- Email: [email protected]
Imperial decline: Russia's changing role of Asia
Review
Essays
What these works demonstrate is that U.S. security policy in the future will be even more complicated than during the Cold War. No single organizing principle has been elaborated, despite the best efforts of analysts. With the exception of nuclear accidents of the sort examined by Pry, no single threat seems paramount to our security, at least in the near term. The continuing problem of Russia’s management of its vast nuclear arsenal, however, will remain a serious worry for years. And, as Pry notes, our policies cannot rest solely on the hope that pro-western leaders will be elected to office in Russia. Two other concerns stand out from the literature. First, notwithstanding Russia’s nuclear might and instability, it is China that stands out as the most likely challenger to U.S. supremacy in international politics for the next several decades. And none of the authors has much praise for the Clinton administration’s policies for handling China. Secondly, the authors display considerable concern with LJ.S. vulnerability to weapons of mass destruction. Explicitly or implicitly, these analyses suggest that the United States should consider acquiring ballistic missile defenses, and soon, For Americans will be increasingly vulnerable to threats of attack by nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, whether at home or abroad while deploying troops in regional contingencies. The Cold War paradigm of deterrence on the basis of mutual destruction will not work in the new era Here, too, none of the authors has praise for the Clinton administration’s go-slow policies on ballistic missile defense. It seems, in sum, that the old quip applies: America has no policy and even that is being mismanaged. But in the emerging structure of international politics, there is nothing funny about it.
The Great Power Balance in Northeast Asia by Gilbert Rozman
Imperial Decline: Russia’s Changing Role in Asia. Edited by Stephen J. Blank 8: Alvin Z. Rubinstein. (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1997. 296 pp. $49.95, cloth; $16.95, paper.) Broken Ttiangle: China, Russia, and America @er 25 Yearn: By Peter W. Rodman. (Washington, D.C.: Nixon Center for Peace and Freedom. 1997. 83 pp. $6.95, paper.) X!X Major Powers qf Northeast Asia: Seeking Peace and Secur-ip. Edited by Tae-Hwan Kwak & Edward A. Olsen. (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1996. 261 pp. $49.95.) Gilbert Rozman is Rlu~grave Professor of Sociology at Princeton University. In 1’)96- 97 he was :L tellow at the Wotxlrom- Wilson Intemational Center where he engaged in I-esearch on regionalism in Northexst Asia. including the Kussian Far East. Nmheast China. and the Japan Sea coast ofJapan.
130
I 0rhi.s
Essays
What these works demonstrate is that U.S. security policy in the future will be even more complicated than during the Cold War. No single organizing principle has been elaborated, despite the best efforts of analysts. With the exception of nuclear accidents of the sort examined by Pry, no single threat seems paramount to our security, at least in the near term. The continuing problem of Russia’s management of its vast nuclear arsenal, however, will remain a serious worry for years. And, as Pry notes, our policies cannot rest solely on the hope that pro-western leaders will be elected to office in Russia. Two other concerns stand out from the literature. First, notwithstanding Russia’s nuclear might and instability, it is China that stands out as the most likely challenger to U.S. supremacy in international politics for the next several decades. And none of the authors has much praise for the Clinton administration’s policies for handling China. Secondly, the authors display considerable concern with LJ.S. vulnerability to weapons of mass destruction. Explicitly or implicitly, these analyses suggest that the United States should consider acquiring ballistic missile defenses, and soon, For Americans will be increasingly vulnerable to threats of attack by nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, whether at home or abroad while deploying troops in regional contingencies. The Cold War paradigm of deterrence on the basis of mutual destruction will not work in the new era Here, too, none of the authors has praise for the Clinton administration’s go-slow policies on ballistic missile defense. It seems, in sum, that the old quip applies: America has no policy and even that is being mismanaged. But in the emerging structure of international politics, there is nothing funny about it.
The Great Power Balance in Northeast Asia by Gilbert Rozman
Imperial Decline: Russia’s Changing Role in Asia. Edited by Stephen J. Blank 8: Alvin Z. Rubinstein. (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1997. 296 pp. $49.95, cloth; $16.95, paper.) Broken Ttiangle: China, Russia, and America @er 25 Yearn: By Peter W. Rodman. (Washington, D.C.: Nixon Center for Peace and Freedom. 1997. 83 pp. $6.95, paper.) X!X Major Powers qf Northeast Asia: Seeking Peace and Secur-ip. Edited by Tae-Hwan Kwak & Edward A. Olsen. (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1996. 261 pp. $49.95.) Gilbert Rozman is Rlu~grave Professor of Sociology at Princeton University. In 1’)96- 97 he was :L tellow at the Wotxlrom- Wilson Intemational Center where he engaged in I-esearch on regionalism in Northexst Asia. including the Kussian Far East. Nmheast China. and the Japan Sea coast ofJapan.
130
I 0rhi.s