‘Tilting’ the balance? An evaluation of Britain’s strategic approach to the Indo-Pacific

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Thomas Wilkins
{"title":"‘Tilting’ the balance? An evaluation of Britain’s strategic approach to the Indo-Pacific","authors":"Thomas Wilkins","doi":"10.1177/01925121231195605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Notwithstanding its exit from the European Union itself, the United Kingdom still remains an influential European power with significant interests and equities in the Indo-Pacific region. This article probes the substance of London’s engagement with the region through a distillation of relevant policy documents/statements appertaining to the Indo-Pacific. It reconciles this material within a three-tiered analytical framework that encompasses British ‘aims’; the ‘assets’ it holds; and then ‘assesses’ its performance and prospects. Like the other European actors considered in this Symposium, it reveals the strong confluence of economic, security and normative elements that define its regional strategic outlook. While there are many synergies with the approaches of the other European powers, what makes the United Kingdom case distinctive is a more prolific set of regional partnerships alongside multilateral engagement (‘networks and grids’), and a greater accent on hard power capabilities. The latter however are placed in service of the former – Britain has no aspirations to shift the regional balance of power independently.","PeriodicalId":47785,"journal":{"name":"International Political Science Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01925121231195605","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Notwithstanding its exit from the European Union itself, the United Kingdom still remains an influential European power with significant interests and equities in the Indo-Pacific region. This article probes the substance of London’s engagement with the region through a distillation of relevant policy documents/statements appertaining to the Indo-Pacific. It reconciles this material within a three-tiered analytical framework that encompasses British ‘aims’; the ‘assets’ it holds; and then ‘assesses’ its performance and prospects. Like the other European actors considered in this Symposium, it reveals the strong confluence of economic, security and normative elements that define its regional strategic outlook. While there are many synergies with the approaches of the other European powers, what makes the United Kingdom case distinctive is a more prolific set of regional partnerships alongside multilateral engagement (‘networks and grids’), and a greater accent on hard power capabilities. The latter however are placed in service of the former – Britain has no aspirations to shift the regional balance of power independently.
“倾斜”平衡?英国对印太战略方针的评价
尽管英国退出了欧盟,但它仍然是一个有影响力的欧洲大国,在印太地区拥有重要的利益和权益。本文通过对印度-太平洋地区相关政策文件/声明的提炼,探讨了伦敦与该地区接触的实质。它在一个包含英国“目标”的三层分析框架中协调了这些材料;它持有的“资产”;然后“评估”它的表现和前景。同本次专题讨论会审议的其他欧洲行动者一样,它显示了经济、安全和规范因素的强烈融合,这些因素决定了它的区域战略前景。虽然与其他欧洲大国的方法有许多协同作用,但使英国案例与众不同的是,除了多边参与(“网络和网格”)之外,英国还拥有更丰富的区域伙伴关系,并且更加强调硬实力能力。然而,后者是为前者服务的——英国无意独立改变地区力量平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: IPSR is committed to publishing material that makes a significant contribution to international political science. It seeks to meet the needs of political scientists throughout the world who are interested in studying political phenomena in the contemporary context of increasing international interdependence and global change. IPSR reflects the aims and intellectual tradition of its parent body, the International Political Science Association: to foster the creation and dissemination of rigorous political inquiry free of subdisciplinary or other orthodoxy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信