{"title":"把东盟纳入美国的印太战略","authors":"K. Koga","doi":"10.1080/0163660X.2022.2149952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As part of the intensifying great power competition between the United States and China, a set of new Indo-Pacific frameworks primarily led by Washington—namely the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), the AUKUS, and the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF)— has emerged. These US-centric minilateral and multilateral frameworks essentially aim to build a coalition with politically and strategically “like-minded” states to maintain and enhance the existing rules-based international order largely constructed by the West since the end of the Cold War. For the United States, the core institution in East Asian regional architecture, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), remains a “second order” priority. As the United States has extensive bilateral alliance networks in the region, ASEAN has never played a central role in its foreign policy in East Asia or the Indo-Pacific region. Of course, the United States and its allies continuously emphasize the importance of ASEAN as well as “ASEAN unity and centrality” and praise ASEAN’s effort to pursue its own Indo-Pacific vision, the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP). However, the United States has neither explained the strategic role ASEAN is expected to play in the Indo-Pacific region nor defined “ASEAN unity and centrality” in its strategic thinking.","PeriodicalId":46957,"journal":{"name":"Washington Quarterly","volume":"45 1","pages":"157 - 177"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Getting ASEAN Right in US Indo-Pacific Strategy\",\"authors\":\"K. Koga\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0163660X.2022.2149952\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As part of the intensifying great power competition between the United States and China, a set of new Indo-Pacific frameworks primarily led by Washington—namely the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), the AUKUS, and the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF)— has emerged. These US-centric minilateral and multilateral frameworks essentially aim to build a coalition with politically and strategically “like-minded” states to maintain and enhance the existing rules-based international order largely constructed by the West since the end of the Cold War. For the United States, the core institution in East Asian regional architecture, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), remains a “second order” priority. As the United States has extensive bilateral alliance networks in the region, ASEAN has never played a central role in its foreign policy in East Asia or the Indo-Pacific region. Of course, the United States and its allies continuously emphasize the importance of ASEAN as well as “ASEAN unity and centrality” and praise ASEAN’s effort to pursue its own Indo-Pacific vision, the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP). However, the United States has neither explained the strategic role ASEAN is expected to play in the Indo-Pacific region nor defined “ASEAN unity and centrality” in its strategic thinking.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46957,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Washington Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"157 - 177\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Washington Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2022.2149952\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Washington Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2022.2149952","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
As part of the intensifying great power competition between the United States and China, a set of new Indo-Pacific frameworks primarily led by Washington—namely the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), the AUKUS, and the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF)— has emerged. These US-centric minilateral and multilateral frameworks essentially aim to build a coalition with politically and strategically “like-minded” states to maintain and enhance the existing rules-based international order largely constructed by the West since the end of the Cold War. For the United States, the core institution in East Asian regional architecture, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), remains a “second order” priority. As the United States has extensive bilateral alliance networks in the region, ASEAN has never played a central role in its foreign policy in East Asia or the Indo-Pacific region. Of course, the United States and its allies continuously emphasize the importance of ASEAN as well as “ASEAN unity and centrality” and praise ASEAN’s effort to pursue its own Indo-Pacific vision, the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP). However, the United States has neither explained the strategic role ASEAN is expected to play in the Indo-Pacific region nor defined “ASEAN unity and centrality” in its strategic thinking.
期刊介绍:
The Washington Quarterly (TWQ) is a journal of global affairs that analyzes strategic security challenges, changes, and their public policy implications. TWQ is published out of one of the world"s preeminent international policy institutions, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and addresses topics such as: •The U.S. role in the world •Emerging great powers: Europe, China, Russia, India, and Japan •Regional issues and flashpoints, particularly in the Middle East and Asia •Weapons of mass destruction proliferation and missile defenses •Global perspectives to reduce terrorism Contributors are drawn from outside as well as inside the United States and reflect diverse political, regional, and professional perspectives.