Search

In recent years, maritime sovereignty disputes have become highly visible microcosms of broader contests between security orders in East Asia. Escalating tensions over seas provoke questions about how historical and territorial conceptions of sovereignty map onto maritime areas, and the continuing effectiveness of the so‐called "rules‐based order" in maintaining regimes for deciding jurisdiction of islands, rocks and other maritime land features. The paper examines sovereignty claims and the international law of the sea across various cases, including the contested claims over Dokdo/Takeshima, Senkaku/Diaoyu Dao and China's nine‐dash line. These case studies reveal the tensions between two legal regimes: territorial rules of acquisition (sovereignty) and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This article concludes by considering the ways that the symbolic nature of these disputes has implications for the capacities of UNCLOS and other legal instruments in the US‐led "rules‐based order" to establish orderly relations among states in the maritime arena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Like many other regional powers in the Asia‐Pacific, Australia is a middle‐sized state wedged between two great powers, the United States (US) and the People's Republic of China. While Australia continues to rely upon the US alliance for security, China remains its biggest trading partner. Over the past two decades, Australia's public foreign policy discussions have centred upon Australia's "China Choice" in the context of growing strategic rivalry between these dominant powers. This debate has sought to grapple with the options available to Australia in managing its relations with an increasingly assertive China and an unpredictable US. This article examines the public debate on China policy since the election of the conservative Liberal‐National Coalition government in 2013. It argues the appropriateness of a pragmatic foreign policy in relation to the engagement of great powers has been the central question in Australia's China debate. Yet what constitutes pragmatic action in relation to Australia's China policy is varied and based on differing understandings of how middle‐sized states can and do seek to cope with structural shifts. The paper also argues, however, that an emergent anti‐pragmatist tradition has recently emerged that reflects the unprecedented challenges facing Australian foreign policy and presents "pragmatism" as a threat to Australian sovereignty, principles, and values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of the ongoing international debate concerning the efficacy or otherwise of the NPT and IAEA in preventing or managing nuclear proliferation, Australia's undertaking to enter a nuclear cooperation agreement with the People's Republic of China (PRC), once identified as a “strategic competitor” of Australia's major alliance partner the United States (US), suggests that Australia's approach to proliferation issues is being re-evaluated. This paper argues, utilising an analysis of the relationship between the evolving US approach to nuclear issues and Australian policy, that the Howard government's evolving approach to nuclear issues can be characterised as an attempt to balance the competing imperatives of maintaining Australia's reputation as a nuclear non-proliferation standard bearer, regional strategic and economic considerations and the weight of the Australia-US alliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid deterioration of the Australia‐China bilateral relationship from a warm and positive partnership to cold hostility has been overwhelmingly interpreted as the result of the actions of one or the other of the parties. This article seeks to analyse the recent negative dynamic in Sino‐Australian bilateral ties in a broader context, considering the full history of Sino‐Australian relations, and by drawing into the analysis both countries' crucial relationships with the United States. It argues that a deep and comprehensive understanding of Sino‐Australian relations is not possible without appreciating the triangular dynamics that operate among Australia, China, and the United States. It seeks to conceptually elaborate on the notion of triangulation as a foreign policy strategy as a prelude to examining the changing dynamics of Australia‐China relations between 1949 and the present day. It then traces the evolution of the triangulation dynamic through several phases, most recently attempts by Australia to "de‐triangulate" the relationship before succumbing to Washington's and Beijing's efforts at re‐triangulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia is currently in a transitional period. Recognizing the challenges presented by China's rise to the current regional order, existing literature analyses the security situation in Asia by focusing on the material aspects of power distribution between the US and China. Few works substantively discuss the roles played by middle powers such as Japan in shaping the regional order and how they can deal with the challenges of great power competition and threats to the global rules‐based order. By employing Japan's involvement in the South China Sea issues as a case study, this article examines how a middle power attempts to shape or underpin the regional security order and if such attempts are effective. The investigation of Japan's engagement illustrates that a middle power's practical support can indirectly and gradually contribute to sustaining and defending the regional "rules‐based order". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Faced by increasing challenges to its national security and development, China has taken active measures to improve its security position in the Asia‐Pacific and to foster a lasting and commonly‐beneficial regional security order based on its "New Asian Security Concept", highlighting common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable peace. Though the Chinese government tends to follow a bilateral rather than collective approach to consolidate its regional security stance for the time being, one can expect China to push forward an all‐inclusive and comprehensive platform for enhanced collective security. Yet China will not pursue a completely new security order to replace the old one. Instead, it is taking a pragmatic and incremental approach to shape the necessary environment for the evolution of the US‐led hegemonic order into a more pluralistic, inclusive, and comprehensive one, where peace and security are guaranteed through closer political consultation and more integrated economic and social development among regional countries. If Sino‐US relations can be well managed and China keeps projecting its growing power in a restrained and contributive way to provide more public goods for regional peace and development, then one can hope for an Asia‐Pacific security community to take shape in the coming decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses trends in regional security order in Asia. Topics covered include the maritime security policy of Japan with Vietnam and the Philippines, peace-building efforts of China at Burma, South Korea's cybersecurity contributions in the Association of Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN) countries, the evolution of the regional economic order in East Asia and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

The article presents information on the undertakings of the Commonwealth of Australia from July to December 2009. Topics covered include the Henry Tax Review, the Council of Australian Government's increased focus on health issues, water conservation and the management of the Murray-Darling Basin, foreign relations with China and efforts by Liberal parliamentarians to undermine the leadership of politician Malcolm Turnbull. The article also includes examinations of the political undertakings of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, the Australian Capital Territory.