The Real Challenge Of The Pacific

One of the biggest fears the United States has is that China will try to conquer one of our allies in the

For the last several decades China and Japan have both risen as superpowers and dominated the Pacific. Japan during the 1980s had the “economic miracle”, however it had a recession in the 1990s that set Japan back. As China becomes a rising superpower due to growing populations and cheap labor and, while Japan remains a “fragile superpower” because of the lack of resources and ageing population both nations will continue to grow, or will China become another fallen communist nation and will the tiger of the Pacific come to a roaring halt? Ever since the Four Humiliations in 1839 China was in desperate need to modernize and change many aspects of its government if it wanted to keep up with the ever-changing world.

in the region. America’s presence in Guam and the Philippines and its support of China posed

During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, China’s position quickly dwindled from being the dominant power in the East to struggling against encroaching Western powers that desired its territories, one of its main opponents being Russia. After the 1917 Russian Revolution, the newly established Bolshevik regime offered to return various territories seized by the Tsarist empire to China, but they failed to deliver on their promises when they seized Outer Mongolia and $2 billion in machinery soon after. This instance, among many others, contributed to hostile Sino-Soviet relations during the twentieth century.

Following the War of 1812, the United States established itself as a world power and proved its capability to protect needy nations. After the French Revolution, nations realized the importance of balancing power and recognized the dangerousness of one nation holding excessive power. (Stanley Chodorow, MacGregor Knox, Conrad Schirokauer, Joseph Strayer, Hans Gatzke 1969) For years, America held the policy of isolationism and only intervened in other countries’ affairs if necessary. Despite strained relations in the past, diplomatic relations with China began in 1979. (Andrew J. Nathan, Columbia University 2009) Last year, an American battleship entered the South China Sea, inspecting Chinese activities. As an ally and nation known to keep the

War in the Pacific – Turning the Tide The turning point during the Pacific War of World War II (WWII) can be attributed to not just one single event but a gradual turning of the tide in which the strategic initiative switched from the Japanese to the Allied powers. This gradual shift can be defined by the three major battles of the Coral Sea, Battle of Midway and the Campaign in Guadalcanal. These battles spanned from 3rd May 1942 to 9th February 1943 and highlighting the entry of the United States (US) and their subsequent successes. Ultimately the turning point of the War in the Pacific is when Japan lost the strategic initiative however given the intricacies and unpredictable nature of warfare there are many factors that give reasons as

There was breach of faith by withholding information and not being upfront during the communication process between different parties. This situation was also caused by cultural differences like relationship building, “Guanxi”, emphasis on personal relationships versus factual-based legalistic approach, completely varied styles of doing business, and also

As of today, China has expanded and built over seven artificial islands in the South China Sea since 2014. The South China Sea has recently come to be a major problem in Asia as issues have risen over who has rights of passage and claims in this area. The Chinese of recent have been making territorial claims in the South China Sea that are in areas of free passage for many other Asian countries and the United States. In October 2015, a U.S. guided missile destroyer encountered one of the artificial islands and China’s response was that it would “take any measure” to maintain its security in “their territory”. The Chinese have been questioned in the Permanent Court of Arbitration by the Philippines after claiming rights to historical locations in the South China Sea, which violates sovereign rights of the Philippines, yet China responded to this outcome with refusal and has continued to advance itself in the territory causing huge disputes with its neighboring countries as freedom of navigation has been compromised through China’s actions.. In order to guarantee resolution and maintain the freedom of navigation aspect of international law there needs to be a foreign policy put in place that puts more United States military in the South China Sea with support from disputing countries like Japan and the Philippines as a way to make the issue multilateral and law abiding.

In July 2013, Wenweipo - the pro-PRC Chinese-language newspaper published an article titled “Six Wars China is sure to fight in the next 50 years”. According to this article, after unification of Taiwan (year 2020 to 2025), China will take the second war: Reconquest of Spratly Islands (year 2025 to 2030) and “China will send the ultimatum to countries surrounding the Islands with the deadline of 2028. The countries having disputes on the sovereignty of Islands can negotiate with China on preserving their shares of investments in these Islands by giving up”. In 1999, two Chinese military colonels – authors of the book namely “Unlimited War” suggested using an “unlimited war” to solve the disputing in the South China Sea. These authors said that, to avoid a war does not mean that not using military force and a conflict is indispensable. However, there is one more important thing that to control the intensities of conflict that. It is necessary to conduct some special activities to prove the sovereignty of China in the disputing Spratly Islands but do not let this activities increase to the total war. These things prove that the potential war between Vietnam and China in the future could be come true.

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 events that have taken place over the past couple of centuries, and more so the past decade, have monumentally impacted the relationship between the United States and China for better and for worse. Today, China and the U.S. have evolved into two of the most elite superpowers in the world, and they classify as some of the most prominent leaders in economics, military, technology, and universal innovation. Currently, the United States is just weeks away from electing their next president, cyber-attacks are being investigated exponentially, and the South China Sea Debate continues to be disputed. The outcomes of all these events will undoubtedly affect the relationship between China and the United States for the next 10 years.

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

The dispute over the South China Sea denotes the process of power rebalancing while China rising as a hegemony in East Asia. China craves for more resources and power and decides to effectuate that by controlling more maritime territory. This act impelled the United State to align with the Philippines to balance with China. In a realism world, U.S. has adequate reason to intervene for fear for China becoming too strong a power.

Theories are used in many fields of science, but in no field are they more prevalent than Political Science. These theories are often used and researched upon to try and attempt to discern how states interact with one another. Offensive Realism, a new branch of realist political theory, is brought forth in John Mearsheimer’s book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. This theory focuses on the key aspects of realism, while adding a twist as to why war is an option. In his book, Mearsheimer explains the history of great powers, and predicts that China, the world’s current rising great power, will not gain hegemony in Asia peacefully. With the rise of China, he asserts the US will form coalitions with multiple states throughout Asia, to contain their growing power. This rise in power, and subsequent reactions by the US, are based on his theory Offensive Realism, which is used to predict China’s future actions. The rise of powers, and the reactions of other powers, is historically analyzed, beginning in the late 18th century, all the way to modern times. These analyzes each attempt to support his overall claim that China will rise through non-peaceful means, and shows significant support with historical examples. While the theory often meets an exception when the usual non-European power, Japan, is mentioned, Mearsheimer’s theory introduces a solid new aspect to the realm of Political Science, and presents enough evidence and information to be considered integral to

Snyder claims that realism failed to predict the Cold War. Given this, Mearsheimer states “China cannot rise peacefully.” Since realists describe the world as a self-help system, according to Posen, every country “must look to its own interests relative to those of others” and because “security is the preeminent issue in an anarchic world, the distribution of capabilities to attack and defend should matter.” Thus, because China’s strive for regional hegemony inevitably threatens the power dynamic of the global system, the U.S. will, according to Mearsheimer, take an offensive realist approach that will eventually lead to war. In addition, as seen in post-Cold War, economic stability greatly determines the distribution of power. Friedberg notes, that the projected “speed and magnitude of China’s growth in recent decades appears to be unprecedented” and as early as 2015, “China’s economy could overtake that of the United States.” Although the U.S. faces an unprecedented challenge to economic power, according to Ikenberry, China has signaled cooperation by “redoubling its participation in existing institutions, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia Summit or working with the other great powers in the region to build new ones.” Nevertheless, following the actions of the U.S. post WWII, China strategically makes “itself more predictable and approachable” to reduce “the incentives for other