Although the claim that the US had abandoned Asia never fully held up to scrutiny, in recent months the Obama administration has repeatedly signaled its new commitment to the region, a decision that will not only have direct implications for China, but also for Washington's allies.
The Strategic Vision journal, published under the auspices of the Center for Security Studies at Taiwan's National Defense University, invited me to share my views on what the so-called US pivot could mean for the future of the region. The entire journal can be accessed here, with my article starting on page 9.
2 comments:
A question for if and when you get time, J.M...
""Key to this will be for regional leaders to realize that future regional stability will depend on the willingness and ability of all the players involved to operate in a multilateral environment."
Is the stock phrase "future regional stability" merely a euphemism for the avoidance of armed conflict? Or is there a broader meaning?
Perhaps the term "stability" could refer to known and predictable rules for the use of shipping lanes, fishing zones and so on also, but it strikes me that the phrase "reducing future instability in the region" might be better - given that potential armed conflict is not the only source of "instability" and that the region's States are generating their own internal, socio-economic strains.
@Mike: I could settle for "reducing future instability in the region." And yes, this would include shipping lanes, fisheries and so on, though my article addresses mostly armed conflict.
Post a Comment