Search

You searched for: Content Type Working Paper Remove constraint Content Type: Working Paper Publishing Institution S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Remove constraint Publishing Institution: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Political Geography China Remove constraint Political Geography: China Topic International Relations Remove constraint Topic: International Relations
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Ralf Emmers
  • Publication Date: 09-2005
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
  • Abstract: The Working Paper argues that the maritime disputes over the South China Sea are characterised by a strategic and diplomatic status quo. China does so far not have the necessary power projection to impose naval hegemony in the South China Sea. None of the ASEAN claimants can rely on sufficient naval power or an external military alliance to impose their claims in the Spratly Islands. A similar situation of status quo exists on the diplomatic front. China and the ASEAN countries have been negotiating for years to conclude a code of conduct for the South China Sea. The 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea is based on a multilateral dimension as well as on a convergence of views on the need to peacefully manage the dispute. While a step in the right direction, the declaration is only an interim political agreement and it is still to be seen whether the parties will sign a detailed and binding code of conduct for the South China Sea. The Working Paper starts by reviewing the nature of the maritime disputes. It then describes the security environment in the South China Sea by examining the changing strategic conditions of the disputes. Its final section discusses the long diplomatic road toward the 2002 Declaration. The Working Paper concludes that the South China Sea has remained primarily a political rather than a military issue thanks to China's desire to accomodate the Southeast Asian countries and the limited naval capabilities available to the different claimants.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, International Relations, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: China
  • Author: Evelyn Goh
  • Publication Date: 07-2005
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
  • Abstract: The small and medium-sized states in Southeast Asia have undergone significant geostrategic changes with the end of the Cold War and the rise of China. There has been a lively debate over the last decade about whether these countries would balance against or bandwagon with China, and how their relations with the other major powers in the region would change. Recent works that argue against the simple dichotomy of balancing versus bandwangoning are correct in asserting that Southeast Asian countries do not want to choose between the two major powers, the U.S. and China. But this paper goes further to present the results of an empirical study that fleshes out the conceptual thinking that underlies this avoidance strategy. It finds that instead of merely adopting tactical or time-buying policies, key Southeast Asian states have actively tried to influence the shaping of the new regional order. It argues that key Southeast Asian states in fact have (a) distinct coneptualisations of two main pathways to order in the region–omni-enmeshment of major powers and complex balance of influence; and (b) a concrete vision of the preferred power distribution outcome, which is a hierarchical regional order.
  • Topic: International Relations, Security, Regional Cooperation
  • Political Geography: China, Southeast Asia
  • Author: Alastair Iain Johnston
  • Publication Date: 09-2003
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
  • Abstract: In the past public opinion has never really been an important issue in Chinese foreign policy studies for obvious reasons. China, after all, is not a country where voters can recall poorly performing political leaders. Foreign policy is still one of the most sensitive public policy issues where unapproved or sharp public dissent and criticism can be politically risky. And the Chinese political system is still a dictatorship.
  • Topic: International Relations, Nationalism
  • Political Geography: China, Beijing