B&R,AIIB: Opportunities for Enhancing FDI in South Asia

Implementation of China's Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road (B&R) initiative and the advent of Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) have redirected attention to infrastructure building in economic development.The domestically driven B&R policy is rewriting the geoeconomic and geopolitical map of Eurasia,while AIIB catalyzes a positive change in the dynamics of international development cooperation.They provide opportunities for South Asia which has economic potential but limited foreign investment inflow thus far.     

北极地缘政治的多尺度特征——兼论北极问题与南海问题的本质不同

随着北冰洋海冰融化速度的加快,北极的国际关注程度逐渐增加,北极权益的争夺也愈演愈烈。由于北极地区的特殊性和复杂性,北冰洋沿岸国和非北冰洋沿岸国都试图寻找符合本国利益诉求的战略定位,因此导致目前北极地区的相关概念混乱不清,不利于北极问题的可持续性解决,也有可能演化成地区冲突。本文探讨了北极地缘政治的多尺度特征,包括地理区域尺度、地缘安全区域尺度、地缘政治区域尺度和地缘经济区域尺度的特征,并在此基础上辨析了北极地区的北冰洋沿岸国与北极国家、"近北极国家"与北极利益攸关者、大北极国家与泛北极共同体等相关概念;并对北极问题和南海问题进行了正确区分,阐述了北极问题和南海问题在本质上的不同之处。明确北极地缘政治的多尺度特征及相关概念,才能更加有利于我国的北极可持续发展建设实践,也能够避免其他国家将北极与南海相提并论,避免干扰我国南海权益的正当维护和北极权益的正当争取。     

China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Implications for the Middle East

This article examines the geopolitical and economic implications of the Belt and Road Initiative for the Middle East. It locates the BRI within the region’s politics and examines the opportunities that the initiative offers for the region, as well as its inherent risks and challenges. It argues that the BRI is not merely an economic project as framed by Beijing, but that it represents a new stage in China’s engagement with the region, and—if fully implemented—could have wide geopolitical implications. The Middle East has the potential to contribute immensely to China’s sustained growth by addressing its energy security, supporting China’s role as a ‘megatrader’, and, more importantly, driving China’s efforts to become a global maritime power and monetary power by internationalizing the Renminbi (RMB). Thus, the BRI could have wide implications for the Middle East. Far from being a win-win project for all, the BRI will likely benefit some countries in the region more than others. Iran stands ready to benefit most. The BRI will likely increase the strategic importance of the Suez Canal and could potentially undermine the importance of some logistic hubs in the Middle East in favour of other trade hubs in Central Asia.     

中国参与和推动东北亚区域经济合作的战略

东北亚地区对中国有着特别重要的地缘、经济、政治与安全意义。由于东北亚地区有着复杂的地缘关系,这个地区的合作呈现出多重框架、多种机制、多重因素影响的特点。出于地缘经济、政治的考虑,尤其是东北地区发展的战略考虑,中国对东北亚地区的合作采取了积极参与和务实推进的政策。本文主要分析新形势下中国参与和推进东北亚区域合作的战略性思考与选择。     

Conceptualizing regional powers’ geoeconomic strategies: neo-imperialism,neo-mercantilism,hegemony, and liberal institutionalism

This article argues that geoeconomics, defined as the geostrategic use of economic power, has become an increasingly important feature of regional powers’ strategic behavior. Yet, we still lack analytical tools to identify and compare regional powers’ geoeconomic strategies. The article marks a first attempt to develop a typology for differentiating potential geoeconomic strategies that regional powers may pursue in dealing with their corresponding regions. It merges the regional power focus with a geoeconomic perspective, producing the following four ideal-typical strategies: neo-imperialism, neo-mercantilism, hegemony, and liberal institutionalism. This new typology serves as a conceptual device for creating analytical differentiation between regional powers and the range of possible geoeconomic strategies pursued by them. The paper discusses ways in which the new typology may contribute to our understanding of regional powers’ foreign policy conduct and to the emerging geoeconomic research agenda. While the purpose of the article is not to test any specific hypothesis or to empirically analyze cases, brief case study vignettes will be presented for illustrative purposes, looking particularly at Brazil, the EU, Germany, and Russia.     

Europe after the U.S. Pivot

Insofar as Europe's security and cohesion have for decades been premised upon a strong American political and strategic engagement, Washington's intention to “rebalance” to Asia casts a shadow over the sustainability of a stable and coherent geopolitical order on the continent. This article argues that as the United States seeks to rebalance strategically towards the Asia-Pacific region a number of “indigenous” geopolitical trends are becoming increasingly important in Europe: an Anglo-French entente for a “maritime” Europe, a German-French “continental” project of economic and political integration, and Russia's resurgence across Europe's East. The growing prominence of competing geopolitical visions for Europe might even call into question the cohesion and direction of the institutional expressions of the U.S.- engineered Western order in Europe, namely the Atlantic Alliance and the European Union. Increasing geopolitical and institutional contestation, we contend, pose a number of challenges for both U.S. interests and European security.     

India's Role in the South China Sea: Geopolitics and Geoeconomics in Play

This article looks at the South China Sea, an area of dispute between China and other littoral states, as a new area of geopolitical and geoeconomic interest for India. The article follows the strategic discourse on the South China Sea circulating in the Indian government and wider strategic community, and brings in Chinese responses and interpretations of India's involvement. India's role in the South China Sea is four-fold: first, naval deployments; second, increasing strategic-military links with littoral states like Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam; third, economic involvement of Indian energy companies in South China Sea waters; and fourth, discussions between India and other regional and extra-regional China-concerned powers about the South China Sea. India's involvement in the South China Sea represents a new development in its Look East Policy, a new balancing factor in the interplay of actors within these waters, and a new friction factor within India-China relations.     

NATO and the Arctic: is the Atlantic alliance a cold war relic in a peaceful region now faced with non-military challenges?

Abstract

This article analyzes which role the Atlantic Alliance plays in the Arctic and whether it can contribute to the security and territorial integrity of its members in the region. In a dramatic change from the cold war era, the Arctic is no longer at the center of a conflict between two hostile superpowers. But what can a basically military organization such as NATO – though with proven political functions – contribute to stabilizing the Arctic region if its major challenges are non-military? With regional challenges resulting mostly from globalization and climate change, it is open to question whether a military alliance such as NATO has the will and the capability to cope with them. We might thus need to look also at individual members’ interests and abilities besides searching for joint alliance action. If we find NATO not up to the challenges, which alternative institutions offer themselves for coping with the political conflicts and controversies in the Polar region?     

Science and technology in the South Atlantic: minding the gaps

The notion of a geopolitical system known as the South Atlantic is severely tested when it comes to science and technology (S&T), especially given the enormous disparities between (and sometimes within) countries of the region. The essay attempts to characterise the S&T policy pursuits of these countries by dividing them into the most advanced (Brazil and South Africa) versus the poorer remainder, and identifying the most powerful drivers for S&T investment for each group. The practical needs of social and economic development for the latter group are self‐evident. Rather more subtle are the multifaceted initiatives of the two more developed countries, with drivers ranging from prestige and national security to economic competitiveness and growth. The increasing complexity of policy making in Brazil and South Africa is driving analysis of their behaviour more towards the model of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries. A major restraint on better research is the parlous state of data on research and development in all of the countries of the region; finding a remedy for that weakness would not only benefit policy researchers but also the policy makers themselves, who lack adequate feedback mechanisms for their investment paths in S&T.     

中俄北极合作与海洋安全

2019年6月6日中国国家主席习近平和俄罗斯总统普京在莫斯科共同签署的《中华人民共和国和俄罗斯联邦关于发展新时代全面战略协作伙伴关系的联合声明》中提到,要推动中俄北极可持续发展合作,在遵循沿岸国家权益基础上扩大北极航道开发利用以及北极地区基础设施、资源开发、旅游、生态环保等领域合作。为深入开展北极合作研究,2019年10月21日,吉林大学北极研究所等主办、《东北亚论坛》编辑部等协办了"北极合作与冰上丝绸之路建设研讨会暨中俄海洋论坛"。本刊选取了其中5位学者的文章,重点阐述中俄北极合作和海洋安全保障、北方海航道的地缘政治基础、国际数字化运输走廊的开发和信息化、投融资体系、东北亚国家战略协调等方面的问题,并提出应对策略,以期为我国参与北极开发、促进中俄北极合作提供理论支撑和决策参考。     

Avoiding the Geoeconomic Domino Theory

The recent US emphasis on a geoeconomic confrontation with China in the developing states could spawn an economic version of the domino theory. Geoeconomic domino theory assumes that if Beijing’s economic influence is not stopped in a developing state, America might witness more developing states incorporated into the Chinese economic orbit. The falling economic domino eventually can reach the developed economies. Nonetheless, there are reasons to expect that the developing economies would not fall to China one after another. China’s gains in the developing regions in material capacity, ability to govern key issue areas, and ideological appeal are also dubious. In conducting geoeconomic competition with China, the United States should concentrate on the developed economies—Western Europe and Northeast Asia—that have a significant impact on the balance of power.     

Geoeconomics in the context of restive regional powers

Geoeconomic power and its use appear to be a crucial, albeit understudied aspect of today’s international relations. Traditionally, international power has been thought of in geopolitical rather than geoeconomic terms. Indeed, ever since the famous debate about sea power and land power between Alfred Thayer Mahan and Halford MacKinder at the cusp of the twentieth century, scholars have linked geography with the pursuit of political and military power. However, the term “geoeconomics” is of a more recent origin, and also more vexing than geopolitics. The term is commonly associated with Edward Luttwak’s writings in the early 1990s Luttwak (Natl Interes 20:17-24, 1990, Int Econ 7/5:18-67, 1993), although it did not spin a major scholarly discussion at the time. For Luttwak, geoeconomics denoted the successor system of interstate rivalry that emerged in the aftermath of Cold War geopolitics. As a consequence of the rise of major new economic powers, such as China, India and Brazil, there is renewed interest in the concept. Yet, an overview of the literature indicates that there seems to be no agreement on what exactly the term means. This special issue tackles the different ways in which the term geoeconomics is used, in the context of the policies pursued by major regional powers (e.g. China, Russia and Germany). How are we to understand the actions of these regional powers in contexts where economic interests, political power and geography intersect? In the introductory article, we overview the literature and summarise the main arguments of the individual papers.     

Soft Security Threats in the New Europe: The Case of the Balkan Region

‘You cannot have a process where Balkan countries pretend to reform and we pretend to believe them.’

Chris Patten, EU Commissioner in charge of External Relations BBC World News, 25 November, 2002

Southeastern Europe represents for Europe a significant geo-strategic and geopolitical region whose stability and security directly affects Europe’s political and security infrastructure. Conflicts and instability are still prevalent in the Balkans and, as a consequence, security cooperation in Europe is struggling to cope with risks of a non-military nature. It is widely accepted that as a region, the Balkans at the dawn of the 21^st century remains weak and unable to deal efficiently with soft security threats. This article initially provides a generic picture of the Balkans and the hard security challenges prevalent there. It also aims to identify and assess the main types of new security threats that are currently present in the region, as well as to explore how these threats would be influenced by EU and NATO membership. The article also outlines the cooperative security measures adopted by the southeastern European countries, and it concludes by providing some thoughts on how the future developments in the region will be influenced by current international developments     

中韩第三方市场合作:进展、阻力与对策

第三方市场合作是中韩两国参与国际分工协作的新型合作模式,也是两国发展战略对接与比较优势互补的重要经济实践。中韩第三方市场合作在产品服务、工程建设、投资合作、产融结合和战略合作五个领域打造了一系列重要工程,不仅加深中韩两国的合作基础,还为第三方市场的经济发展注入新动力。但其中存在诸多挑战,产业结构的竞争、复杂的营商环境、域外大国因素的介入以及中韩经济波动等都对中韩第三方市场合作造成了阻力。因此,开拓战略新兴产业、打造示范工程、创新金融合作和完善协调机制,是实现中韩第三方市场合作可持续发展的重要保障。     

东北亚地缘政治变迁与中国崛起的安全环境

从地缘政治角度研究国家安全环境问题是作为国际政治行为体的民族国家永恒的主题,也是国际关系研究的重点问题。中国崛起的国际环境是否有利,首先取决于中国周边的地缘政治经济和地缘安全环境。地缘政治格局的演变与国家安全利益紧密相关,东北亚地区的中国崛起是不可遏止的必然过程,同时也是极为艰难复杂的过程,大国崛起必然也面临着“崛起困境”。哪些地缘政治关系和安全环境构成了“崛起的困境”,就成为东北亚安全环境中中国崛起的战略问题。     

东亚金融区域主义的兴起及其地缘安全影响

2008年全球金融危机以后,国际货币金融体系持续动荡,以地区金融安全合作为导向的金融区域主义逐步兴起,且成为一种显著的地缘政治经济现象。金融区域主义对地缘安全的影响主要有两个方面:一是地区金融安全,地区金融主义有助于构筑地区金融安全网络,推动地缘经济整合;二是地缘政治安全,地区金融主义会扩大地区大国的地缘政治影响力以及增加地区排斥外围国家干涉本地事务的能力。金融区域主义产生的这些地缘安全影响对不同的行为主体而言,具有不同的意义。首先,东盟作为地区性的经济共同体,会极力反对东亚大国利用金融区域主义将东盟纳入其势力范围之下,威胁东盟的地缘政治安全环境。其次,作为最大出资方,中日对地区货币金融领导权的争夺变得日趋激烈,且形成了持续的冲突性关系,从而削弱了东亚金融安全合作的政治前景。最后,东亚作为美元回流机制中的关键一环,如果将美国排斥在外,无疑会增加东亚地区与美国的地缘政治矛盾。因而,东亚金融区域主义在兴起的过程中,不仅要看到其稳定地区货币金融秩序的一面,同时也要看到其有可能制造地缘政治安全问题的一面。     

美俄印欧的欧亚地缘战略对“一带一路”建设的影响

“一带一路”建设是中国以新兴发展中大国的姿态建设性参与全球秩序重塑的过程。在此过程中,“一带一路”与既定地缘政治格局中某些国家的利益和战略之间存在一定程度的冲突和博弈。为此,本研究试图从“一带一路”与美俄印欧版“一带一路”之间的互动关系中,考察美俄印欧基于各自地缘政治经济利益而制定的地缘战略,以及客观上所形成的地缘挑战,提出中国的应对举措。本文认为,源自于特朗普弱化美国国际领导责任的地缘战略,“C5+1机制”对“一带一路”并不具有反制的地缘战略效果;中俄互信固然达到了前所未有的高度,然则受地缘政治变化带来的地缘战略不定性的影响,不可忽视欧亚经济联盟与“一带一路”之间存在地缘利益失衡的潜在风险;印度“印太构想”等互联互通战略和“大国梦想”背后的地缘战略考量,势必削弱“战略对接”在人们预想中的相关积极功能;欧版“一带一路”反映出欧盟试图通过所谓的“可持续”亚欧联通战略提升在亚欧大陆话语权的地缘战略考虑,但其内部的认知分歧,使其无法摆脱中国对其“分而治之”的疑虑。     

欧债危机对拉美经济的影响机制与拉美的政策措施及成效

在当前经济制度背景下,欧债危机主要通过贸易、投资和金融等机制影响拉美经济:欧盟需求不足可能使拉美国家的出口收益减少;欧盟信贷额度下降、股市波动、资本流动性减少,会减少对拉美国家的投资,导致拉美国家投资不足和金融市场不稳,对拉美国家的产业结构调整也会产生消极影响。面对危机,拉美国家的应对策略并非临时的或短期的政策,而是从长期应对危机的历史中汲取了经验和教训。拉美国家实行稳健的宏观经济政策和灵活的浮动汇率政策,通胀处于可控水平,银行监管适当,整体债务水平较低,加上较为充足的外汇储备和经济运行状况总体良好等因素,为拉美国家抵御欧债危机的冲击发挥了相当大的减缓作用。但是,欧债危机对拉美经济可能会存在长期效应。中国与拉美的贸易为拉美经济的发展提供了动力,但中拉关系中还存在很多不稳定因素。未来中拉之间的战略依存度将越来越高,经贸往来也将更加密切。     

东北经济区地缘战略研究

分析预测21世纪初期俄罗斯、日本在东北亚的地缘战略、朝鲜半岛的政治走向和美国的亚太战略及其对东北经济区的政治经济影响，可以认为，对东北经济区未来的发展是机遇大于挑战，至少会赢得1/4世纪的宝贵和平时期。因此，应抓住机遇，积极发展。其地缘战略是：在地缘政治方面与俄罗斯合作，防御日美联合及其构建地区性防御体系；在地缘经济方面与日韩合作，促进东北亚经济的共同发展；充分利用已有的基础和有利的地理环境，争取国家的重点支持，加强区内联合，采取超常规发展举措，加快发展；全面对外开放，以开放促开发，促进国际合作，用地缘经济促进地缘政治的良性发展，为东北经济区快速发展营造良好的外部条件。