Power, Geography, and Stability

1
Power, Geography, and Stability

• Gustaaf Geeraerts
• Department of Political Science
• Free University of Brussels (VUB)

2
Introduction

• Purpose of the speech
• To give an account of the underlying security
  structure in East Asia
• Why I accepted to give this luncheon speech

3
Topics of Discussion

• Security in East Asia?
• Interdependence or balance of power?
• Contemporary East Asia bipolar or multipolar?
• Dynamics of power in East Asia
• China and US great power rivals
• Peace and stability in bipolar East Asia

4
Security in East Asia?

• Why study East Asia as a distinct security
  complex
• Post-Cold War
• The growing importance of China

5
Security in East Asia different views

• Western pessimism
• Realism
• Liberalism
• Asian optimism
• Asia different from Europe
• Pragmatism, growing interdependence,
  multilateralism

6
Interdependence or balance of power?

• Economic interdependence ? end of all security
  concerns
• Why?
• Economic and security policies do not easily
  integrate
• This is so because of at least four reasons

7
Interdependence or balance of power?

• Economic variables change faster than security
  variables
• Security trends are less self-correcting than
  economic trends
• Economic sanctions are low in effectiveness
• National security is still the ultimate realm of
  state sovereignty

8
Interdependence or balance of power?

• Given that in East Asia
• Growing interdepence YES
• Effective regional security regimes NO
• It follows
• Balance of power main driver of security

9
Balance of power mechanism (1)

• What is it?
• Still relevant?
• Globalisation of economics and technology
• Economic power more important?
• Anarchic nature of international system
• Multilateralism
• Realist state-centric view still dominant

10
Balance of power mechanism (2)

• Importance of structure (Waltz)
• Anarchy
• Functional differentiation
• Distribution of capabilities

11
Balance of power mechanism (3)

• Importance of geography (Ross)
• Great power potential
• Operation of balance of power
• Interests of great powers
• Offence or defence dominant

12
Contemporary East Asia bipolar or multipolar?

• Post-Cold War global structure is still unipolar
• US is the only superpower
• What about regional hegemony?
• Regional power structures/global power structure
• Superpower/regional power
• China is regional great power
• US is regional great power in east Asia

13
Contemporary East Asia bipolar or multipolar?

• Looking only at structure multipolar
• Taking into account geography bipolar
• Chinese dominance of mainland East Asia
• US dominance of maritime East Asia

14
Great power dynamics in East Asia

• Is there any power capable of challenging the
  bipolar structure in Asia?
• Russia a would-be great power
• Japan economically powerful but too dependent
  and vulnerable to be a great power

15
China and US great power rivals

• China and US cannot be partners they are rivals
• China the geography of potential hegemony
• US enduring hegemonic potential

16
China the geography of potential hegemony

• Natural resources to sustain economic development
  and strategic autonomy
• If modernization successful
• Minimal resource dependency
• Minimal long-term dependency on foreign markets
• Strategic depth

17
US enduring hegemonic potential

• Favourable geographic condition
• Separated from East Asia by Pacific Ocean
• Neighboured by weaker powers
• Naval power for power projection into distant
  regions
• Strategic depth

18
US enduring hegemonic potential

• Abundant economic resources and technological
  prowess
• Continued US economic superiority
• Big domestic market low dependency on foreign
  markets
• US energy dependency is comparably low

19
Military expenditures, in constant US Dollars
(1998 prices and exchange rates)
20
Military expenditures, as a percentage of GDP
(1998 prices and exchange rates)
21
Peace and stability in bipolar East Asia

• Bipolarity, balancing, and geography
• Bipolarity, geography, and national security
  interests
• US maritime interests
• China continental interests
• Bipolarity,geography, and the security dilemma

22
Bipolarity, balancing, and geography

• China long-term balancing
• US status quo power
• Bipolarity adds to regional order
• Great powers have higher stake in regional order
• Disproportionate share of world capabilities
  leniency towards and control of allies
• Geography reinforces these dynamics
• Chinese and US spheres of interest are
  geographically distinct and seperated by water

23
Bipolarity, geography, and national security
interests

• Negative sides of bipolarity
• High threat perception
• Excessive tension
• Costly foreign policies
• Clearness of threat
• Outspoken worry about reputation
• Repeated tests of resolve
• High sensitivity to relative gains

24
Bipolarity, geography, and national security
interests

• Again geography
• Conditions national security interests
• Conditions weapons procurement policies
• US-China relationship maritme vs land power
• So they have different geopolitical needs

25
US maritime interests

• Balancing China
• Secure shipping lanes
• Secure access to regional markets
• As a maritime power no need for influence on the
  mainland
• Status quo sufficient for securing its power
  interests and its shipping lanes
• Maritime containment strategy

26
China continental interests

• China now has secure borders on its entire land
  periphery
• Having secured its continental interests, will it
  try to develop maritime power-projection
  capabilities?
• Not very likely
• Chinas land borders remain vulnerable
• A continetal strategy continues to serve its
  vital interests
• Development of maritime capability is too costly

27
Bipolarity,geography, and the security dilemma

• Different geopolitical interests
• gt different weapons systems
• Land power vs maritime power each power has a
  disadvantage in the others theatre
• China inferior in maritime theatres
• US inferior regarding ground-force activities on
  mainland East Asia
• Strategic space is defence dominant

28
Possible flashpoints

• Spratly Islands
• Korea
• Taiwan

29
Conclusions (1)

• Prospects for peace and stability look promising
• Geography minimizes the probability of power
  transition
• Stable bipolarity stimulates
• timely balancing
• great power ability and interest to bring order

30
Conclusions (2)

• The dynamic of a competition between a maritime
  power and a land power reduces conflict over
• vital interests
• reduces the impact of the security dilemma
• This means lower likelihood of
• High leven tensions
• Repeated crises
• Arms races