ASIA: "Into the wide blue yonder: Asia's main powers are building up their navies. Is this the start of an arms race?" The Economist, 7 June 2008, p. 53.
China and other Asian states say they build up their navies to ward off pirates and terrorists. This is considered an "implausible" explanation by the Economist.
Hmm, the magazine should spend more time at naval conferences. I hear that stuff from more than just Asian navies . . .
Emerging great powers build navies. That's history.
The Asian situation has been artificial for a very long time: the American navy dominating the region's waters. In a "flat world," it should not surprise anyone that this does not continue, nor should it.
Instead, we should be encouraging the rise of Asian navies interested in policing their own waters and securing the SLOCs between Asia and the Middle East, not to mention handling disaster relief.
But, of course, says the magazine, despite lots of opportunities for cooperation, there also exists the danger of confrontation.
So what's the answer? Let the naval developments trigger more regional security agreements. Build your East Asian NATO from the water in.
Oh, and dream of another Pacific War!
| Permalink |
Comments (3)
Possible that navies might be of use in resource wars (meaning wars for resources including those of oceans and seas)? Has Mahan ever really been updated to the 21st Century and incorporated the lessons of the 20th? Seems to me that the straits are still crucial and even more so now than when the good Captain Mahan wrote "The Influence of Seapower on History." T.B. what book is the best you find for analysis of potential resource wars and competition on "Globalization" and the Core?
Posted by William R. Cumming. | July 3, 2008 2:42 PM
I would argue that book is called Some Principles of Maritime Strategy by Julian S. Corbett.
It doesn't address the subject matter specifically, but puts forth how to think about conditions and adapt accordingly with Seapower.
As far as the book on the specific subject, it is yet to be written.
Posted by Galrahn | July 5, 2008 11:36 PM
I see no reason why East Asian states should cooperate unless there's the chance of confrontation. The recent compromise over the Senkakus/Daioyus is a case in point. But that leaves minor powers out of luck.Without compelling issues for the majors to respect, the minors will be squeezed out of their SLOCs.
International law is the only hope to give each state the coastline and waters the others can respect. And, international treaties require a hegemonic protector. But, could the hegemon be a regional sheriff?
Posted by Bal(t)imoron | July 7, 2008 6:05 AM