time of economic volatility, change, and uncertainty juggling all four becomes more difficult. This is when countries enter the danger zone where hidden cracks and fissures in a countrys organization and structure could become destabilizing. In this paper we will compare the challenges and prospects for the United States and China as both countries enter the danger zone. The purpose of this paper is to examine how each countrys unique attributes are likely to impact its ability to succeed. We will examine their political, economic and legal systems to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each. We will also assess the role of corruption in each society. Both the United States and China have serious economic, social, political and security issues on the horizon. To solve the problems will require serious sacrifices and pain for a large portion of the populations in both countries. Which form of government will best be able to adapt quickly to the constantly changing environment? Will a serious economic slowdown topple the Communist dictatorship in China? Will gridlock and distrust in the U.S. prevent Americans from adapting fast enough to make the necessary changes in time to save its financial system and economy? Time will tell.

Stuck Between Two Allies

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-237
Author(s):  
Terence Roehrig
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Asia Pacific Region ◽  
Course Of Action ◽  
Maritime Disputes

Abstract The Asia-Pacific region is home to numerous island and maritime disputes but the Dokdo/Takeshima dispute is unique in that it involves two u.s. allies placing Washington in a uncomfortable position. u.s. policy has long been that it takes no position on sovereignty and will abide by any negotiated resolution of the dispute. Yet when tensions have flared between South Korea and Japan over the issue, there have often been calls for the United States to intervene and help solve the problem. However, any u.s. attempt to exert its leverage to reach a solution would be dangerous. Instead, Washington’s best course of action is to quietly remind both sides of their common economic and security interests while helping Seoul and Tokyo to manage the dispute in a careful and judicious manner.

THE TRANSPORT POLICy MAKING IN MONGOLIA AND POSSIBLE BENEFITS FOR RUSSIA IN THE FRAMEWORK OF FOREIGN POLICY INPLEMENTATION IN THE NORTHEAST ASIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 50-57
Author(s):  
T. Beydina ◽  
◽  
S. Kaplina ◽  
A. Litovchenko ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Northeast Asia ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Global Market ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Russian Government ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Passenger Traffic ◽  
Long Time

The paper deals with geopolitical processes in Northeast Asia (NEA), which includes among others the Russian Federation (RF, Russia), Mongolia and the People’s Republic of China (PRC, China). There is some interesting information in the paper about geopolitical interests which the United States of America (U.S.) utilizing in this region through Mongolia – RF’s closest neighbour, and how it can be used in Russian interests. The center of global political and economic activity is shifting in this region. The research has shown that in the first quarter of the twenty-first century, trade between the countries of the Asia-Pacific region and Europe will become the most dynamic global market. Significant benefits will be received by those countries which will be able to attract transit Euro-Asian cargo and passenger traffic to their transport communications. In this regard, the scientists examine Mongolia’s political initiatives in the field of transport communications management, its impact on the internal environment of Russia, and also consider the political and economic benefits for Russia in implementing joint transport projects with the Mongolian side. Russia’s policy in the NEA is aimed at protecting the national interests and ensuring the country’s security, using the economic and political potential of the NEA states. Russia’s geographical position allows it to be a link for the countries of Europe and Asia, acting as a transit territory, including Mongolia, which is looking for opportunities to increase exports through Russian transport corridors. In this regard, the Russian government provides for the modernization of the Trans-Siberian Railway, the Baikal-Amur Railway and the Pacific ports. At the same time, there is a struggle for geopolitical influence between the United States and China in the region. To contain China’s economic expansion, the United States seeks not only to attract its long-time allies, Japan and South Korea, but also to use other countries, in particular Mongolia, which in turn can be used to promote Russian interests in the region

Constitutional War Initiation and the Obama Presidency

2016 ◽  
Vol 110 (4) ◽  
pp. 701-717 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Ramsey
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Presidential Candidate ◽  
Military Force ◽  
President Obama ◽  
War Powers ◽  
Original Meaning ◽  
Basic Proposition ◽  
The U.S

In 2007, presidential candidate Barack Obama argued that the U.S. president did not have independent constitutional authority to use military force except in response to an actual or imminent attack on the United States. Since 2008, President Obama has directed the use of U.S. military force in at least seven countries (Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Somalia). Critics find inconsistency in these positions, contending that the Obama presidency will be remembered for expansion of the presidency's war powers. But when the administration's record is closely examined, these claims seem overstated. At least with regard to war initiation, the Obama presidency need not be regarded as materially enhancing the president's constitutional powers.This assessment begins by establishing two baselines. First, most war powers scholars agree that under the Constitution's original meaning, Congress’ power to “declare War” required the president to seek congressional approval prior to initiating war. This constitutional command had substantial grey areas, including responses to threats and attacks, relations with non-state actors, and low-level hostilities. Nonetheless, the basic proposition stated by candidate Obama appears well founded both in the Constitution's text itself and in early postratification practice. Second, in the modern (post-Vietnam War) era, most scholars agree that the practice has changed somewhat, with presidents asserting an expanded independent authority over uses of military force. This essay agrees with that description, although it contends that the change in actual practice is less dramatic than commentary sometimes claims.

The Evolving Inter-Korean Relationship and Regional Politics

2001 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sung-Joo Han
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Korea ◽  
North Korea ◽  
Northeast Asia ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Regional Politics ◽  
The World ◽  
Realistic Assessment ◽  
North And South

The historic June 2000 summit and subsequent exchanges between North and South Korea have added a new dimension to not only South-North Korean relations but also the situation in Northeast Asia as a whole. On one hand, the thawing South- North Korean relations has generated great optimism among those who see it as an irrefutable sign of North Korea's intention to join the rest of the world as a constructive player. At the other extreme, it is seen as a deceptive, if not desperate, act on the part of North Korea to reap economic gains and lower the guard of South Korea and its allies, principally the United States. Perhaps a more realistic assessment lies somewhere between these polar analyses.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document