Search

You searched for: Political Geography China Remove constraint Political Geography: China
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: David C. Gompert
  • Publication Date: 05-1998
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies
  • Abstract: China's emergence begs a fresh look at power in world affairs—more precisely, at how the spread of freedom and the integration of the global economy, due to the information revolution, are affecting the nature, concentration, and purpose of power. Perhaps such a look could improve the odds of responding wisely to China's rise.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy, Government, International Law
  • Political Geography: United States, China, Soviet Union
  • Publication Date: 03-1998
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Carter Center
  • Abstract: At the invitation of the government of the People's Republic of China, The Carter Center sent a delegation to observe village elections in China from March 2-15, 1998. In addition to evaluating nine village elections in Jilin and Liaoning provinces, the nine-person team, led by Carter Center Fellow Dr. Robert Pastor, reached a long-term agreement with the Ministry of Civil Affairs (MCA) on election-related projects.
  • Topic: Civil War, Democratization, International Organization
  • Political Geography: China
  • Author: Keun-Wook Paik, Jae-Yong Choi
  • Publication Date: 01-1998
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: Chatham House
  • Abstract: The lack of indigenous oil and gas resources in Northeast Asia is a real obstacle to the region's economic development, and the region has paid the price. The importance of the introduction of pipeline gas into Northeast Asia lies not only in diversifying supply sources but also in providing price leverage for the region's consumers. Despite many implementation problems, the Sino-Russian agreement on East Siberian gas and pipeline development laid a firm basis for the introduction of pipeline gas into the region, and this could fundamentally affect the region's energy supply balance in the coming decades. The introduction of pipeline gas will open a new era of multilateral cooperation in the region. It is now no longer a matter of whether but when and how this gas will be introduced. Northeast Asia — comprising China, Russian Asia (Siberia and the Far East), Korea and Japan — forms the world's biggest market for liquefied natural gas (LNG). Out of world trade totalling just over 100 bcm in 1996, 63.8 bcm was imported by Japan and 13 bcm by Korea, together representing 75% of the world total. Given that China is set to import both LNG and pipeline gas in the next decade, there will be further rapid growth in the region's demand for gas. Many questions about the scale of expansion, the introduction of pipeline gas as a part of the expansion, the role of natural gas in power generation, and the establishment of multilateral cooperation for the pipeline development remain unresolved. Nevertheless, recent announcements by CNPC (China National Petroleum Corporation) of two contracts signed with the Kazakstan government for the development of oilfields for transport via pipeline to western China are a strong signal that the Northeast Asian region is set to witness the introduction of long-distance pipeline oil. In the longer term, these developments may be eclipsed by the development of pipeline gas. This paper briefly reviews the potential gas and oil supply sources to the Northeast Asian region and recent developments, together with the problems that need to be tackled for early implementation of pipeline gas. After presenting the results of a unique survey on the views of both Japanese and Korean companies on the Northeast Asian natural gas market and the development of long-distance pipelines, the paper discusses the implications of such developments.
  • Topic: Development, Energy Policy
  • Political Geography: Japan, China, East Asia, Northeast Asia
  • Author: Daniel A. Sharp, Ezra Vogel
  • Publication Date: 02-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: American Assembly at Columbia University
  • Abstract: The American Assembly is embarking on the third and fourth phases of a project on "China/U.S. Relations in the Twenty-First Century: Fostering Cooperation, Preventing Conflict." The goal of this four phase project is to use the convening and consensus-building power of The American Assembly to produce a set of policy recommendations for the Clinton administration that will promote a constructive long-term relationship between the two countries.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy
  • Political Geography: United States, China, East Asia, Asia
  • Author: K.C. Fung, Lawrence Lau
  • Publication Date: 05-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Asia-Pacific Research Center
  • Abstract: China's presence in the world economy continues to grow and deepen. The foreign sector of China plays an important and multifaceted role in the country's economic development. At the same time, China's expanded role in the world economy is beneficial to all its trading partners. Regions that trade with China benefit from cheaper and more varied imported consumer goods, raw materials, and intermediate products. China also provides a large and growing export market. While the entry of any major trading nation in the global trading system can create a process of adjustment, the outcome is fundamentally a win-win situation. It is a simple but powerful lesson from economics that freer international trade and investments benefit all parties concerned.
  • Topic: International Relations, International Political Economy, International Trade and Finance
  • Political Geography: China, Asia
  • Author: Frederick Z. Brown, William Clinton, Jiang Zemin, William Itoh
  • Publication Date: 01-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Asia Society
  • Abstract: Next week, when President Jiang Zemin comes to Washington, it will be the first state visit by a Chinese leader to the United States for more than a decade. The visit gives us the opportunity and the responsibility to chart a course for the future that is more positive and more stable and, hopefully, more productive than our relations have been for the last few years.
  • Topic: International Relations
  • Political Geography: United States, China, New York, Asia, Southeast Asia
  • Publication Date: 10-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: Dr. LESLIE H. GELB (President, Council on Foreign Relations): Good evening. Welcome, members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Welcome, members of the Council on Foreign Relations Corporate Program and special guests, and our C-SPAN audience. We're here tonight to discuss and explore the substantive issues in the United States-Chinese relationship that will arise in the upcoming summit meeting between Chinese President Jiang Zemin and U.S. President Bill Clinton.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy
  • Political Geography: United States, China, Asia
  • Author: Robert Rubin
  • Publication Date: 10-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: What I would like to do is use our time together this morning to discuss the importance of prosperity and growth in Asia to our own economic well-being and to discuss the challenges and opportunities in our relationship with China--subjects that are on a great many minds because of the recent financial instability in Southeast Asia and China's President Jiang Zemin's landmark visit to the United States.
  • Topic: Emerging Markets, International Political Economy
  • Political Geography: United States, China, East Asia, Southeast Asia
  • Publication Date: 06-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: Dr. LESLIE GELB (President, Council on Foreign Relations): Welcome to today's program on the United States and China: Strategic Partners or Adversaries? My name is Les Gelb. I'm President of the Council on Foreign Relations. And the Council, along with the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, has put together this panel because we think it's dealing with one of the most important, if not the most important, foreign policy question facing the United States. These Policy Impact Panels, as we call them, are designed to do two things. One, try to establish facts in a very complicated situation, because often we spend a lot of time wondering what the facts are or if they can be established. The second purpose is to lay out the policy alternatives, to give us a sense of what we can do about the problems or the facts.
  • Topic: Security, Foreign Policy
  • Political Geography: United States, China, Asia
  • Author: Mickey Kantor
  • Publication Date: 11-1997
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: Council on Foreign Relations
  • Abstract: The challenges of the era of interdependence will constitute the greatest foreign policy test of the 21st century. The war over globalization and interdependence is at an end. Only the battles are yet to be fought. Those who cower behind walls of fear and fail to accept responsibility do so at their own peril, and will not turn containment into engagement, or mutual assured destruction into mutual assured prosperity. The approach of the new millennium finds us at the intersection of three epochal events: in politics, the end of the Cold War; in economics, the emergence of a global economy; and in technology, the rise of the Information Age. The intersection of economics, strategic issues, and political concerns is creating the glue which will bind together an updated U.S. foreign policy. Vast opportunities lie before us, and more than a few pitfalls. We face fewer serious military threats but an increasing number of competitors. The rise of competition, the need to create new opportunities, and the confluence of major economic and political changes create a need to intensely focus on U.S. priorities and goals. Despite this urgency, we have yet to fully articulate a foreign policy that matches the era in which we now live, especially the appropriate role of international economics. We need to direct our focus toward the lessons we have learned over the past five years. Seekers of universal truths or simple catch phrases should prepare in advance for disappointment. U.S. leadership in both the public and private sectors must accept the challenges represented by these enormous changes. Our willingness to take responsibility, clearly define our goals, and recognize our limitations but pursue U.S. leadership at every opportunity will dictate the success or failure of promoting a stronger United States and a less dangerous world. The goals and objectives are clear: U.S. leadership must pursue peace, stability, economic progress, basic human rights, and sustainable development. In order to address these goals we need to create foreign-policy tools and institutions that are pragmatic, practical, and resilient reflecting the speed with which events, opportunities, and challenges now confront us as a nation. There is no question that global economics has fundamentally changed the nature of foreign policy. Today, economics and foreign policy are no longer separable, and economic security and national security have become synonymous. We live in an interdependent, globalized world. No longer are we self-contained, nor is it in our interest to be so. We can no longer take for granted our global economic dominance and turn our back on foreign markets. It is self-defeating in the short run and impossible in the long run to ignore the problems which occur across the border or across the world, and we cannot overlook our responsibility as the world's remaining superpower. Driven by technological change, freed of Cold War conflicts and connected by economic and strategic interests, the era of interdependence demands negotiation, engagement, and leadership. Interdependence dictates that our foreign policy and economic future are increasingly connected to international trade. Interdependence dictates that terrorism, weapons proliferation, environmental concerns, the drug trade, and economic opportunity are now cross-border issues. These issues profoundly affect the everyday lives of people around the globe. Cross-border issues directly influence policies, laws, and regulations of the countries in question, raising issues such as the rule of and respect for law, regulation and deregulation, privatization, and other concerns heretofore thought to be strictly internal. This new era requires a redefinition of global leadership. Being the only remaining superpower does not simply mean that we are the strongest military power, nor does it mean only that we are the most economically competitive nation on earth. Both of those statements are true, of course. But holding the position of the world's only remaining superpower in the era of interdependence means that we have the opportunity to take advantage of the vast economic potential which is being created around the globe to the benefit of all Americans, and we have a corresponding obligation to rally other nations to pursue common long-term interests, such as strategic and political stability, economic progress, and sustainable development. There are other examples which support the notion of new multidimensional international relations. Brazil has dramatically increased its international standing and influence using its potential economic strategic position. During the Cold War and prior to the dramatic growth of economic power and industrialization, Brazil's strategic position would have been defined and dictated by its ability or inability to have an influence over strategic and political issues especially those concerning East-West relations. But today, and in the foreseeable future, not only do countries increase their influence based on economic potential and achievement, but economic considerations and relationships tend to bring entities together which in other circumstances could not or would not cooperate. The recent Middle East Economic Conferences and the participation of China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) are obvious examples.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, Cold War, Diplomacy, Political Economy
  • Political Geography: United States, China, America, Taiwan, Asia, Brazil, Democratic Republic of the Congo