Search results

The use of smart power to achieve national goals as part of global and regional strategies is becoming an evident trend in world politics. A roundtable discussion held at the IMEMO Centre for Asia-Pacific studies focused on a softer, intellectual dimension of smart power used by major international actors in Northeast Asia and in the Pacific to serve their goals and interests. Ideas and concepts developed by domestic think tanks or political analysts are launched into international discussions aiming to influence actual agenda of international expert community and activities by multilateral frameworks and organisations. The infusion of these ideas into the agenda and content of international discussion overtly or covertly affects the mindset of political class in other countries and drives them towards articulating of policy lines or decisions conforming to national goals set by smart power constructors.This modern policy tool has gained particular importance in the U.S. policy where it was officially endorsed as a part of national strategy. At the same time important regional actors like Japan, China and South Korea also resort to intellectual tools in their policies directed at both domestic and overseas public opinion and political thinking. Having started with slogans designed to improve the image of ruling political teams, policy-makers in these countries increasingly promote ideas geared to appeal to political class inside and outside their countries in order to secure attainment of specific goals and advance ambitious policy tasks. Growing sophistication and powerful promotion of these ideas have become an obvious trend. Against this background, Russia's neglect of intellectual aspects of promoting its own political tasks in the Asia-Pacific reflects the need for re-defining its "eastern" policy.

The publication presents major points of the discussion held by Russian and Japanese experts at the joint symposium organized by IMEMO and Tokyo-based Council on National Security Problems (ANPOKEN) in March, 2013. More than 30 specialists from the two sides exchanged views on security and business relations between Russia and Japan against the background of the present situation in Northeast Asia. The discussion covered major issues of domestic and foreign policy of the two countries as well as problems and prospects of their economies in the context of the growing role of external factors. The participants discussed reaction of political and business elites in Russia and Japan to external and domestic challenges as well as their perception of political, economic and economic situation in Northeast Asia and the Asia-Pacific region.

The publication sums up realization of the 2010-2012 three-year program of Russia-US-Japan dialogue of experts "Security challenges in Northeast Asia". The program was designed to arrange for an expert discussion of current issues of international security in Pacific Asia. A set of international conferences envisaged by the program ended in participants' endorsement of a joint statement reflecting their common vision of the situation and challenges to security in this region, the role of international alliances and possible steps by the three nations to strengthen regional security. The publication contains full text of the joint statement.

The article explores new policies related to security and economic development as represented by the cases of the Republic of Korea and Japan. It assesses combination of old and new internal and external challenges to security, economic development, and social stability, noting the increased interplay of factors affecting national security and innovative growth. The latter is increasingly viewed as an indispensable condition for military, political and social security of a nation, for effectively responding to external pressures as well as to ecological, epidemiological and technology-related risks. Rising technological capabilities in the two Northeast Asian nations contribute to their international ambitions. The authors analyze the tendency in the Republic of Korea to pursue a more independent foreign policy as a "middle power", and Japan's growing international and military profile in the Asia Pacific. The risks and possible future consequences of this trend are explored and assessed. The authors identify the priorities of the Republic of Korea's development strategy within the framework of the "Korean New Deal", and a new vision of the future of Japan as presented in the strategic documents of its government. They note greater aspirations of the two nations to increase their competitive edge in the regional and global race to reach and retain leading positions in the international hierarchy of economic and political power. New tools to ensure this edge are being tested by South Korean and Japanese governments, as old instruments of industrial policy seem to be losing strength and produce little effect. Acknowledgements. This paper was written as part of the research project "Post-Crisis World Order: Challenges and Technologies, Competition and Cooperation" under the grant of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation for conducting major scientific projects in priority areas of scientific and technological development (Agreement No. 075-15-2020-783).

Missile launches and nuclear tests by DPRK in 2013 undermined inter-Korean cooperation and regional stability. The primary purpose of these activities was to strengthen legitimacy of Kim Jong Un's administration. South Korean president Park Geun-Hye's trustpolitik policy focused on improving mutual understanding and developing step-by-step inter-Korean cooperation. Regional powers jointly opposed North Korea's missile and nuclear programs, but failed to elaborate common understanding on policies to promote security in the Korean peninsula as well as on prospects for the unification of Korea.

The publication presents the material of the roundtable that discussed the issue of a new architecture Trans-Pacific Security and Cooperation. A multi-format and multispeed character of regional integration processes makes the task more difficult and its concept – structurally complex. The discussion was attended by IMEMO Deputy Director corr.-member V. Mikheev, as well the researchers from the Center of Asian Pacific Studies V. Amirov, A. Fedorovskiy, V. Shvydko, E. Kanaev, S. Lukonin, Yu. Lukonina, K. Voda, V. Volodina.

The article discusses the conditions under which the Russian "turn to the East" is implemented. It emphasizes that the basis for the "turn" is the Russian-Chinese relations. However, there is a number of intense changes in the foreign policy of China itself as long as it becomes a primary tool for supporting economic growth. The main characteristics of the emerging concept of China's foreign policy are: raise of military power of China, "investment attack" on emerging markets, consolidation of regional "zones of new influence of China", development of the "new type" relations with the US. These features make the behavior of China in defense of their own interests more aggressive (including relations with Russia). Therefore, Russian innovation in the field of geo-economic strategy must be adapted to the new elements of Chinese foreign policy. Despite the status of a "strategic partnership" a number of problems have developed between China and Russia in recent years. These include, mainly, lack of trust because of the unwillingness to provide to each other full political and military-political support and non-optimal consideration of the United States factor in relations between Russia and China. This presupposes the partial "strategic partnership" only. However, the "new interest" of China in Russia is becoming more urgent since China uses Russian "turn to the East" for its own strategic purposes. It is impossible not to see that China refused to support Western sanctions not due to political solidarity with Russia but due to the Chinese business interests' protection. China is developing plans of entering into those sectors and niches of the Russian economy, which are released as a result of leaving or "non-arrival" of the Western capital. The "turn to the East" strategy (which means the "turn to China") can soften the internal losses of Russia from the "war of sanctions" with the West, but will not replace the Russian-American cooperation in the sphere of strategic stability, nuclear nonproliferation, space, terrorism, and climate change.

This forecast examines the major trends in Russia's relations with the world and in the Russian view of the world in 2016. The forecast looks firstly at Russia's role in the world in the context of the extant and emergent state of geopolitics. In a confused international environment, caught between the multiple, discordant and disorderly games of checkers of the present and the emerging design of a new grand chessboard for international relations, Russia and the West have been forced into cooperation. While far from easy and far from guaranteed to work – or last – this situation does offer the possibility of overcoming divides to pursue mutual interests. These interests become particularly apparent in the context of increased shared threats and the need to act jointly against them, the uncertainties created by rising powers, and the difficulties that Russia finds itself in. The key role of new mega-regional trade agreements in this emerging great game is also emphasised in the subsequent sections of the forecast, which deal, respectively, with foreign policy and political economy. The foreign policy analysis sees the US in flux in a presidential election year, and the EU caught at the crossroads of its own failure to capitalise on integration and a migration crisis of unprecedented proportions. Meanwhile, foreign policy in the post-Soviet space is characterised more by stasis than by substantial change, with frozen conflicts and stagnant reforms in Ukraine and limited room for manoeuvre for other players the order of the day. The Russian involvement in the Middle East, however, is anything but stagnant, with the military operations in Syria having dramatic effects in both the situation in Syria and global and regional geopolitics. The sustainability of this quest for influence, however, is questioned by the attitude of other players, but also by Russia's own internal weaknesses, notably its serious and deepening economic crisis.