Chinese Foreign Policy Towards North East Asian Countries

It is no longer appropriate to say, “China is quickly emerging as a global superpower.” The fact is China is just that. Realizing this the United States of America has attempted to once again turn its focus eastward. Continuing problems at home and in the Middle East however have made doing so difficult. Additionally more and more frequently attempts at influencing the ongoing narrative in the Asia- Pacific region have been rebuffed. Even allies have found strength in the emergence of a system that fails to conform to previously prescribed methods and ideals. This leads to a fundamental question America must answer quickly. Has the growing hypocrisy of idealistic political rhetoric versus actual foreign policy finally undermined American credibility with developing nations, or for the purposes of this paper more specifically China? The answer is yes.

In this article, “How to Deter China, The Case for Archipelagic Defense”, Andrew Krepinevich, includes various examples of China’s trait of bullying and how others, who are victim, may not be able to compete in the same way with other governments. He includes strategies that the United States may or may not be able to implement in order to aid in Asian peace. We are given information regarding our country’s planned action to address this issue. He gives examples of how China’s bullying and repression on other countries that are located within China’s reach occur. For example, Krepinevich writes, “China moved an oil rig into Vietnam's exclusive economic zone, clashing with Vietnamese fishing boats”. These actions would never lead to peace between Vietnam and China, however, it only proves who is the most powerful of the two. It is true that China is a world power that is very advanced and able to do the majority of what it wants, but this does not justify actions that cause problems among others. He brings up “Archipelagic Defense”, and this is just a country’s ability to stand firm and defend themselves with these issues. He explains how several countries like Vietnam and Japan in particular, are willing to put forth the efforts necessary for archipelagic defense. This defense is needed in responding to this

The Australian-Chinese relationship stands as an important symbol for international relations in the Asian region. Presently, Australian face an important juncture in their relationship with China. Should Australians be concerned with Chinese military aggressions in the South China Sea or be more focused on strengthening an already strong Australian-Chinese economic partnership? China is Australia’s largest trading partner and has been a vehicle for Australian economic growth in recent decades (Drysdale & Xiaoqiang). Australian leaders must value the self-interest of the people of Australia. Leaders must focus on ensuring long term survival and prosperity of the great nation of Australia. I advocate a mostly defensive realist approach for Australian foreign policy towards China. I believe a policy of economic engagement suits the short and long term interest of Australia and will provide needed stability to the region.

Henry Cabot Lodge- Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he was a leader in the fight against participation in the League of Nations

China’s history continues to shape its contemporary thinking, foreign policy and diplomacy with the West. In order to understand China’s politics and its civilization in general, it is important to look into its history and its traditional philosophy. This book examined many key events in Chinese foreign policy from the classical era to the present day, with an emphasis on the decades after the rise of Mao Zedong. The Chinese’s response and its approach to diplomacy and foreign policy were seen during

In addition, Nye claims that Layne conflates relative economic decline with absolute political decay (Nye 2012, 215). To differentiate between the two, the author argues for the importance of a holistic interpretation of international preponderance (Nye 2012, 215). Such an understanding considers economic and military power separately, and allows for economic competition within the state system without polarity shift (Nye 2012, 215). Nye then discusses constraints on Chinese power that he believes Layne dismisses too easily (Nye 2012, 216). Among these are trends of slow growth associated with international economic adolescence, internal political tensions, regional competitors such as Japan and India, and the basic level of Chinese manufacturing ability (Nye 2012, 216). Moreover, Nye claims that American military preponderance will allow the United States to shape the geopolitical environment in which China defines its national interests for at least the next three decades (Nye 2012, 216). For these reasons, Nye determines Layne’s claims to be over-exaggerated and inconsistent with his theoretic perception of contemporary global politics (Nye 2012,

American foreign policy has begun to tilt towards defense from Asian threats. According to Andrew F. Krepinevich Jr., the navy and the air force desire for the majority of their services to be located in the Asia-Pacific region by 2020. The military desires these modifications in order to control China’s aggressive behavior. In the article “How to Deter China” by Andrew F. Krepinevich Jr., he suggests that these changes, along with others, to boost American military are necessary in order to maintain Asian-Pacific peace. However, in order to confirm or deny his accusations, other theories must first be analyzed. Ikenberry’s institutional approach will be analyzed and compared to Krepinevich’s deterrence theory.

The United States and China have long had a complex relationship. The tension between the two powers is related to the communist regime in China. The United States and China have almost always been on opposing sides in a conflict such as the Korean War, the Tibetan uprise, or the race for nuclear weapons. However, just as the United States has grown in power, China has done the same. China is and always has been the most influential state in Asia. While it has been on the world stage for sometime, its economic and military power has been undermined by more pressing international events. As China’s rise becomes more apparent, many wonder what effects it will have on the global economy and whether it will lead to conflict between the United States and China. Through the exploration of realism, liberalism, and constructivism the consequences of China’s rise can be understood.

in concerned, the resumption of three-way talks also highlights willingness on the part of Japan and South Korea to engage with China. This effort to reduce the so-called ‘Asian paradox’— that is, the disparity between worsening political and security ties and increasing economic interdependence — reflects a common response of hedging against China’s rise. With the jury still out, on whether China is seeking to establish a new regional order, the best strategy at the disposal of regional countries remains to simultaneously balance against and engage with the rising power . The real issue for the U.S. is the trilateral agreements do not include North Korea and their nuclear program continues to go unchecked. If economic ties become so strong for the three core countries, their ability to use power politics to keep the north in check maybe in danger. China, potentially, is using the North Koreas nuclear program as a bargaining chip against the U.S. as it grows into an economic hegemon concerned over the U.S. pivot to

According to Friedberg, China and the U.S. are on their way to compete for international power and influence. In his work, he reviews an emerging Sino- American rivalry that continues to intensify due to the power gap narrowing. This rivalry is not due to erased misperceptions and policy errors. However, it is due to power politics and differing ideologies. Both the U.S. and PRC have objectives that threaten interests of the others side. The United States promotes “regime change” in China. They wish to have China move from an authoritarian means towards liberal democracy by peaceful and gradual methods. Even though both have differences, they see the benefit in continuing their economic relations. Author claims that we focus on the more

China is firmly positioned as a superpower in both the Asia-Pacific region, and the global political arena. Some issues, however, have prevented China from fulfilling its national interests including territorial integrity, economic prosperity, a harmonious society, and a peaceful rise to power.

Assessing China as a whole could become a rigorous challenge, but for the purpose of this paper, certain areas will be analyzed. The First topic of interest is China’s significance to the United States (U.S.), most notably, China’s economic influence and partnership with the United States. When mentioning China’s significance, China’s vast standing army of 2.3 million, with millions more available for service must receive attention. The next portion of this look into China will involve a synopsis of threats to and from China and the threats justification with possible immediate and future implications.

We first turn to David Kang’s 2003 article “Getting Asia Wrong: The Need for New Analytical Frameworks.” This piece attempts to analyze the response of neighboring Asian states to China’s rising economic and military power since the end of the Cold War. In this, Kang analyzes the situation through comparing the actual responses to what a realist perspective would dictate would occur.

From an international relations perspective, the Taiwan Strait, one of the most likely conflict zones in the Asia-Pacific region, has been dubbed the “Balkan Peninsula of the East.” The status of Taiwan has been one of the most intricate issues in international relations arena for the past decades. The Taiwan question is essentially an extension of the “two Chinas” problem, which creates a dilemma for accommodating

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more integrated and willing to cooperate within the global political and economic systems than ever in its history. However, there is growing apprehension in the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. in regards to the consequences of rising in economic and military power in China. Descriptions about Chinese diplomacy in the policy and scholarly are less positive lately concerning China’s obedience to regional and international rules. There was little debate in the U.S. and elsewhere in regards to whether China was or was not part “the international community.” Scholars and experts in the early 1990s have contended