Search

In the global political and economic agenda cycle of the 21st century, interest in the seas has spread rapidly. The security of maritime areas, which are central in issues such as transportation, global trade, natural resource reserves, and transfer, has also become a part of national and international security strategies, especially since the beginning of the 2000s. However, different perspectives on the concept of "maritime security" lead to the lack of a single definition of the concept. Therefore, the factors threatening the security in question should be mentioned differently. The absence of widely agreed upon maritime security threats both complicates global cooperation on maritime security and weakens the fight against these threats. Identifying the most serious and common threats to maritime security is essential for joint action in the fight against them. This study aims to carry out a comprehensive analysis in defining the concept of maritime security and to identify the most serious threats to maritime security in the 21st century. For this purpose, 21st-century maritime security threats have been determined within the scope of academic studies, strategy papers, military documents, and reports published by states and international organizations. Then, the severity levels of these threats were determined through the AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) Method. As a result of the study, the three most important factors threatening maritime security in the 21st century are determined as climate change (with a significance level of 0.3169), marine pollution and environmental problems (with a significance level of 0.2104), and sea boundary disputes between states (with a severity level of 0.1783). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes instances of the Indian leadership's choice of an escalatory approach in its border dispute with China, first in the adoption of the Forward Policy in the lead up to the 1962 war, and more briefly the more recent decision in 2017 to take escalatory action in response to Chinese activity in the Doklam area in the trijunction of the India-China-Bhutan border region. In doing so, the paper demonstrates how a focus on reputation as an explanatory factor may allow us to make better sense of how Indian leaders have in the past and continue to in the present make decisions on key issues of national security concern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the evolution of Sino-Japanese rivalry in the security sphere concentrating on the Chinese perspective, and placing it within the wider context of complex interstate rivalry between China, Japan and the United States. From a theoretical viewpoint, this research contributes to the literature on interstate rivalry from multiparty perspective, which has been overlooked in existing research. China–Japan–US complex interstate rivalry includes elements of positional, spatial and ideological rivalry simultaneously. When rivalries mix two or more rivalry types, they become more difficult to resolve. The two broad trends of China's military build-up and deepening US–Japan alliance evolve in tandem intensifying rivalry dynamics and increasing positional elements of rivalry. There are many indications on various levels that for China, controlling Japan's international ambitions has become less important and more attention is paid to ways in which Japan helps the United States in reaching its objectives in Asia through their alliance agreement. The cases analysed to display complex interstate rivalry include the Taiwan question, territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas, and the North Korean nuclear issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper joins the debate on Japan's territorial dispute with South Korea over the Dokdo/Takeshima islets. Informed by the ontological security framework of analysis, this paper seeks to explain the decision to adopt the ‘Takeshima Day’ ordinance by the Shimane Prefectural Assembly and the subsequent ascendance of ‘Takeshima’ to the fore of Japan's identity construction vis-à-vis the Korean ‘other’. In this paper, I distinguish between two processes: one that led to the adoption of the ordinance and another that resulted in the entrenchment of ‘Takeshima’ in Japan's identity construction vis-à-vis the Korean ‘other’. The paper argues that the former process should be understood within the context of Shimane Prefecture's distinct identity construction vis-à-vis Tokyo, while the latter can be attributed to recent changes in Japan–Korea relations unrelated to the territorial dispute per se. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Starting with the security complex theory elaborated by Barry Buzan, this paper aims to provide an overview over an area long troubled by tensions and conflicts - South Asia. We are going to use an approach going from general to particular. After establishing a theoretical framework regarding the phrase security complex, the paper will focus on the South Asian security complex and more specifically on the two most important actors: India and Pakistan. The relations between the two countries, both born after the partition of 1947, have always been characterized by turmoil - religious clashes, failed peace talks, territorial disputes not to mention the numerous wars conducted. We will emphasize the sources that generated direct confrontation over the last 66 years (such as Kashmir dispute or cross border issues) in order to be able to identify some future scenarios and eventually outline solutions for regional peace and stability. Some special attention will be paid to the nuclear dimension that determined an escalation in the rivalry between the two powers. India obtaining nuclear weapons has started an arms race in the region, thus opening the path to more conflictual situations such as the Kargil War of 1999. Furthermore, an insight in the issue of terrorism that raises even more tensions in the dispute between India and Pakistan will be useful. Taking into account this problem, we will discuss India's vulnerability to terrorism (pointing out some recent attacks such as the 2006 Mumbai train bombings or the 2008 Mumbai attack), its counterterrorism efforts as well as Pakistani ties with terrorism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is obvious that the security environment in East Asia is more unstable and unpredictable. In the South China Sea, tensions over disputed islands initiate a more severe Sino–American rivalry. In the East China Sea, China disputes the control over the Senkaku Islands, and is escalating military activities around those islands. North Korea continues provocative activities including launching of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons tests. This naturally leads to the idea that Japan needs to play a larger role to restore stability in the international order. This paper explores the challenges facing East Asian security in the face of the passage of Japan's new security bills in 2015 and how they impact the future of Japanese security policy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

For the last ten years, Japan and China have tried to work together toward a “mutually beneficial relationship” based on common strategic interests but have failed to accomplish this for a number of reasons. The two historical neighbors are separated by no more than a strip of water and have come a long way to be the third and the second largest economies in the world, respectively. Along with political economic aspects, relations between the two countries are of critical importance in regional and global security contexts. With that in mind, the following paper will: (1) overview trends in Sino–Japanese relations over the last ten years; (2) look at trends in China's military capabilities and activities and the implications; and (3) discuss key issues and courses of action for Japan. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The Asia-Pacific has seen the emergence of a new security dilemma, as geopolitical friction increases due to escalating crises. Significant tensions between China and many of its Asian neighbors have arisen due to maritime disputes, the North Korea nuclear crisis, and a military arms race. There are three main areas of the common security challenges in the Asia and Pacific region today: Chinese military growth, the U.S. military dominance and strategic “rebalance,” and conflicts or hot spots in the region. The future way out of the Asia-Pacific's current security dilemma depends heavily on how the U.S., China, and Japan can work together. This paper seeks to examine three issues: 1) the logic of China's military growth and how serious a threat it has posed to other countries in the region; 2) the major barriers that hold back military exchange programs between China and the U.S.; and 3) the intervening factor, the strengthening of a U.S.-Japan alliance and its repercussions for China. It will provide proposals to establish a collective framework including more specific security dialogues and cooperation in this region. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]