http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Winterford,David (검색결과 5 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
Asian Multilateralism: Implications for US Policy
( Edward A Olsen ),( David Winterford ) 한국국방연구원 1994 The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis Vol.6 No.1
During the Cold War security in Asia was dominated by several bilateral relationships between the United States and its Asian partners. In post-Cold War Asia there is growing interest in multilateralism for enhancing regional security. The Clinton administration refers to a "new Pacific community and has indicated interest in multilateral fora for discussing trade and security issues. However, like its predecessor, the administration has not developed a coordinated policy toward Asia. While there has been a new emphasis on trade policy, in terms of security there is greater continuity with the Bush administration, and Consequently, despite the Clinton administration`s "bott- om- u p review of US defense programs, there has been very little change in Washington`s strategic thinking concerning Asia. Instead of shaping a new US geopolitical vision for post-Cold War Asia, the administration muddles through from bilateralism toward multilateral structures. Although multilateralism may hold the promise of injecting balance and reciprocity into security relations, it confronts several major pitfalls that may undermine its prospects for success. This paper examines three of the most significant of these obstacles: the existence of multiple instances of "double containment" in America`s security policies toward Asia; the unpredictability of post-Cold War Asian regional political dynamics; and the difficulty of devising a new multilateralist surrogate for old US ideological motives in post-Cold War Asia. This paper argues that during the Cold War the United States crafted bilat- eral relations with Japan and South Korea aimed not only at containing the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea but restraining its own two treaty allies as well. That is, America`s strategy in Asia rested on two sets of "doub- le containment." In effect, US policy rested on "double containment.2" By linking two seemingly separate bilateral security arrangements embodying double-containment aspects, Washington geometrically multiplied the impact of its containment of its two allies within the larger anticommunist contain- ment approach. The paper examines the rationale, nuances, and structure of the two Northeast Asian versions of double containment. Given current reali- ties in Northeast Asia, the paper argues that double-containment2 is not only fully functional in the 1990s but it also continues to shape the security parameters of China, Taiwan, Southeast Asia and Oceania. The paper sug- gests that, as it did during the Cold War, Northeast Asian double containment continues to undermine moves toward a broader network of overall Asian collective security and may well foredoom such efforts to failure. Problems in Northeast Asia pose a second obstacle in the way of effective multilateralism. For example, if events in Korea were to take a dramatic turn for the worse or in case of temtorial conflict between Russia and Japan, it is not hard to visualize a rupture in US-Japan security ties. Such events would cause grave problems for overall Asian multilateralism since many Asian states do not share common security perceptions on these Northeast Asian issues. Most Asian states do seem to want Washington to stay engaged militarily in Asia, but Washington`s new interest in multilateralism may stem from it desire to shift burdens to regional powers, to thwart the great power aspira- tions of regional actors by harnessing them collectively in ways reminiscent of containment, and to maximize multilateral Asian strategic dependence on the United States to increase American economic leverage. Finally, in examining a third major obstacle to multilateralism, the paper argues that a sustained American commitment to multilateral security struc- tures in post-Cold War Asia requires linking these new arrangements to deeply felt American economic, political, and ideological interests. Asian governments have learned that post-Cold War America is still seeking to reshape Asian economic and political systems, and American ideological goals continue to inject tensions likely to undermine multilateral structures. Ironically, Washington may find to its dismay that part of the appeal of multi- lateralism to Asia is the prospective benefit it may offer in containing the United States. Are American policy-makers prepared to accept this restraint? The paper concludes by suggesting the choice is not between accepting or rejecting multilateralism but rather determinimg which variant of multilater- alism might be most successful. It suggests that an appropriate framework is likely to be a loosely structured Pax Condorninia, a form of multilateralism with Asian as well as American characteristics.
-
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
