USA: +1 508 290 1604 
Sign in
QUESTION
In a short essay, accomplish the following:
Question: Briefly define China’s expansion in the South China Sea
Why is it important?
Identify an international relations perspective to address that security issue, and explain your reasoning.
Propose a strategy for the United States. What instruments of power will you employ to manage this security issue and how? What does success look like?
What risks does your strategy create?
How will you know if the strategy has succeeded?
Finally, do not operate under the illusion your single issue of focus defines American national security all on its own. As such, you’ll need to account for trade-offs and acknowledge limitations
Be sure to use the tools outlined in JDN 1-18 and other related readings to develop your perspective
Support and defend your answer using specific examples from the course materials.
Required length 2000-words.
• Make sure you use a minimum of Ten different sources. Use the author-date-page system.
o For materials provided in the course (i.e., materials listed in the course’s Resource List): Use author-date-page format.
o For example: During the turbulent 1960s, science fiction programs on television reflected the public’s attitudes toward the older generation (Hodges 2003, 176).
o Hodges (2003, 176) discussed how, during the turbulent 1960s, science fiction programs on television reflected the public’s attitudes toward the older generation.
o In a 2003 article, Hodges (176) discussed how, during the turbulent 1960s, science fiction programs on television reflected the public’s attitudes toward the older generation.
• While well documented facts are important, what you think and how you defend your position is most important. There is a delicate balance here: do not give me a history lesson and very little personal thought. By the same token do not give just your personal opinion. Ideally, I would like to see about 80% facts with 20% your personal opinion (critical thinking).
• Make sure you re-read your work. Spell check does not catch run on sentences or the difference between real words with different meanings: “in-depth knowledge” and “inept knowledge”
• DO NOT USE WIKIPEDIA AS A SOURCE
Topics to include in paper:
Economic Instrument of Power
Military Instrument of Power
Soft Power
National interest / Objectives
China Belt and Road initiative. (BRI)
Trillion Dollar plan
Chinas Silk Road (history)
LINKS with articles:
https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/territorial-disputes-south-china-sea
https://media.defense.gov/2020/Aug/31/2002488087/-1/-1/1/BURGESS.PDF
https://www.axios.com/2022/03/20/china-fully-militarized-three-islands-south-china-sea
Videos regarding topic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHCkZbBwFyM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g-YpDZEOAI
Within the field of international relations, the national interest has frequently been assumed to comprise the pursuit of power, security and wealth.[5][6][7][8] Neorealist and liberal institutionalist scholars tend to define the national interest as revolving around security and power.[9][10] Liberal scholars see national interests as an aggregation of the preferences of domestic political groups.[11] Constructivist scholars reject that the national interest of states are static and can be assumed a priori; rather, they argue that the preferences of states are shaped through social interactions and are changeable
The national interests, a key concept of international relations, encompass the political interests, security interests, economic interests, cultural interests and other interests of a country.
Today, strategy involves much more than just the use of the military. U. S. Army War College theorists H. Richard Yarger and Arthur F. Lykke explain this concept, noting that strategy focuses on the nation-state and the use of the elements of power to serve state interests
With the state sovereignty at the core, a country’s political interests embody the bulk of its national interests with national security being the most fundamental of the national interests.
As an integral part of strategic thinking, the concept of national interests, once formed, will exert great impact on the making and implementation of national strategies. From a cognitive viewpoint, the concept of national interests is deeply influenced by the way of thinking, cultural traditions, values, ideologies and other characteristics of the subject.
National Interest is a rationality of governing referring to a sovereign state’s goals and ambitions, be they economic, military, cultural, or otherwise
As you might recall from earlier lessons, this focus on states as key actors in the international system dovetails with the perspectives of both realism and liberalism. In either case, policymakers must assess the role of other states in their own calculations about national security.
First, the United States faces security challenges emanating from major states, such as China and Russia, who seek to increase their power relative to the United States and other contenders. These states’ actions may cause instability within their respective regions of influence and destabilize neighboring states. Recent examples include Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and Russian intervention within Eastern Ukraine. China is increasingly asserting itself in the East and South China Seas against neighboring states to protect rich resources and trade opportunities.
Second, the United States is concerned with threats posed by adversary states that are known, or believed, to be pursuing a nuclear weapons capability, such as North Korea and Iran. While these states may pose security challenges in and of themselves, they also have the potential to contribute to larger problems of regional instability, such as conflict on the Korean Peninsula or Iranian actions with regard to Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. As another example, while the United States has cooperative relations with Pakistan in fighting terrorism, many remain concerned about the domestic instability of this nuclear-armed country and its uneasy relationship with India — yet another nuclear-weapons state.
Third, weak and failing states continue to pose real challenges for U.S. security, in addition to creating humanitarian concerns. Issues may arise because of the common phenomenon of refugees migrating away from conflict, often crossing into neighboring states and fueling regional instability. There is perhaps no better example of this today than with the Syrian crisis and its destabilizing effects on Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey. Additionally, weak government institutions in both Pakistan and Afghanistan pose problems for stability in southwest Asia, besides providing havens for extremist groups (as does Syrian instability). Finally, the weakness of many governments in various regions in Sub-Saharan Africa not only adds to regional instability but also increases the chance that pandemics may spread globally, as the recent Ebola outbreak demonstrates.
Like Russia, China has been assertive diplomatically, economically, and even militarily in what it views as its rightful area of dominance, and this includes the East and South China Seas. Perhaps the first obvious instance of this was the U.S. Navy incident with China in April 2001, where an EP-3 collided with a Chinese fighter, causing the Chinese pilot’s death and the detention of the EP-3 and its crew on Hainan Island for over a week. In December 2013, the USS Cowpens cruiser barely avoided a collision with a Chinese Navy ship that seemed to clearly target the U.S. Navy ship for being too close to Chinese vessels, although the U.S. ship was in international waters in the South China Sea. According to Chinese maritime expert Peter Dutton, in “China’s Maritime Disputes in the East and South China Seas,” China has used a policy of “non-militarized coercion, which involves the direct and indirect application of a broad range of national capabilities to alter the situation at sea in China’s favor” since 2008 (2014, p. 11). In addition to the United States, Chinese activities have also targeted close U.S. allies in the region such as Japan.
From a realist perspective, it makes sense that the major state in a region would attempt to dominate that area and nearby states to enhance its security. Even from the perspective of liberalism, it is not remarkable that a major state like China would attempt to enhance its economic and trade relations with nearby states to enhance its wealth (and security). Recall that expanded trade relations are considered to be beneficial for all states and to contribute to peaceful relations between states. And, from the constructivist perspective, the fact that the Chinese people are interested in asserting their identity and culture within their geographic region is not surprising. How might U.S. policymakers make sense of Chinese actions to formulate specific policies and appropriate use of the IOPs relevant to the East and South China Seas? Do the alternative perspectives or strategies offer helpful insight? What instruments of power are most likely to be effective in U.S.-China relations?
ANSWER
China’s Expansion in the South China Sea
China’s expansion in the South China Sea (SCS) is defined as the territorial claim and activities of China in the SCS, which includes building artificial islands, constructing military facilities, and establishing administrative structures. Despite countries like the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei claiming areas of the SCS, China has claimed sovereignty for most of them, which has led to tension and disputes between these countries and international actors like the United States. Therefore, the expansion has interfered with freedom of navigation and regional stability.
China’s strategy to expand to the South China Sea is motivated by reasons like the SCS has numerous overlapping territorial disputes between the neighboring countries. At the same time, the South China Sea is strategically located and serves as a vital trade route for global commerce. According to Masroor and Khani (2018), the region has rich resources of fisheries, oil, and gas and is one of the international routes where over 70,000 ships cross annually.
International Relations Perspective To Address China’s Expansion in the South China Sea
States are self-interested and seek to maximize their power to ensure survival in a competitive international system. While China’s actions can be seen as a rational response to a perceived threat to its security and interests, its territorial claim affects other nations fighting for the same resource. Therefore, the international perspective of liberalism can be utilized to address China’s expansion to the SCS. Liberalism emphasizes the significance of international institutions, cooperation, and norms in resolving conflicts and promoting stability in affected regions. Using a liberal perspective, bridging the differences to address the SCS issue will promote dialogue and negotiation between China and its neighbors and reinforce the importance of international law and norms governing maritime disputes.
As opposed to viewing anarchy as a drive for conflictual behaviors, liberalists see anarchy as an enforcer for cooperative relationships between states (Antczak, 2020). Although states hold onto their own interests, international institutions can be instrumental in finding a common interest. International organizations consider cooperation a rational step to avoid resulting wars (Teixeira, 2021). Otherwise, international cooperation can reduce uncertainties of rival’s intentions and enable working together to achieve the common good for all parties.
In reference to the liberal point of view, ignoring the role of power to focus on the harmony of interests among states shapes their relationship and ties. Liberals enforce that cooperation can be reached when liberal values are adopted and the free-market rules embraced (Antczak, 2020). Consequently, countries sharing political ideologies and economically dependent on one another limit the chances of going to war. Therefore, the liberal perspective can ensure that countries involved in the SCS issue engage in mutually beneficial relationships for the compatibility of interests and ultimate harmony.
Strategies for the United States
The strenuous nature of the involvement and the risk posed by China’s expansion raises concern for US interests. According to Fravel and Glaser (2022), the US’s security interests are limited, and any significantly firmer policy would generate an unwarranted high-risk war. On the other hand, the US believed its relationship with China could be primarily cooperative until a decade ago. Therefore, the shift in US assessments depicts a significant shift in US’s foreign policy community (Fravel and Glaser, 2022). As experts place importance on the SCS, they warn that upon China’s success in its expansion to the SCS, it would be a devastating blow to the US’s influence in the region, hence a tilt of power balance across Asia to favor China. Therefore, the US can re-evaluate its commitments in this security issue and decide whether competitive or less competitive strategies are to be adopted to protect its interests and those of the allies (Gong, 2012).
China has also not backed down since but has continuously used soft power to augment its economic and strategic influence and present itself as an alternative leader to the global hegemony of the US. For instance, China brought the BRI initiative motivated by Beijing’s desire to bring harmony to the long-term domestic, economic, and geopolitical challenges. Similarly, despite being a grand strategy, the BRI’s focus is an attempt for China to return to its great-power status without provocation to its neighbors and the US. As the US seeks a strategy to address the expansion, it is important to understand the BRI and the Silk Road.
The BRI is a massive infrastructure development project that looks to enhance China’s connectivity with the rest of the world. It was launched in 2013 to ensure the construction of a network of railways, highways, ports, airports, and other infrastructure projects that will link China with more than 70 countries in Asia, Europe, Africa, and beyond. The BRI is sometimes called the “New Silk Road” because it is modeled after the ancient Silk Road trade route that connected China with the Mediterranean world. China’s expansion to the SCS can be seen as a modern-day version of the Silk Road. The Silk Road has historically connected China with the Mediterranean world for trade and culture. Therefore, it was a significant factor in developing China’s economy. By controlling the region, China seeks to ensure its sea lanes’ security and expand its economic and political influence in Southeast Asia and beyond. The expansion is closely linked to the BRI because the region is a strategic gateway for China to connect with Southeast Asia and beyond. By controlling the South China Sea, China will ensure the security of its sea lanes and protect its economic interests in the region.
The US-Led Indo-Pacific Strategy
Based on the issues arising from the security issue in China and its neighbors, the US could adopt the Indo-Pacific strategy to promote a regional framework for security, economic cooperation, and governance in the region to counter China’s growing influence. This strategy includes increasing its military presence and cooperation with countries in the region, promoting economic and trade ties, and advocating for a rules-based international order that respects human rights and democracy. Gong (2020, 29) described the ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) strategy as the most significant geopolitical response voiced by major regional powers to constrain China’s expanding ambitions. Although the concept of a “Trillion dollar plan” is not an official component of the US-led Indo-Pacific strategy on China, it can ensure working with allies and partners in the region to identify investment opportunities and mobilize private sector capital to support infrastructure development. This proposal aims to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
Instruments of Power
- a) Diplomatic Instruments of Power
Apart from diplomacy being an uncomfortable concept for ordinary Americans, it has been the number one go-to tool when pursuing national interest. However, Fendrick (2012) argues that the diplomatic instruments of power cannot be used in isolation but with others like military power, actual or potential, economic power, “soft power,” etc. Still, diplomacy has to yield emphasis depending on the situation. According to Fendrick (2012), diplomats will act with national interests like political and security interests in mind. In a simple explanation, diplomacy can be shaped through soft power, where the US can shape China’s preference through a co-opt strategy rather than coercion. The sustained diplomacy through appeal and attraction with China and other regional actors will lead to finding a peaceful and mutually acceptable resolution to the South China Sea dispute. Thus, the United States should work with Asian and other regional allies and partners to promote dialogue and negotiation with China, using multilateral forums such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the East Asia Summit and bilateral engagement with China and its neighbors.
Again, the US can continue to emphasize the importance of international law and norms, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and work with other countries to ensure these rules are respected and enforced. Again, it is important to consider the historically close ties between China and ASEAN. Gong (2012, 32) explains that as China’s power continues to grow, the ties between the country and ASEAN are weakening simultaneously due to the threat perceptions and approaches to maintain regional security; hence, a great opportunity for the US to perforate with diplomacy to ensure a balance of power and diversity of the security options.
Military and Economic Instruments of Power
The military and economic instruments of power may be risky but are still options for the US in the security issue. The United States could use its economic leverage to pressure China to modify its behavior in the SCS. This economic strategy might include imposing economic sanctions on Chinese companies involved in constructing artificial islands or other activities in disputed areas, as well as limiting Chinese access to U.S. markets and technology. These economic sanctions influence change in actions through options like raising customs duties on imported goods to destabilize economic exchanges because maintaining long-term government equals having a strong and vibrant economy (Chun, 2012). At the same time, the US could work with its allies and partners to promote alternative economic arrangements that do not rely on China, such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
On the other hand, the US could maintain a robust military presence in the SCS region to halt or manage the Chinese aggression and ensure freedom of navigation and overflight. The military instruments might include conducting joint military exercises with allies and partners, increasing the US Navy patrol frequency in the SCS, and deploying additional military assets to the region. Since the US cannot achieve this on its own due to China’s growing military capabilities, the US could enhance the military capabilities of its allies and partners in the region, such as the Philippines. As stated earlier, these options are riskier than they sound, considering China’s growing influence and military power across Asian countries. Besides, ASEAN may not risk regional security by allowing a more intense remedy like a military action because of the war potential.
Success in the SCS context would mean using a more peaceful resolution to the South China Sea dispute that upholds international law and norms, promotes regional stability, and ensures freedom of navigation and overflight. Again, it would involve reduced tensions between the United States and China and greater cooperation between the two countries on issues of mutual concern. Ultimately, success would require a sustained and coordinated effort by the US and its regional allies and partners to ensure a balance of power and limited scuffles, i.e., preserving the security and stability of the region, preventing conflict, and maintaining the United States’ strategic presence and influence in the region.
Risks
The US-led Indo-Pacific strategy has a foreseeable negative impact on its national interests in Asia and the Indian Ocean region. On the other hand, China is not backing down on adopting new strategies to cope with the challenges posed by the ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) strategy (Gong, 2020, p.29). This is because China considers its economic prowess an important tool in its policy toolkit, and the BRI has been the most useful strategic tool to respond to the FOIP. However, Lindley (2022) retorts, “China now threatens the relative post–Cold War stability and vision of a peaceful future within the international community” with its strategy.
One of the strategy’s risks is an escalation of tension between China, which could lead to a new arms race. At the same time, the strategy has unforeseen alienation of allies and partners who may not want to participate in this power competition. For instance, some European countries have economic ties with China and the US. Therefore, hesitance may be inevitable as they do not want these ties to be severed in the power race. Simultaneously, the strategy threatens the economy through a potential fallout that will disrupt trade and economic ties- given how China has become a major trading partner. Nonetheless, strategy adjustment is needed to cater to the unintended consequences, like what Gompert, Cevallos, and Garafola (2016) predict that the military instrument of power may not go as planned due to China’s vast military expansion and strengthening.
In summary, the issue of China’s expansion is a controversy that will need time for each party to speak in the same tone. Nevertheless, the US-led Indo-Pacific strategy would have worked if China had resolved the issue with the BRI and the SCS expansion. The international community has the right to be involved in considering expansion, and the BRI plan affects them in several ways. Otherwise, success will resemble a rules-based international order where the rule of law, respect for human rights, and democratic values are upheld. In other words, success will manifest through preserving the existing international order and preventing China from unilaterally rewriting the rules to suit its own interests.
References
Antczak, A. L. (2020). China’s Quest In The South And East China Sea: The Struggle Between Realism, Liberalism And Constructivism. Revista Mexicana de Análisis Político y Administración Pública, 9(1), 4-16. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=7874943
Chun, C. K. (2012). Economics: A Key Element Of National Power. US Army War College Guide to National Security Issues, 1, 199-210.
Fendrick, R. J. (2012). Diplomacy As An Instrument Of National Power. US Army War College Guide to National Security, Policy and Strategy, 179-184.
Fravel, M. T., & Glaser, C. L. (2022). How Much Risk Should the United States Run in the South China Sea? International Security, 47(2), 88-134. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00443
Gompert, D. C., Cevallos, A. S., & Garafola, C. L. (2016). War with China: Thinking through the unthinkable. Rand Corporation.
Gong, X. (2020). Non-Traditional Security Cooperation Between China And South-East Asia: Implications For Indo-Pacific Geopolitics. International Affairs, 96(1), 29-48.
Hu, W., & Meng, W. (2020). The US Indo-Pacific strategy and China’s response. China Review, 20(3), 143-176. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26928115
Lindley, D. (2022). Assessing China’s Motives: How the Belt and Road Initiative Threatens US Interests. Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs.
Masroor, M., & Khani, M. (2018). Geopolitical Rearrangement in the South China Sea. Geopolitics Quarterly, 14(50), 168-196. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17354331.1397.14.50.7.5
Teixeira, V. A. G. (2021). The Hegemony’s Contest in the South China Sea. SAGE Open, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211031216
