This article reiterates the relevance of Clausewitz to India’s nuclear deterrence, which is supported by New Delhi’s “trinity of war” aggregates of constitutional democracy, economic strength, technological advancement, diplomatic engagement, military buildup, and nationalistic cultural ambitions. These aggregates impart substance and credibility to India’s nuclear doctrine and force posture, making India’s position more confident and reliable in comparison to Pakistan’s deterrent. This dynamic could undermine strategic stability in South Asia by incentivizing India to contemplate counterforce options against Pakistan.
The People’s Republic of China (PRC) continues to aggressively seek a return to international prominence and has increasingly amplified its presence as a global power. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made it abundantly clear that it has plans to reshape the world order more to Beijing’s liking. Within the Indo-Pacific, the PRC has strategically crafted its international policies through its signature Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), designed to gain advantage and leverage Beijing’s growing economic and military might. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, President Xi Jinping’s vision includes “creating a vast network of railways, energy pipelines, highways, and streamlined border crossings, both westward—through the mountainous former Soviet republics—and southward, to Pakistan, India, and the rest of Southeast Asia.” Through this framework, four observable tactics have emerged: the use of debt diplomacy, border disputes with neighboring nations, the general disregard for agreements and international norms, and, more recently, Beijing’s undermining actions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Arguably, an objective observer could consider the PRC’s international policies to be subversive and, at a bare minimum, have the potential to impact the entire Indo-Pacific region.
The time has now arrived to recalibrate India’s rise as a geopolitical and strategic power for the liberal international order. How can India’s policy choices fit in President Joe Biden’s “America Is Back” foreign policy?
This article explains the strategic importance of the RCEP and its role in China’s rise and declining credibility of the American opposition to it. Finally, using qualitative content analysis, the article argues that a successful RCEP amplifies the strategic ambiguity among the US regional allies and strategic partners linked in security arrangements like Quadrilateral Security Dialogue in their commitment to counter China and will further weaken the credibility of the American efforts to contain China’s rise in the Indo-Pacific region.
This article contends that China, through its Belt and Road Initiative, is continuing a long-standing pursuit of its energy security strategy begun in 1993 and a separate maritime strategy. The economic corridors that have resulted will diversify the sources and routes of energy imports, and the initiative’s energy cooperation projects are a continuation of China’s long-term goals. China’s maritime strategy, pursued through the Maritime Silk Road, is designed to achieve the goals of developing naval bases and the blue-water navy and increasing military capabilities and naval activities to protect China’s vital interests.
This article examines, first, Military-Civil Fusion’s origins and organizational framework, along with its execution today under President Xi Jinping. The analysis documents key economic and political interactions among MCF’s various stakeholders. Additionally, the article uses as an example the participation one State-Owned Enterprise (SOE) in MCF to highlight the technological force multipliers that China gains. In doing so, I describe the challenges to MCF’s implementation and contend that MCF is a complex military and economic enterprise requiring greater attention by the Department of Defense.
China defines its national defense policy as strategically defensive, proclaiming “we will not attack unless we are attacked, but we will surely counterattack if attacked.” To prepare for a potential “counterattack,” China is building an increasingly formidable set of offensive capabilities for use at the operational and tactical levels of war to counter United States and allied forces in the western Pacific (hereafter WestPac).
The new Arctic has already changed the dynamics of international commerce, the search for raw materials, access to the Far North, and military presence. History has shown that when America is slow to react to global challenges, the nation may find itself in a game of catch-up with the nations that acted quickly. However, the realities of US global commitments make it impossible to focus on the Arctic without accounting for the other regions of global competition. Only by thoughtfully executing, evaluating, and improving the nation’s Arctic security strategies will the nation be able to achieve the allocation and sharing of critical resources that secure US national Arctic interests to better guarantee the Arctic’s future as a secure and stable region.
Volume 04 Issue 3 - Summer 2021
Review of Strategy Strikes Back: How Star Wars Explains Modern Military Conflict. Edited by Max Brooks, John Amble, ML Cavanaugh, and Jaym Gates. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2018. 272 pp. IBSN: 978-1640120334
The manuscripts contained in this package present a record of the grand strategic viewpoints of students at the Air Command and Staff College for the 2021 academic term. Each manuscript is a response to the final exam prompt for the International Security I core course, The Context of International Security. The course presents various academic perspectives regarding international security, with a focus on US national security and the US national interest, as well as the tools at its disposal for the attainment of security and interests.
The lens of rational liberalism reveals the United States and China can—and should—cooperate to achieve mutually beneficial results. A liberal grand strategy of rational interdependence will employ rational liberalism to create cooperation and interdependence across the realms of international relations, and this interdependence will enhance US national security and calm fears of a rising China.
The views and opinions expressed or implied in JIPA are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of the Department of Defense, Air Force, Air Education and Training Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government or their international equivalents.