Ever since then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s announcement of a “Pivot to Asia” in an October 2011 op-ed in Foreign Policy magazine, expectations and questions have risen around what shape the Pivot will take. The announcement was made amid rising tensions along China’s maritime borders, the East and South China Seas, both significant trade waterways. However, as time went on, many have started to doubt the American commitment to the rebalancing, especially its military/security component. Come 2015, the US is again preoccupied with difficult situations in the Middle East, while the Ukraine crisis put a strain on US-Russia relations, the latter being increasingly more engaged with Beijing. China meanwhile keeps pushing its claims in the South China Sea, recently through expanding infrastructure construction on its holdings.
To examine the US policy of rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific, we have invited number of specialists to reflect on various issues related to the topic. Contributors will address its economic, political and security aspects, impact on bilateral relations with traditional and emerging partners, historical development of US involvement in the region, etc.
J. Michael Cole, Thinking Taiwan/China Policy Institute, Taiwan, Taiwan: Between the pivot and a hard place.
Alex Calvo, University of Nagoya, Japan, The other ‘pivot’: Is Russia also rebalancing towards the Pacific?
Harry Kazianis, The National Interest/China Policy Institute, USA, Why the Pivot Will Fail: Washington Won’t State Its Real Goal.
Abraham M. Denmark, The National Bureau of Asian Research, USA, Alliances and Partnerships for a Rebalancing United States.
Carlyle A. Thayer, University of New South Wales, Australia, U.S. Rebalancing Towards the Asia-Pacific: The Defence-Security Dimension.
Chen Dingding, University of Macau, Macau (China), Making Sense of China’s Reaction to U.S. Rebalance Strategy: What is China’s ambition?
Michael Mazza, American Enterprise Institute, USA, U.S. in the Asia Pacific: Towards More Effective Asia Strategy.