Great Power Relations in the 21st Century: How can the United States respond to the challenges posed by the emergence of great power rivals in Asia?
Author
Armstrong, Ross
Term
3. term
Publication year
2014
Pages
62
Abstract
This thesis examines how the United States can respond to the rise of great power rivals in Asia and what great-power competition in the twenty-first century is likely to look like. It focuses on the relationships among the United States, China, and India in the Asia-Pacific and their interactions with smaller states. Methodologically, it compares three approaches—Mearsheimer’s Offensive Realism, Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations, and Spykman’s Rimland hypothesis—by applying their core ideas to a range of scenarios to assess their explanatory power and strategic implications. The findings indicate relations marked by fear and competition, with China the most feared and most disruptive actor, helping draw the United States and India closer given limited direct competition between them. Competition mainly occurs through efforts to influence smaller states, while direct great-power confrontations are rare; major war is judged unlikely, though miscalculation in disputes involving weaker states could trigger escalation. Threats of force and psychological intimidation are used to create irreversible facts on the ground. Theoretically, Offensive Realism provides the most consistent explanation; the Clash of Civilizations is partly useful (e.g., for rising nationalism), but civilizational alignment is unreliable when the core state is seen as dangerous; Rimland theory helps explain U.S. and Chinese behavior and the foundations of American power, but is less applicable to India. These patterns frame U.S. strategic considerations around partnering with India and managing relations with smaller states rather than seeking direct confrontation.
Dette speciale undersøger, hvordan USA kan reagere på fremvæksten af store magtkonkurrenter i Asien, og hvad storpolitik i det 21. århundrede kan komme til at ligne. Fokus er på relationerne mellem USA, Kina og Indien i Asien og Stillehavet samt deres samspil med mindre stater. Metodisk sammenlignes tre tilgange—Mearsheimers Offensive Realisme, Huntingtons “Clash of Civilizations” og Spykmans Rimland-hypotese—ved at anvende deres kerneidéer på forskellige scenarier for at vurdere deres forklaringskraft og strategiske implikationer. Resultaterne peger på relationer præget af frygt og konkurrence, hvor Kina er den mest frygtede og mest forstyrrende aktør, hvilket bidrager til et tættere forhold mellem USA og Indien, der ikke konkurrerer direkte med hinanden. Konkurrence udspiller sig primært gennem forsøg på at påvirke mindre stater, mens direkte konfrontation mellem stormagterne er sjælden; stor krig vurderes som usandsynlig, om end fejlvurderinger i konflikter med svagere parter kan eskalere. Trusler om magtanvendelse og psykologisk intimidering bruges til at skabe uigenkaldelige fakta. Teoretisk set er Offensive Realisme den mest konsistente forklaring; “Clash of Civilizations” er delvist nyttig (bl.a. til at forklare stigende nationalisme), men civilisatorisk tilpasning er ikke sikker, når kerneakten anses som farlig; Rimland-tilgangen forklarer i høj grad USA’s og Kinas adfærd og det amerikanske magtgrundlag, men er mindre relevant for Indien. Disse mønstre indrammer amerikanske strategiske overvejelser om samarbejde med Indien og håndtering af relationer til mindre stater frem for direkte konfrontation.
[This apstract has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project full text]