The United States and Asia in 2014

Visible U.S. efforts to sustain influence in the Asia-Pacific met with mixed success. President Barack Obama’s visit to the region reinforced alliance commitments, but U.S. policy momentum on regional trade and diplomacy remained sluggish. Washington’s effective management of its relations with Beijing remains the key factor to how well the U.S. will fare with other regional actors and issues

Asian-Pacific Alliance Systems and Transregional Linkages

The beginnings of a dynamic process of American and European economic and cultural interaction with the Asian-Pacific states can be discerned. Such interaction promises to be of benefit to all parties. NATO will be obliged to demonstrate sufficient collective will to identify and pursue successful policies beyond its traditional geographic confines if it is to meet the many political and economic challenges ahead

The Military-News Media Relationship: Thinking Forward

Over the course of the next six months, the Strategic Studies Institute will examine the impact of the media\u27s technological advances on strategic and operational level planning and policymaking, first in an overseas theater, and subsequently on decisions made at the national level. The first of these two studies recognizes the complexity of executing military operations under the scrutiny of a very responsive, high technology world news media. Given the volatile, unstable, and ambiguous environment in which armed forces can find themselves, the actions of field forces have a greater chance than ever before of affecting subsequent strategic decisions made at higher levels. The pressure on field commanders to get it right the first time is demonstrably greater than ever. The author intends that these thoughts provide commanders with an understanding of the high technology and competitive news media environment they can expect to experience and offers specific suggestions for successfully communicating with reporters.https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1901/thumbnail.jp

Australia and the Korean Crisis: Confronting the limits of influence?

In this Centre of Gravity paper, Professors O’Neil, Taylor and Tow argued that the apparent optimism surrounding the upcoming ‘season of summitry’ on the Korean Peninsula should be tempered by the fact that there are potential risks attached to engaging the North Korean leadership without preconditions. They argue these include legitimising its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs, alliance decoupling, and a serious deterioration in Asia’s strategic climate if the Trump-Kim summit fails to deliver concrete results

The South China Sea: middle power perspectives

In this paper, six experts examine the South China Sea issue, and what role middle powers can play in helping ensure that the contest over disputed territory does not lead to conflict. Brendan Taylor and William Tow examine Australian debates, arguing that Australian policymakers should explore an ‘Asia-first’ approach by cooperating with Indonesia and South Korea to help manage and encourage resolution on the issue. Shafiah Muhibat and Christine Susanna Tjhin provide an Indonesian perspective of middle power diplomacy in the South China Sea, claiming that while middle power collaboration is possible, it will require addressing issues of legitimacy and trust between Indonesia, Australia and South Korea. Lee Jaehyon and Bong Youngshik Daniel round out the discussion by examining South Korea’s strategic distance from the South China Sea. They claim that middle powers like Indonesia, Australia and South Korea can develop spoke-to-spoke networks that limit the ability of hub countries like China and the US to unilaterally shape the regional order in the Asia-Pacific

Australia and Thailand - A Strategic Reset?

In this multi-author edition of the Centre of Gravity series, co-editors William Tow and Suphat Suphachalasai work with leading strategic thinkers to explore the relationship between Australia and Thailand

Apocalypse forever? International relations implications of 11 September

This is a contribution to ongoing discussion of the international relations issues raised by the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. It acknowledges apparent failings (of analysis or prediction) in the IR literature but then suggests the shortcomings are really the product of divergent traditions of analysis (behaviouralism, structuralism and evolutionism) which isolate different aspects of phenomena for attention. The paper then discusses the contrast between hard power and soft power - to help identify the distinctiveness of the new forms of terrorism (their non-linear objectives and the lack of proportionality involved). It concludes on an encouraging note by urging international cooperation as a solution, even in cases where the protagonists' resentments have tended to militate against conventional channels of dispute resolution