The United States and the Indian Ocean: Power Shifts and Uncertain Leadership

2018 ◽  
pp. 99-113
Author(s):  
Deepa M. Ollapally
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-55
Author(s):  
Mohamad Zreik

AbstractThe Chinese Ministry of Commerce issued a statement Friday morning, July 6, 2018, confirming the outbreak of a trade war between the United States and China. The statement came after the United States imposed tariffs on many Chinese goods, in violation of international and bilateral agreements, and the destruction of the concept of free trade which the United States calls for following it. It is a war of opposite directions, especially the contradiction between the new Trump policy and the Chinese approach. The proof is what US Defense Secretary James Matisse announced in Singapore in early June 2018 of “the full strategy of the new United States, in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific,” where China was the “sole enemy of the United States” in China’s geostrategic region. Intentions have become publicized, and trade war between the two economic giants is turning into a reality. This paper will give an overview of the US-China scenario of trade war, then a focused analysis on the Trump’s administration economic decision regarding China, and the consequences of this decision.


Subject China's Indian Ocean strategy. Significance The Xi Jinping administration plans to integrate Eurasia and Africa more closely with China through investment and infrastructure, including pipelines, railways, roads and ports under the 'Silk Road Economic Belt' and 'New Maritime Silk Road' initiatives. The former is designed for Eurasia, the latter for the Indian Ocean. This is of growing concern to India, which sees the Indian Ocean as its sphere of influence. Impacts Indian Ocean stakeholders including the United States, India and Australia will cooperate to balance Chinese activities. China's ties with Persian Gulf countries will strengthen as China overtakes the United States as the largest crude oil importer. China's South China Sea and Indian Ocean strategies are interlinked on economic and security goals.


Subject Strategic entanglement of India, Pakistan and the United States. Significance Washington is slashing Coalition Support Fund (CSF) and Foreign Military Financing (FMF) payments to Islamabad, in the belief that Pakistan harbours the very militants that the United States is fighting in Afghanistan. Washington envisions deeper military cooperation overall with Delhi, which accuses Pakistan of sponsoring militants who act against India. Islamabad is being driven closer to Washington’s rival Beijing. Impacts Pakistan will step up efforts to complete an anti-militant fence on the disputed border with Afghanistan. India is likely to resist any calls from the United States to begin joint patrols in the Indian Ocean. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) will face security risks from Islamist militants and Baloch separatists.


2017 ◽  
Vol 03 (04) ◽  
pp. 481-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiacheng Li

From the strategic perspective, the Indian Ocean has been increasingly important to China’s foreign trade and energy security. China has been faced with a deepening dilemma in the Malacca Strait for years, in large part due to the strategic pressure from the United States and India. Under its new initiative to construct the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road,” China needs to develop a long-term, security-oriented Indian Ocean strategy based on a comprehensive analysis of all the favorable and adverse conditions. Its strategic goals should include building an Indian Ocean fleet, expanding its base networks, and sharing power peacefully with the United States and India, so as to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests in the region.


2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Scott

This article analyses and evaluates Indonesia’s grappling with the Indo-Pacific. Analysis is threefold – Indonesia’s actorness in the Indo-Pacific, its strategic discourse on the Indo-Pacific, and its Indo-Pacific diplomacy. Actorness is pursued with regard to Indonesia’s more active involvement in regional and subregional structures in the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean. Strategic discourse is threefold – Natalegawa’s “Indo-Pacific Treaty” concept (2013–2014), Widodo’s “maritime nexus” drive (2014 onwards), and the current “Indo-Pacific Cooperation Concept” (IPCC; 2018 onwards). Diplomacy is pursued with regard to Indonesia’s relationship with Australia, Japan, China, India, and the United States. The article concludes that while Indonesia certainly is on the rise as an Indo-Pacific actor, its continuing naval weakness undermines Indonesia’s “maritime nexus” stance, while its reluctance to challenge China leaves Indonesia’s Indo-Pacific Treaty and its IPCC vague and to some degree ignoring uncomfortable security issues posed by China. A closer synergy for Indonesia with the US and Japanese Free and Open Indo-Pacific initiative is suggested.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document