Search

Begin New Search Topic Economics Political Geography Asia Content Type Journal Article Publication Year within 10 Years

21. The Future of U.S. Supply Chains: National Security and the Pandemic

Author:
Troy Stangarone
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic has been the most significant economic disruption to the international economy since the Great Depression. The IMF estimates that the global economy contracted by 3.5 percent last year, while the WTO has projected a 5.3 percent decline in global trade. The economic impact on the United States has been significant as well. Early in the pandemic the United States experienced shortages of critical medical supplies and products, while the need to social distance has continued to place restrictions on the overall economy. For 2020, the pandemic saw GDP decline by 2.3 percent, while exports fell by 12.9 percent and imports by 6.4 percent. All of this has resulted an increased focus on supply chains and their vulnerabilities.
Topic:
Economics, National Security, COVID-19, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

22. The Big Squeeze: Japanese Supply Chains and Great Power Competition

Author:
Mireya Solis
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
Japan led, and was transformed, by the global supply chain revolution. Facing growing protectionism in industrialized markets and reeling from sharp yen appreciation in the aftermath of the 1985 Plaza Accord, Japanese firms responded with a drastic increase in their overseas investment activities. In so doing, many of these companies spearheaded the movement towards the fragmentation of production across national boundaries that sought efficiency gains by pooling the competitive advantages of different locations. Japan’s experience with the first supply chain revolution was transformative. It altered its export-led model with important implications for its foreign policy. Japanese investments in the United States helped abate trade frictions; integrated production was at the heart of the project to rebuild relations with China, and Japan’s lead as foreign investor in Southeast Asia has been a pillar of its blueprint for regional integration. The strains in the rules-based international trade order, however, have raised questions about the ability of global supply chains to continue to operate effectively. The U.S.-China geopolitical rivalry has manifested in a damaging trade war, and moves to restrict tech flows are creating decoupling pressures. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these trends with lockdowns that disrupt supply chains while export protectionism and calls to renationalize production are on the rise. The intensified risk environment could lead to a second supply chain revolution with a greater emphasis on redundancy and diversification and bifurcation of productive chains. How will Japan respond to the challenges to international production, a central engine of its economic prosperity, and with what consequences for its relations with major powers? To provide greater clarity on this overarching question, this paper is organized as follows. Section 1 describes the central role of Japanese firms in the emergence and deepening of regional production networks. Although Japan’s overall share of intra-regional trade has decreased in the 21st century—in tandem with China’s rise as regional hub- Japanese firms have retained their central role in GVCs (Global Value Chains) through their advanced manufacturing capabilities. Section 2 offers a glimpse of past and recent supply chain shocks—China’s embargo of rare earth metals, the Great East Japan Earthquake in Tohoku, and the Japan-Korea export control dispute—to illustrate both sources of vulnerability and resilience of Japanese GVCs. Section 3 assesses the systemic shift brought about by revived great power competition, and identifies some early adjustment responses from Japanese firms to a new normal of heightened geopolitical tension.
Topic:
Economics, Strategic Competition, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:
Japan, China, and Asia

23. Georgia After the Second Karabakh War

Author:
Mamuka Tsereteli
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
The outcome of the Second Karabakh War between Azerbaijan and Armenia significantly trans­formed the geopolitical reality in the South Caucasus, with im­plications for the wider Black Sea‑Caspian region. The unsettled political geography of the South Caucasus and the ethno‑political separatism fueled by external actors since the early 1990s left bleeding wounds on the bodies of the newly re‑emerged sovereign states of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. These conflicts have determined the trajectory of the geopolitical developments of the region for the last 30 years, including on the for­eign policy orientations of these new states. The conflicts in the South Caucasus were the primary challenge for transforming the strategic assets of this region into greater political and economic success. Three major conflict areas in the South Caucasus were former autonomous regions, created in the early Soviet period: Nagorno‑Karabakh, Abkhazia, and the Tskhinvali region, what was called South Ossetia. (Briefly: the latter term was introduced by the Soviets in the 1920s as a name for the newly created autonomous area in Georgia, popu­lated by Ossetians alongside ethnic Georgians. The historic homeland of Ossetians is located to the north of the Greater Caucasus mountains. Following the Soviet tradition of planting ethno‑political time bombs, Ossetia proper—located in the Russian Federation—was named North Ossetia, while the Tskhinvali region of Georgia—with the Ossetian population at the time concentrated in the border areas with Russia—was named South Ossetia.) As of today, all three of these areas are self‑proclaimed indepen­dent states, are formally ruled by de facto governments, and saw fierce military confrontation in the early 1990s. In 2008, the Tskhinvali region became the battleground between Russian and Georgian forces. In 2020, Azerbaijan regained through a combination of military action and diplomatic brinksmanship all seven regions outside of Nagorno‑ Karabakh that had been occupied by Armenia, as well as one‑third of the former Nagorno‑Karabakh region. In the case of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia, as of mid‑2021, these ter­ritories remain, in reality, governed by Russian occupational forces. The Russian military influence was in­serted into Karabakh after the war that ended on November 10th, 2020, with Russian peacekeepers playing an increasing role in the governance of the region. In terms of geopolitical orienta­tion, Armenia willingly allowed Russian troops onto its territory, seeing them as a security guar­antee and deterrent against Azer­baijan. Georgia aligned itself with the Western powers, determined to join NATO and the EU. The conflicts on Georgian territory are seen as punishment from Russia for Georgia’s pro‑Western focus. As a result, there has been a heavy Russian military presence in the separatist areas of Georgia since the Russian invasion to Georgia in 2008.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

24. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor

Author:
Ali Haider Saleem and Arhama Siddiqa
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
The term Silk Road is used by scholars to describe a network of trading posts and markets linking East Asia to the Mediterranean. In terms of geographical context, the editors of Baku Dialogues define the region as the “geographic space looking west past Anatolia to the warm seas beyond; north across the Caspian towards the Great Plain and the Great Steppe; east to the peaks of the Altai and the arid sands of the Taklamakan; and south towards the Hindu Kush and the Indus valley, looping down around in the direc­tion of the Persian Gulf and across the Fertile Crescent.” States falling under this parasol include China, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, the five Central Asian republics, Azerbaijan, and Russia. China’s Belt and Road Initia­tive (BRI), which traverses several continents, is a long‑term, strategic investment plan with the objective of facilitating economic integration of countries in line with the historic Silk Road. In April 2015, China’s President, Xi Jinping announced the China‑Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which amounts to BRI’s flagship project. This en­terprise, which encompasses road, rail, and oil pipeline links, will help Beijing advance its influence across South and Central Asia.
Topic:
Economics, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Bilateral Relations, Infrastructure, and Silk Road
Political Geography:
Pakistan, China, and Asia

25. Economic Sanctions as a Tool of China’s Hybrid Strategies

Author:
Rafal Wisniewski
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Polish Political Science Yearbook
Institution:
Polish Political Science Association (PPSA)
Abstract:
The article aims to analyze the role of economic sanctions in the People’s Republic of China’s overall approach to achieving its security objectives in the international arena. During the last two decades, Beijing used this instrument on numerous occasions to exert pressure on a varied group of actors. China’s current strategy toward a range of disputes and conflicts it is engaged in (the South China Sea territorial disputes most prominently stand out) is often described using the popular vocabulary of “hybrid warfare” or “grey zone conflicts”. Putting the conceptual complications aside, the author agrees that the PRC’s approach can be viewed as part of a growing trend for great powers to employ what can be called “hybrid strategies” toward its opponents. As part of a broader category of economic statecraft, economic sanctions form an important element of this approach. Considering current scholarship on both “hybrid” (or “grey area”) warfare and economic sanctions, the article answers the question of why the PRC increasingly resorts to hybrid strategies (including economic coercion) and identifies the main characteristics of Chinese economic sanctions. It also provides preliminary conclusions on their effectiveness.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Economics, Territorial Disputes, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and South China Sea

26. China's Belt and Road Initiative and Georgia: A Short Overview

Author:
Ekaterine Lomia
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
Since the beginning of the 2000s, China has embarked on an unprecedented path of economic development, as evidence of which is the largest economic project of the XXI century initiated by the People's Republic of China. The global Belt and Road Initiative announced by the first person of the country, Xi Jinping, is a shortened name of the ‘Silk Road Economic Belt’ and ‘XXI Century Maritime Silk Road’. It covers the Asia-Pacific, Europe, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, West Asia, and Africa and involves more than a hundred countries, international organizations, and leading economic actors. The main participants in the project are China, Mongolia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Poland, Germany, the Netherlands, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran, and India. The article reviews the role of the Chinese project in a global context. The paper focuses on the role and purpose of Georgia in the Belt and Road Initiative. This study will try to reveal the results for the benefit of Georgia, which is one of the participating countries, and the role of China through research to be made from documents and academic studies on the subject. Georgia tries to conduct its relations with China, as a partner in the project, with a policy of balance without disturbing its relations with the West.
Topic:
Economics, Bilateral Relations, Infrastructure, Hegemony, and Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, and Georgia

27. Chinese Investments in Brazil: Economic Diplomacy in Bilateral Relations

Author:
Virginia Soledad Busilli and Maria Belen Jaime
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Contexto Internacional
Institution:
Institute of International Relations, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract:
The People’s Republic of China has consolidated its status as a great power and strengthened its presence in different regions of the planet. In accordance with its economic development strategy, Beijing’s growing bond with Latin America is part of China’s need to guarantee access to raw materials and energy resources. In this framework and through economic diplomacy, China has strengthened its trade relations, as well as loans and investments in most of the region’s countries.Brazil is an example of this relationship pattern, as one of China’s most important partners and top investment destination in Latin America. It became Beijing’s top commercial partner in 2012. This paper will analyse the composition and evolution of Chinese foreign direct investment (FDI) in Brazil between the years of 2004 and 2020. In order to do so, we will study the main projects carried out by the country, as well as the characteristics of the Chinese companies (state or non-state) that participated in the process, in order to understand their most important features. Likewise, we will analyse the articulation of the Chinese FDI with its trade flows. We will start from the premise that Chinese investments in Brazil are directly linked to Beijing’s strategic interests, while at the same time guided by market logics that try to maximise profits. In this vein, within the framework of the ‘going out strategy’,state companies play a fundamental role.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Economics, Bilateral Relations, and Hegemony
Political Geography:
China, Asia, Brazil, and South America

28. Medical Security, Covid Challenge and the U.S. - Japan Alliance

Author:
Kent Calder
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
National security has been classically conceived as a narrowly military and state-centric concept, especially in the Western industrial world. Security is, generations of strategists and statesmen have told us, a matter of defending core nation-state values and interests by force of arms. Two world wars across the first half of the twentieth century, and a long nuclear confrontation to follow, engrained this military and state-centric conception deeply into global consciousness and public discourse. The tragic COVID-19 crisis now confronting us suggests that this logic may be flawed, or at least oversimplified. Over 2.3 million people worldwide died in the first year of this global pandemic, with well over 100 million infected. These figures are likely understated.44 Untold millions of people continue to suffer from “long COVID” maladies around the world.
Topic:
Economics, Health, National Security, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Japan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

29. Foreign Direct Investment, Gross Domestic Product, and Export Nexus in Turkey: Autoregressive Distributed Lag Bounds Model and Granger Causality Approach

Author:
Bayram Gungor
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development
Institution:
Centre for Strategic Research and Analysis (CESRAN)
Abstract:
The relationship among the FDI, GDP and Export has gained vast attention among the researchers and policy-makers. There are many studies on the interaction of these variables using various econometric approaches in the literature. However, it has seen that the findings have been different from country by country. Therefore, this study's main problematic is to estimate the coefficients that show the interaction among the FDI, GDP and Export covering 1980-2019 in Turkey. The ARDL Bounds Model and Granger Causality approach were selected to measure the coefficients statistically. Three models were executed to calculate the short-run and long-run coefficients. While the Model 1 and Model 3 were found statistically significant to explain the dependent variables, the Model 2 was found statistically insignificant. Because of this, the Model 2 was excluded from the study. The short- run coefficients were also found statistically significant to explain the dependent variables of the Model 1 and Model 3. While GDP affects the FDI positively in Model 1, GDP affects the Export negatively in Model 2. The ECT was found statistically significant at 0.01. The speeds of adjustment of the Model 1 and Model 3 were calculated as approximately 93% and 16% levels, respectively. Unlike the ARDL Bounds Model, the Granger Causality test was implemented to measure the variables' causal relationship. It was seen that there is only a unidirectional Granger causal relationship running from GDP to FDI in the Model 1 and from GDP to Export in the Model 2.
Topic:
Economics, Foreign Direct Investment, GDP, and Exports
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

30. U.S. Trade Policy toward China: Learning the Right Lessons

Author:
Scott Lincicome
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Cato Journal
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Labor market and cultural disruptions in the United States are real and important, as is China’s current and unfortunate turn toward illiberalism and empire. But pretending today that there was a better trade policy choice in 2000—when Congress granted China “permanent normal trade relations” (PNTR) status and paved the way for broader engagement—is misguided. It assumes too much, ignores too much, and demands too much. Worse, it could lead to truly bad governance: increasing U.S. protectionism; forgiving the real and important failures of our policymakers, CEOs, and unions over the last two decades; and preventing a political consensus for real policy solutions. Indeed, that is happening now.
Topic:
International Relations, Economics, Markets, Bilateral Relations, Trade, and Protectionism
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America