|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
144482
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the past several years, maritime Asia has witnessed increasing security challenges, and this trend may persist in the near future. There are several underlying dynamics, including a geopolitical power game, lack of maritime governance and competition for maritime resources. However, in this globalised world, countries become quite interdependent and competition/confrontation is not the favourable policy choice. All countries share common interests in maintaining a stable maritime order, safeguarding the sea lines of communication (SLOCs) and developing a maritime economy. With China a rising maritime power, Chinese maritime policy has become important for Asia. Though incurring some misperception and misunderstanding, China will stick to its peaceful development strategy and try to foster a “harmonious ocean”, instead of resorting to the so-called “Neo-Mahanian Doctrine”. In achieving this, China will adopt an increasingly cooperative maritime policy, with the 21st-century Maritime Silk Road (MSR) initiative supplementing the effort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
133522
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The paper seeks to assess the growing strategic importance of the Bay of Bengal and how this signifies for Bangladesh's imperative to develop strong maritime capabilities. With the growing significance of the Bay of Bengal, both the littoral and the extra-littoral countries are reassessing their interests in this region and reformulating respective strategies to ensure optimum benefit in their favour. After the verdict by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in March 2012, Bangladesh is now able to establish its claim over a significant area in the Bay of Bengal. These emerging realities are driving Bangladesh to develop capabilities to project effective control over its maritime zone and to ensure sustainable utilisation of marine resources. To respond efficiently, Bangladesh government has undertaken various initiatives including modernisation of the Bangladesh Navy with an aim of establishing a three dimensional force. The paper, based on secondary literature, finds that there is a growing interest among the countries in the Bay of Bengal area leading to a competitive strategic atmosphere for countries like Bangladesh. The findings also suggest that Bangladesh's drive for maritime capability building is a timely and pragmatic step which requires further strengthening in the coming years. Besides, the paper also argues that Bangladesh needs to formulate a comprehensive maritime strategy, focusing on diverse sectors of capability building. Some key areas can include empowering the coast guard, resource exploration and exploitation capacities, maritime infrastructure development for connectivity and seaborne trade as well as well-coordinated maritime governance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
188395
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Maritime safety and security remains an area of concern in the Indo-Pacific region, a vast integrated maritime space bound by trade and shipping connectivity. While multiple organizations have evolved over the years to address the various threats and challenges at the sub-regional level, the absence of an overarching institution that could synergize these efforts to improve wider maritime governance has hampered overall efforts. This article explains how such an ‘umbrella’ organization could be created to enhance maritime safety and security in the Indo-Pacific region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
185099
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article argues that geopolitics is a major obstacle to an effective Indian policy on substantive maritime governance. It holds that India’s involvement in maritime governance is predominantly shaped by geopolitics and driven by two geopolitical concerns, Delhi’s drive to counter China’s expanding influence in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) and India’s pursuit of leadership in that region. This emphasis on geopolitics is perfectly reasonable from India’s perspective but comes at the cost of constraining Delhi’s maritime governance policy and reducing India’s ability to address substantive maritime governance issues. Hence, India’s focus on geopolitics undermines substantive maritime governance. The focus on geopolitics negatively impacts substantive maritime governance because it: 1) leads India to oppose China’s involvement in IOR’s maritime governance; 2) creates bureaucratic obstacles to India’s substantive maritime governance; 3) constrains Delhi’s ability to concentrate its substantive maritime governance efforts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
187144
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
India’s growing role as a maritime powerhouse beckons unprecedented opportunities and challenges. The present mode of maritime governance characterised by the outdated role of generalists, particularly the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), is nothing more than an unfaded representation of a colonial stopgap arrangement with no scientific substance per se. Irrespective of an ideation that took place in 2014, the Indian Maritime Service (IMS) as a technocratic cadre for maritime administration never came to fruition. The commentary builds a rationale for IMS as a non-uniformed branch of specialists in view of the highly technical frontiers of civilian maritime domain, which is left in the hands of generalists. It concludes with the requirement of recalibrating the civil services with sub-specialist credentials to enhance the Indian maritime trajectories.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
174942
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Indo-Pacific region is a centre of gravity for the world’s economic, political and strategic interests. It is a home of world’s most densely inhabited states, different forms of governance and includes over half of the world’s population. It is also a theatre of great power politics, competition and rivalry. Piracy in the vital choke points, dispute on the South China Sea and rising China factor in the Indian Ocean are some of the challenges faced in this region. As the maritime domain is unique, cooperation among nations is necessary to ensure peace in the region. Therefore, a maritime theory approach is needed to study good order at sea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
159103
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Pentagon Press, 2018.
|
| Description |
xli, 209p.hbk
|
| Standard Number |
9789386618320
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 059378 | 359.54/CHA 059378 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
151680
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Vij Books India Pvt Ltd, 2017.
|
| Description |
xi, 113p.hbk
|
| Standard Number |
9789385563980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058963 | 333.7/SAK 058963 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
121103
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
During the late 1990s and the early 2000s, this author conducted a comparative study on regime building in the world's three maritime 'mega regions', i.e., the Atlantic, the (Asia-) Pacific and the Indian Ocean. The aim was to explain why regime building is so difficult in the latter as compared to the former two, and why newly formed regimes tend to end up as 'sandbanks of shattered hope' soon after their inauguration. Many reasons were offered both by the author's numerous respondents and by the author himself, but amongst the findings was the widely shared opinion of specialists from various Indian Ocean Rim countries that attempts at regime building tended to fail because their aims and objectives were too lofty. Rather, it was argued that regime-building attempts should start on the relatively modest level of confidence building measures which all potential participants could agree on, such as disaster relief, search and rescue (SAR), sustainable development of marine resources, fisheries protection, and the fight against piracy. All those measures can be subsumed under the label 'maritime governance', which will be define below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
167322
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Policy communities throughout the world tend to agree that in recent years China has become more assertive in its maritime disputes with neighbouring countries. However, scholars vehemently disagree about the underlying motivations for such a change, whether structural factors, China’s external pressures, or growing overseas interests. This article argues that existing analysis runs the risk of dismissing the embedded logic of domestic legitimacy as the single most important explanation. China’s maritime strategy has almost always served the goal of legitimisation in consistence with the Party’s central enterprises, be they survival, modernisation, or political influence/power. The rise of naval nationalism from within has pushed the central leadership to respond with determination for the sake of maintaining credibility as ‘national saviour and protector’. More importantly, in view of the bureaucratic fragmentation in China’s maritime governance, new policy actors can forward their own interests by appealing to nationalist sentiments, and to the Party’s new central task of projecting political power. Our case studies on Sansha City, the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands, and the Haiyang Shiyou 981 Drilling Rig bring in supportive evidence. Specifically, they demonstrate that all extant explanations may indeed influence China’s maritime strategy, but mostly through their impact on domestic legitimacy. Based on our legitimacy thesis, it can be predicted that, if the central leadership manages to consolidate its domestic legitimacy, China will assume a more moderate, cooperative, and constructive attitude towards maritime disputes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
101173
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In Africa, as elsewhere, ports are a telling indicator of the tenor of political power and the contests and shifting fortunes among ruling groups. Glaringly evident in the long era of imperial expansion, this is equally true in the present period of late-capitalist commercial acceleration and consolidation. With a focus on Ghana's port of Tema, a leading edge of containerised trade serving a vast swath of the West African sub-region, this essay examines the struggles between state agencies, indigenous capital, and the world's leading multinational shipping and logistics firms invested in port expansion. Rather than the predicted triumph of multinational concerns, the case of Tema reveals the persistent grip of Ghana's national port authority. Deftly capitalising on its claims over land, labour and legislation, this state body also mobilises preferential access to development assistance and financial aid. The result is a port defined by the aspirations and autonomous capacities of what may be described as a neo-developmental state. Both grounded in historical precedent and fragile in its configuration of multiplex and competing interests, Tema lays bare the complex forces at stake in the revitalisation of maritime frontiers now occurring across the African continent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|