| ID | 155466 |
| Title Proper | Informal hierarchy in Asia |
| Other Title Information | the origins of the U.S.–Japan alliance |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Cha, Victor |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | The U.S.-based alliance system in Asia has grown stronger since the end of the Cold War, not weaker. Indeed, Japan and the Republic of Korea each celebrated in recent years the 60th anniversary of their alliances with the United States with proclamations of continued resiliency and longevity. Why is this? How do great powers maximize their influence in regional security? Some might argue that the threat of a rising China provides the glue to the alliances’ longevity. But no country in the region is really looking to balance China as the raison d’ȇtre of their security relationship with America. I argue the San Francisco system’s durability today is found in the unique origins of the hub and spokes alliance system. The United States operationalized a strategy of ‘tight bilateralism’ that maximized power through the creation of formal networks and informal hierarchy in Asia. It established a formal network of alliances to deter the communist threat, but also to exercise control over these newfound allies. The United States had bilateral relationships in Europe, where it transacted business through deep bilateral ties, as well as through a regional organization; moreover, some multilateral coordination among the member states was encouraged. This was less the case in Asia. Instead, a ‘hub and spokes’ arrangement emerged in which all parties in the network were plugged into a central hub, but with almost no interaction among them. This formal hub and spokes network operated as an informal hierarchical arrangement with Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, and others that maximized U.S. power. Moreover, the arrangement was legitimized domestically in all of the member states. This structure and process contributed greatly to the bilateral alliance arrangement’s continuing durability, even today. In this article, I focus on Japan as the primary example of this hierarchy strategy of ‘tight bilateralism’ at work. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Relations of the Asia-Pacific Vol. 17, No.1; 2017: p.1-34 |
| Journal Source | International Relations of the Asia-Pacific Vol: 17 No 1 |
| Key Words | Asia ; Informal hierarchy ; U.S.–Japan Alliance |