International Relations of the Pacific Rim
While the realism theory represents a spectrum of opinions or ideas which tend to circulate around four central pillars of political groups. That is egoism, international anarchy and power politics the liberal approach on the other seems to focus on a broader picture in terms of issues concerning enlightenment. It seeks to find a long lasting peace and cooperation in the international platform. Constructivist theory states that both political and social aspects are historically and politically linked. These theories are of the opinion that the situation in the pacific is inevitable from the human consequence but rather it is a cause of both political and historical events. Peace is however key in this region.
The Chinese world order prior to the Western Imperialism has been described as being super as far as technology, and its economy is concerned for the most part of the millennium. This was before the economic trough the country experienced in the 19th century. The china world order is still relevant in the present day, as it has re-emerged as a world economic power while at the same time taking concern in the East-Asia politics.
The expansion of the European powers has a direct hit on the diversity and vigorous economic growth of the East Asia. It has also worked to arouse regional conflicts between these two regions over the pacific and financial markets in the globe as well as the Pacific Rim. However, it led to a rise in trade of commodities in the two regions. It has also raised concern in the management and organization of the region’s relationship with the birth of the Association of Southern Asian Nations (ASEAN) (Ikenberry and Mastanduno 32). The primary differences were in the interest of the markets, culture manipulation and the fight of trade routes.
Japan became an imperial power around the 1880’s. As the country is made a tendency of the importation of raw materials from other Asian countries in order to make quality finished well and export them again. Through Industrialization, it was able to become a center of textile goods and merchandise. As the country also has the mission of asserting itself as a great nation and not suffer western domination like China. Its military ensured it a sense of security and independence, which was a saline environment for the growth of the country into the imperial it is in the present day.
During the cold war, China security policy can be linked as that in collaboration with a western power (USA). This is seen as collaboration between the western and the east (strongest global and Asian powers). Economic and political stability contributes to its peaceful rise from the 1990’s.
One of the major security challenges for Japan in the cold war lies in its relation with other east countries and the “cold-war” in its self. Its gigantic economic contribution can neither work to gain appreciation from its neighbors like Kuwait nor work to neutralize the criticism from another neighbor state for its refusal to join forces in the contribution of its military personnel. Its historic issue seems to bring Japan in its strait having few allies in the region. In the 21st century, the roles of India and Russia have changed significantly from that of extending their borders to those of peace treaties with accordance to the liberal theory of international relations.
The split of the Korean Peninsula has to the present day remained split Korean into two. This is due to the historical and political influence that graced this Korean empire. While the American had colonized the south at one point this made them split as the Japanese had brought a policy that forced the Korean, who lived here in the past to acquire an anti-Japanese attitude. These differences dating back to the 1990’s have preceded the long “permanent” split of the Korean Kingdom. This has brought intense war games in this area. As part of the unification efforts, UN was the first to intervene by bringing imposing “police action” to stop the menace. Other constitutional and political dialogues are still in progress.
The regional relations have been for a long past been in the control of the most influential political powers in this region. These include Japan, China and the United States of America. Identity has played a significant role concerning collaborations with respect to national identity as well as social. Countries like North Korea and Japan have been reluctant to join hands with the Western states due to their historical past. This has been a major issue and has worked to slow the dialogue processes in the 1990’s. However, national values have led to the countries collaboration to ensure peaceful co-existence of the countries in the Asia-Pacific.
Both traditional military securities, as well as the non-traditional securities as forms of authoritative institutions, have had one objective to date. That of maintaining a peaceful and stable co-existence and correlation of the states, therefore, enhancing the international relations. The distinction between the traditional and the non-traditional security (NTS) formulations mostly has been in the formulation of strategies. The NTS have embraced more transparent and democratic dialogues procedures as compared to the traditional “combat” resolution procedures. The significant challenges encountered will majorly relate to the historical and political issues that states have heard with their neighbors. This has proven to be difficult to manage as immediate solutions are not possible.
Since civilization, the USA has been the only superpower due to its massive military infrastructure and massive economy. However, this period of unipolar has been superseded with the emergence of other superpowers like China, which has experienced an economic boom in the past couple of decades. This brings about bipolarity. The East Asia has been exposed through these forces of power including Japan this results in tri-polarity. In most occurrences, the East Asia has experienced both bipolarity and tri-polarity during the advent of the cold war where many all the super powers were involved in the struggle (USA, Japan and China).
These struggles have contributed to the political turmoil in most countries especially Korea that has led to the split of its Peninsula-into North and South Korea. However, on the brighter side, these power waves have led in many instances to the decolonization of some of the East Asia countries such as North Korea. The Japanese have been able to evacuate North Korea due to the invasion of the United States of America. Such scenarios have been witnessed and have led to the independence of states such as Kuwait.
A part of the strategies to involve smaller powers to cope with the rapidly changing regional dynamics was to involve these countries in the international meetings and have them contribute to be part of the solution. By doing this, these nations and the population they present would not feel alienated from the plans of these regions hence they would be willing to cooperate.
There has been a significant change of the US foreign policy from the three chains of command in the USA. The peak of these metamorphoses has been vividly evident in the Obama government, which has proposed numerous changes, which have brought a sign of hope and relief from that of the Clinton and Bush administration. This has been so due to the enhancement of these policies to being more modest, cooperative and most importantly less reliant on its military capability. This works to provide room for smoother peace talks among the nations as well as more effective and efficient resolutions.
These changes have worked to bring close relations with the East Asia. The act of rebalancing which has been used as Obama’s signature-that which aims at deploying American engagement in this Asian religion with the sole reason of curbing what the American government terms as the rising Beijing’s territorial advancement, has also been received with full acceptance by the principal political leaders sighting more political stability and economic growth. It is, therefore, a positive attribute as far the reconciliation efforts are concerned.
As earlier discussed, the three key principles related to International relations work put more insight on the phenomenon in the Asia-Pacific region. According to the constructivist theory, it explains the political turmoil and instability has been because of the past political and social differences between countries in this vicinity. With this understanding, influential states and multinational bodies are expected to initiate peace campaigns with the aim of maintaining a long-lasting relationship between regions in conflict. This is with accordance to the liberal theory. An understanding of these principles also brings out a very important aspect that can proceed unnoticed. This is the gradual continuing post-cold war events between non-compliant states such as the Russia and Indians. This might render the situation in some countries unstable due to the ever-unending conflicts.
The major superpowers in East Asia view the current security configurations as one, which have made a significant milestone on the road to better international relations. They will improve and support better business ventures and the growth of economies involved. The small super powers in these relations are very important as they have unique capabilities in the providence of scarce resources such as labor and intelligence. They also work to contribute to the economic and military needs in the area in which they occupy. In the next decade, the security of this region will be far much better given the invested interest and participation of most superpowers and the countries involved.
Ikenberry, G J, and Michael Mastanduno. International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. Internet Resource.