|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
137943
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In East Asia, the coercive use of maritime capabilities has led some to argue that the return of gunboat diplomacy has become inevitable. The use of coercion and deterrence there are indeed undeniable. However, Alessio Patalano argues that there is more than gunboats to diplomacy in a self-aware maritime East Asia. Capable navies can offer a significant contribution when dealing with major natural disasters, and these deployments should be regarded as diplomatic missions aimed at building relations and enhancing regional security. Japan's experience in this regard provides a relevant case in support of this argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
175658
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In what ways are Japanese foreign and security policies changing? How far will these changes go? Will they result in a policy posture that breaks from the post-1945 approach as originally designed by Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru? This special issue presents six articles that address these questions. They tackle the relationship between recent changes in Japanese domestic policy institutions and Japanese diplomatic and security practice. In this introduction, we outline the significance of the essays’ findings and propose a methodological shift in the interpretation of Japanese policy. We make the case that Japan’s approach to diplomatic and security affairs under Abe is evidence of the emergence of a ‘Realpolitik Japan’. From this perspective, we argue that values and political ideology have translated into practical choices that make the question of the ‘break with the post-1945’ approach less relevant to understand the significance of political change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
164482
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This special issue explores how and to what extent ‘hybridity’ informs national policy, doctrines, and military transformation in Asia. The introduction engages with three preliminary issues as a way to set the broader analytical context. It reviews the concept of ‘hybrid warfare’ to make the case that versions of this notion have long been a feature of regional strategic thinking and practice. It similarly argues that maritime geography has had an impact on how ‘hybrid’ courses of actions in the region have been conceptualised, notably in regards to ‘grey zone’ operations. Lastly, it reviews the question of how to engage with the issue of the effectiveness of such strategies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
132885
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article draws upon previously unavailable document materials to question views pointing to a degree of stagnation in Japanese maritime thinking. It similarly reviews claims about trends to compensate the decline of national military power with the build-up of projection capabilities. The article's main argument is that Japanese seapower is not declining. The Japanese Navy is evolving to combine enhanced capabilities to retain sea control in the Sea of Japan and the East China Sea with extended operational reach and flexibility, including an expeditionary component to meet alliance and diplomatic commitments in East Asia and beyond its confines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
177917
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Abe era has produced a significant increase in Japan’s geopolitical assertiveness, which is likely to endure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
104768
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In late 2010, the Japanese government issued a new defence policy. Central to it was a maritime conception of Japan's security. As an island nation, its naval posture has long been important. Today, sea communications and unhindered access to international markets and resources remain the drivers of its strategy of maritime deterrence-one strikingly similar to nineteenth-century Britain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
145943
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Japan–NATO co-operation has come a long way from the initial political contacts of the 1990s, with Japan’s contribution to reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan a core factor in the development of the partnership. Alessio Patalano, however, argues that it is the counter-piracy operation in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean which has been critical to the development of a more robust form of military interaction and has set the foundations for an enhanced partnership. He explains why maritime security can continue to play a central role in driving co-operation forward, notwithstanding the need for both actors to respond to the return of peer competition at sea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
139323
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The very human consequences of the migrant crisis in the Mediterranean Sea have dominated recent headlines, as the number attempting the treacherous crossing from Africa to Europe has significantly increased in tandem with the minor improvement in conditions at sea. The question of how to tackle this problem has also featured prominently on the EU agenda, given that its current border-patrol mission, Operation Triton, was not designed to respond to the humanitarian challenges posed by the phenomenon. In this article, Alessio Patalano considers the lessons that can be drawn from Triton’s predecessor, Operation Mare Nostrum, a year-long effort led by the Italian navy to rescue migrants, which came to an end in October 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
151053
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Bloomsbury, 2015.
|
| Description |
xvii, 244p.: figures, maps, photospbk
|
| Series |
Bloomsbury Studies in Military History
|
| Standard Number |
9781350011083
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058950 | 359.03095209045/PAT 058950 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
132882
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this issue of The Journal of Strategic Studies, we join the debate over the role that seapower plays in the current re-shaping of security relations in Northeast Asia and we aim to make three contributions to it. First, we argue that seapower matters because East Asia is a maritime region, one in which maritime forces are a primary tool underscoring both cooperative and competitive regional dynamics. Second, we suggest that claims of an emerging naval arms race in East Asia are not supported by the way the different regional countries are debating the pursuit of enhanced capabilities. In the region, there are certainly signs of capabilities procured with neighbouring actors in mind, but these procurement plans are only a fraction of much more complex and articulated policies that have to do with the wider evolving strategic meaning that the sea has for each of the nation states under examination. The third contribution of this issue concerns the realm of methodology. Over the past decade and a half, a number of new source materials emerged in China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea (ROK) that enabled scholars with language expertise to engage in greater depth in the study of defence policy and military modernisation in East Asia. The articles in this issue aim to showcase how different methodologies, ranging from contemporary history to political science, can be applied to articulate nuanced analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
124739
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The sea sets East Asia apart from other regional systems that influence international economic, political and military affairs. Alessio Patalano argues that in East Asia, the centrality of the maritime realm to economic and political matters is transforming it into a primary battleground for national ambitions. Meanwhile, the wide range of functions exercised by maritime forces puts them at the forefront of both competition and the management of security issues and regional stability. Maritime security issues are therefore likely to remain high on the regional agenda in East Asia, although the risk of escalation to war may not be as high as is often assumed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
128028
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The East China Sea (ECS) is gaining an increasingly central role in Sino-Japanese relations as it is crucial to the economic development and political affirmation of both countries, for whom the main sea routes crossing the ECS offer vital arteries for trade and energy imports. For the past year and a half, the ECS has attracted considerable international attention because of the flare-up of tensions over the sovereignty of the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands. This small group of islands is also claimed by the authorities in Beijing and known in Chinese as Diaoyu. Is war looming? Are we seeing an escalation spiral that will ultimately set the two countries on a collision course? The article argues that the current tensions should be seen in the wider context of the increased strategic significance of the ECS. For there are two different types of disputes here. One concerns sovereignty over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands; the other concerns the demarcation of the Chinese and Japanese maritime borders and exclusive economic zones (EEZ) as defined by the United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This distinction is important because sovereignty on land is different from sovereignty at sea. The former is connected to a vital national interest and historically, represented a primary reason for war. The latter focuses on functional rights over bodies of water included in the EEZ, not on the actual 'ownership' of the maritime realm. Accordingly, the article argues that seapower is going to play a crucial role in the projection of Japanese and Chinese power and status in the ECS and in the evolution of Sino-Japanese relations more generally. Significantly, Naval Defence doctrines in both countries have evolved greatly over recent years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
085098
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The build-up of Japan's military apparatus in the 1990s and 2000s has been often regarded by security analysts as indicative of a departure from the country's Cold War strategic posture. Japan appears to be engaged in a process of militarisation that is eroding the foundations of its 'exclusively defence-oriented' policy. In the case of the archipelago's naval strategy, such assessments overlook the longstanding significance of a core feature of its defence policy, namely the surveillance of maritime crossroads delivering the wealth of the country. The paper reassesses the evolution of the Japanese strategy since the Cold War by examining the development of the Japanese Maritime Self-Defence Force's submarine force, one of the key components of the defensive shield for these crossroads. The paper argues that with the changes in the security environment of the 1990s, Japan already fielded a mature force with state-of-the-art submarines, and that the rise of a new naval competitor aiming at controlling key strategic points along Japan's sea lanes reconfirmed the critical importance of submarine operations to Japanese national security
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
131334
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the literature on the Japanese postwar rearmament, the loss of credibility of the Imperial armed forces prompted the Japan Self-Defence Forces to distance themselves from that institutional lineage and to define and display their own image. Underpinning this was the notion that the Imperial Army and Navy were publicly regarded as organisations that could no longer offer relevant professional models. This article reviews that assumption, investigating the early postwar naval narrative as it became popularised by journalist and historian It? Masanori. It suggests that the postwar rejection of the imperial military past did not affect the Imperial Army and Navy equally. The reputation of the Imperial Navy as a professional organisation was not eradicated from postwar public memory. A distinguished correspondent and an internationally renowned writer, It? dedicated his work to shape the early postwar naval narrative, defining the virtues that made the navy a symbol of the nation's own journey into modernity. In so doing, he joined the public debate on rearmament and argued for the standards of the Imperial Navy to find their way into the professional ethos of the new armed forces
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
164487
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The paper challenges the notion that Chinese maritime coercion in the East and South China Seas (ESCS) is best described as a grey zone strategy. The ‘grey zone’ notion raises two issues. Conceptually, it adds little to the existing literature on maritime coercion. Practically, it creates confusion over the understanding of maritime coercion by blurring the distinction between military and constabulary activities. The paper articulates this difference to elucidate the functional correlation between Beijing’s strategic objectives and maritime claims. Within this context, the grey zone construct is particularly problematic since it uncritically assumes that the use of force is designed to remain below the threshold of war. By contrast, the paper argues that Chinese maritime claims to control ‘rights and interests’ are a function of a broader strategic intention to project military power within and beyond the confines of the ESCS, whilst preventing others to do the same. Thus, Chinese maritime coercion (military and constabulary) increases strategic competition and the risk of war, and is therefore better described as part of a ‘hybrid’ strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|