The Clash Between China and the United States and Security in the Asia-Pacific Region - A Security Dilemma, a Balance of Power, and the Bandwagon Effect

The Clash Between China and the United States and Security in the Asia-Pacific Region – A Security Dilemma, a Balance of Power and the Bandwagon Effect

This article attempts to answer the question about the security situation in the Asia-Pacific region. The authors decided to verify the authenticity of the thesis that Asia witnessed the birth of a new security dilemma based on the data on the amount of defense spending among the key countries of the region (China, the United States, Japan, Russia, Pakistan, Australia, and India). The second thesis that the authors want to confirm or reject is that there is a coalition in the Asia-Pacific area that is creating a balance of power and, at the same time, a growing number of countries that want to join the PRC. To this end, the authors have used a content analysis method and a comparative method. The first chapter is a brief description of the article’s theoretical framework in the form of a realistic current in international relations and security research and an explanation of the concepts of power balance, security dilemma, and bandwagoning applied. The second chapter presents data on the defense spending of the most important actors in the region. In the third chapter, which is a substitute for a conclusion, the authors will analyze the situation in the Asia-Pacific region using the previously presented theoretical approach and empirical data.

Столкновение между Китаем и Соединенными Штатами и безопасность в Азиатско-Тихоокеанском регионе – дилемма безопасности, баланс сил и эффект «бандвагона»

Данная статья представляет собой попытку ответить на вопрос о ситуации в области безопасности в Азиатско-Тихоокеанском регионе. Авторы решили проверить правдивость тезиса о том, что в Азии возникла новая дилемма безопасности, основанная на данных о расходах на оборону среди ключевых стран региона (Китай, США, Япония, Россия, Пакистан, Австралия и Индия). Второй тезис, который авторы хотят подтвердить или опровергнуть, заключается в том, что в Азиатско-Тихоокеанском регионе существует коалиция, которая формирует коалицию, нацеленную на балансирование сил, и в то же время растет число стран, желающих присоединиться к КНР. Для этого авторы использовали метод контент-анализа и сравнительный метод. Первая глава представляет собой краткое описание теоретических основ статьи в виде реалистичного течения в международных отношениях и исследованиях в области безопасности, а также объяснение прикладных концепций баланса сил, дилеммы безопасности и переплетения. Во второй главе представлены данные о расходах на оборону наиболее важных субъектов в регионе. В третьей главе, которая заменяет собой окончание, авторы проанализируют ситуацию в Азиатско-Тихоокеанском регионе, используя ранее представленный теоретический подход и эмпирические данные.

REFERENCES:

• Adamczyk M., Porównanie zmiany potencjału militarnego Chin na tle Rosji, Indii, Stanów Zjed­noczonych oraz Japonii w okresie od 1989 do 2013 roku, [in:] Aspekty bezpieczeństwa w życiu publicznym, eds. D. Magierek, M. Pogonowski, Koszalin 2017.
• Adamczyk M., Wyznaczniki ewolucji chińskiej polityki zagranicznej zawarte w Białej Księdze Obrony (2014), “Zeszyty Naukowe Towarzystwa Doktorantów UJ. Nauki Społeczne” 2017, No. 18.
• Adamczyk M., Nowy Jedwabny Szlak jako próba stworzenia mocarstwa lądowego w myśl klasy­cznych teorii geopolitycznych, “Kultura – Historia – Globalizacja” 2017, No. 22.
• Adamczyk M., Globalizacja rodem z Chin – nowa jakość w światowej polityce czy utarte schema­ty?, [in:] Szkice z polityki bezpieczeństwa i myśli politycznej, eds. M. Soboń, M. Habowski, G. Tokarz, Poznań 2017.
• Adamczyk M., Rutkowska P., China and Asia-Pacific region in China’s Military Strategy, “Torun International Studies” 2017, No. 1 (10).
• Albert E., The Evolution of US–Vietnam Ties, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/evolution-us-vietnam-ties.
• Ayres A., What Next for U.S.-India Military Ties?, https://www.cfr.org/article/what-next-us-india-military-ties.
• Barkin N., Exclusive: Five Eyes intelligence alliance builds coalition to counter China, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-fiveeyes/exclusive-five-eyes-intelligence-alliance-builds-coalition-to-counter-china-idUSKCN1MM0GH.
• Bhadrakumar M.K, China Extends Helping Hand To Sri Lanka, https://orientalreview.org/2019/05/18/china-extends-helping-hand-to-sri-lanka/.
• Blanchard B., Diplomat says China would assume world leadership if needed, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-usa-politics-idUSKBN1570ZZ.
• Cha V., The Unfinished Legacy of Obama’s Pivot to Asia, https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/06/the-unfinished-legacy-of-obamas-pivot-to-asia/.
• CNBC, Five Eyes intelligence alliance builds coalition to counter China, https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/12/five-eyes-intelligence-alliance-builds-coalition-to-counter-china.html.
• Curran J., How Morrison Won – and What His Win Means for the U.S.-Australia Alliance, https://www.cfr.org/blog/how-morrison-won-and-what-his-win-means-us-australia-alliance.
• Czaputowicz J., Teorie stosunków międzynarodowych. Krytyka i systematyzacja, Warszawa 2008.
• Czaputowicz J., Bezpieczeństwo międzynarodowe. Współczesne koncepcje, Warszawa 2012.
• Czaputowicz J., Mapa współczesnego realizmu: realizm klasyczny, neorealizm, realizm neokla­syczny, [in:] Teoria realizmu w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych. Założenia i zastoso­wania badawcze, eds. E. Haliżak, J. Czaputowicz, Warszawa 2014.
• Denmark A.M., The U.S.-ROK Alliance and Policy Coordination Toward China, https://www.cfr.org/blog/us-rok-alliance-and-policy-coordination-toward-china.
• Dudek A., Użyteczność analitycznego eklektyzmu w badaniu stosunków Polski z Rosją, “Stosunki Międzynarodowe – International Relations” 2016, No. 2 (52).
• Elek A., The potential role of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, http://www.eastasiafo­rum.org/2014/02/11/the-potential-role-of-the-asian-infrastructure-investment-bank/.
• Ford J., The Pivot to Asia Was Obama’s Biggest Mistake, https://thediplomat.com/2017/01/the-pivot-to-asia-was-obamas-biggest-mistake/.
• Gilpin R., War and change in world politics, Cambridge 1981.
• Goble P., China Will Have Military Bases in Central Asia Within Five Years, Russian Expert Says, https://jamestown.org/program/china-will-have-military-bases-in-central-asia-within-five-years-russian-expert-says/.
• Green D., Thailand pushes China’s Belt and Road despite differing visions, https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Belt-and-Road/Thailand-pushes-China-s-Belt-and-Road-despite-differ­ing-visions.
• Grzywacz A., Closer to a threat than an opportunity: Polish perception of China’s rise and inter­national engagement, “Asia Europe Journal” 2019, No. 18.
• Harding B., Moving the U.S-Thailand Alliance Forward, https://www.csis.org/analysis/moving-us-thailand-alliance-forward.
• Hashimova U., Why Central Asia Is Betting on China’s Belt and Road, https://thediplomat.com/2018/08/why-central-asia-is-betting-on-chinas-belt-and-road/.
• Heydarian R., How Washington’s ambiguity in South China Sea puts the Philippine-US alliance at a crossroads, https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2184390/how-washingtons-ambiguity-south-china-sea-puts-philippine-us.
• Jackson R., Sørensen G., Wprowadzenie do stosunków międzynarodowych. Teorie i kierunki badawcze, Kraków 2012.
• Jaworski K., Teoretyczne aspekty analizy polityki zagranicznej państwa, “Myśl Ekonomiczna i Polityczna” 2010, No. 3 (30).
• Kaczmarski M., Realizm neoklasyczny, [in:] Teorie i podejścia w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych, eds. R. Zięba, S. Bieleń, J. Zając, Warszawa 2015.
• Kaczmarski M., Jedwabna globalizacja. Chińska wizja ładu międzynarodowego, “Punkt Wid­zenia OSW” 2016, No. 60.
• Korolev A., On the Verge of an Alliance: Contemporary China-Russia Military Cooperation, “Asian Security” 2018, Vol. 15, No. 3.
• Kozub-Karkut M., Realizm neoklasyczny – główne założenia i możliwości, [in:] Teoria real­izmu w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych. Założenia i zastosowania badawcze, eds. E. Haliżak, J. Czaputowicz, Warszawa 2014.
• Lee K., It’s Time for the U.S.-South Korea Alliance to Evolve, https://nationalinterest.org/fea­ture/its-time-us-south-korea-alliance-evolve-41272.
• Łoś-Nowak T., Stosunki międzynarodowe. Teorie – systemy – uczestnicy, Wrocław 2000.
• Maçães B., Russia to China: Together we can rule the world, https://www.politico.eu/blogs/the-coming-wars/2019/02/russia-china-alliance-rule-the-world/.
• Majewski P., System hegemoniczny w ujęciu realizmu strukturalnego, “Historia i Polityka” 2018, No. 25 (32).
• Malkin A., Momani B., Emerging Powers and IMF Reform: Where Multipolarity in the World Economy is Leading the Fund, “St Antony’s International Review” 2017, No. 1 (7).
• Mearsheimer J.J., The tragedy of great power politics, New York–London 2001.
• Mingst K., Podstawy stosunków międzynarodowych, Warszawa 2006.
• Morgenthau H.J., Polityka między narodami. Walka o potęgę i pokój, Warszawa 2010.
• Onishi T., Vietnam and Russia expand joint South China Sea gas projects, https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Vietnam-and-Russia-expand-joint-South-China-Sea-gas-projects.
• Pickrell R., A close ally is terrified the US will drag it into a ‘shooting war’ with China in the South China Sea, https://www.businessinsider.com/us-ally-questions-alliance-over-growing-risk-of-war-in-south-china-sea-2019–3?IR=T.
• Potyrała B., Szczegóła H., Armia rosyjska po upadku ZSRR (1992–2000), Zielona Góra 2000.
• Singh A., Pakistan-US Relationship under Donald Trump, https://www.vifindia.org/arti­cle/2019/february/05/pakistan-us-relationship-under-donald-trump.
• Snyder J., One World, Rival Theories, “Foreign Policy” 2009, No. 145.
• Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, SIPRI Military Expenditure Database, https://www.sipri.org/databases/milex.
• The American Enterprise Institute; The Heritage Foundation, China Global Investment Track­er, http://www.aei.org/china-global-investment-tracker/.
• The State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China, China’s Military Strategy, http://eng.mod.gov.cn/Database/WhitePapers/.
• The World Bank, World Development Indicators, http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?source=2&country=&series=NY.GDP.MKTP.CD&period=#.
• Tiezzi S., ‘Historic’ AIIB Signing Marks Beginning of New Era, China Says, http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/historic-aiib-signing-marks-beginning-of-new-era-china-says/.
• Tiezzi S., Don’t Forget About the New BRICS Bank, http://thediplomat.com/2015/07/dont-forget-about-the-new-brics-bank/.
• Tomczyńska A., Realizm ofensywny Johna J. Mearsheimera a hegemonia Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki po zimnej wojnie, [in:] Teoria realizmu w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych. Założenia i zastosowania badawcze, eds. E. Haliżak, J. Czaputowicz, Warszawa 2014.
• Wendt A., Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics, “Inter­national Organization” 1992, No. 2 (46).
• Withnall A., US and India sign ‘breakthrough’ military agreement despite differences over Iran and Russia, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/us-india-military-deal-iran-russia-trump-modi-putin-a8525736.html.
• Wohlforth W.C., Gilpinian Realism and International Relations, “International Relations” 2011, No. 4 (25).
• Wojciuk A., Dylemat potęgi. Praktyczna teoria stosunków międzynarodowych, Warszawa 2010.
• Wroe D., Australia-US alliance needs to evolve as China rises, experts say, https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-us-alliance-needs-to-evolve-as-china-rises-experts-say-20190612-p51wy7.html.
• Yin G., The BRICS Bank and China’s Economic Statecraft, http://thediplomat.com/2014/07/the-brics-bank-and-chinas-economic-statecraft/.
• Zając J., Bandwagoning w polskiej polityce zagranicznej, “Przegląd Zachodni” 2009, No. 3 (330).
• Zawacki B., Shifting ground between the US and a rising China, London 2017.