| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
189745
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
East Asia is essential to the UK’s post-Brexit international strategy. Within a complex web of bilateral and multilateral arrangements, the UK needs to manage historical ties, new strategic objectives and ongoing partnerships. Underpinning these interactions is trust and some of the dynamics more commonly associated with formal security alliances. Post-Brexit, there is a need to assure these states of the UK’s place in the world and particularly its commitment to, and strategic objectives in, the region, but also recognise that there is an increasing risk of moral hazard for the UK in seeking to achieve some of its objectives. Catherine Jones offers a framework for understanding the challenges and opportunities for the UK’s current planning in the region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
189743
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Australian and British strategic interests diverged after the early 1970s. As London’s horizons narrowed, Canberra held tight to Australia’s alliance with the US and looked to emerging Asia for economic opportunities. Recently, however, Australian and UK strategic interests have reconverged, as concern grows in both countries about China’s growing assertiveness. The AUKUS arrangement is the clearest signal of this shift, but, as Ian Hall argues, the substance of Australia–UK strategic cooperation in the Indo-Pacific is yet to be determined and several challenges loom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
189747
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On 24 February 2022, Russia launched a ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine, sparking the largest conflict in Europe since the Second World War. The war is a remarkable opportunity to observe Russia’s military capabilities in a high-intensity conflict and to reflect on military trends witnessed in recent conflicts. Guillem Colom-Piella sets out a series of initial impressions on Moscow’s military performance in this ongoing conflict.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
189748
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Kaliningrad, a Russian exclave situated between Poland and Lithuania, rarely receives interest in the public sphere despite its strategic implications. Acting similarly to a forward operating base, the sovereign Russian territory is host to both conventional and nuclear forces. If desired, through operations originating from Kaliningrad, Russia could deny airspace across the Baltic states and much of Poland, or strike deep into NATO. William DiRubbio argues that the Alliance must develop a more effective strategy towards the Kaliningrad oblast. This involves a prioritisation of targets in Kaliningrad and forward-placing NATO capabilities near the oblast to facilitate a quick response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
189740
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This special feature emerged from a workshop on the UK’s tilt to the Indo-Pacific, organised by the Open University and the Council on Geostrategy and involving academics as well as UK government officials. It aims to unpack the assumptions of the 2021 Integrated Review and to offer practical insights into the opportunities and challenges of the UK’s future engagement with the region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
189741
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The 2021 Integrated Review was informed by two assumptions: that leaving the EU would allow a more agile foreign policy based on ad hoc groups; and that a global shift in power towards the Indo-Pacific meant that the UK needed to engage more with the region. Jamie Gaskarth argues that the missing element to this strategy is a networked approach. Using the insights of network theory and social network analysis, policymakers should be aiming to analyse the social dynamics of the region in a more systematic way. This would allow them to better identify opportunities for greater connectedness and the benefits these may bring, as well as the limits to UK engagement, and non-linear effects that network spillovers can produce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
189746
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The UK has adopted a ‘Global Britain’ foreign policy strategy since the 2016 Brexit referendum. This policy seeks to maintain the UK’s standing internationally while strengthening existing global relations. UK relations with Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) form an important component of this new policy. Laura Southgate examines this new impetus to strengthen UK–ASEAN relations following a period of benign neglect towards the region in the immediate post-Cold War period. In particular, she focuses on the potential success of UK strategy as regards to ASEAN, in light of its extended absence from the region and ASEAN’s growing status as a regional and international power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
189744
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The UK’s relationship with Japan is the cornerstone of the Indo-Pacific ‘tilt’ and provides unique insights into its motivating logic and the UK’s role in world politics, Philip Shetler-Jones argues. First, it exhibits the importance the UK gives to universal principles unrestricted by cultural or geographic markers in its choice of ‘like-minded’ partners – an aspect of Global Britain that is reciprocated in Japanese policy, informing how the ‘tilt’ is received in the region. Second, it represents the prime example of how the tilt maintains the equilibrium of UK foreign policy in the midst of a shifting global power balance, by means of a more diversified, flatter framework of ‘quasi alliance’ relations built on the foundation of the transatlantic alliance. Third, the foremost commitment in the Integrated Review that the UK remain a leading technology power is reflected in the defence technology and industry partnership that is becoming central to the UK–Japan relationship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
189742
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The US policy community has been taking note of the UK’s ‘tilt’ toward the Indo-Pacific since before their British counterparts referred to it as such. UK contributions to the region were first valued by Americans focused on Pacific naval dynamics, and a broader section of the security community has developed a similar appreciation. However, some Americans continue to doubt the tilt’s sustainability and strategic viability, especially due to the dangers associated with spreading the US–UK alliance too thinly with regard to the huge challenges lurking elsewhere. John F Bradford provides an analytical history of US perspectives and expectations regarding the UK’s growing Indo-Pacific role.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|