Suchergebnisse

Historically, Russia‐U.S. political interaction in the Pacific has mostly been defined by the balance of power logic. Moscow and Washington only cooperated when they faced a common threat. In the 1860s it was the British Empire that was seen as such a threat, whereas from the 1920s through the 1940s it was Japan. Today another geopolitical entente of Russia and America might be in the offing, motivated by the rise of China. Such options are already being discussed by Russian experts and are perhaps also being contemplated by strategic planners in Washington. If Russia and the United States are to establish an effective partnership in the Asia‐Pacific, they will need to resolve, or at least moderate, their disagreements in other areas, especially in the post‐Soviet space. Furthermore, they have to do something about the lack of substantial economic ties as well as bridge the gap in their political identities.

The article examines the environmental issues of the Russian Far East (Pacific Russia). The author covers problems such as military-related nuclear and nonnuclear factors of environmental security, excessive exploitation of forests and marine biological resources, the ecological risks of big energy projects, environmental conditions in urban areas and transborder aspects of environmental security. Political, social, and economic factors affecting environmental decisionmaking in the Russian Far East are analyzed. (Asian Aff/GIGA)

Setting the Stage -- What Is the Russian Far East? -- The History of the Russian Far East -- A Region of Troubles -- Moscow's Game Plan for the Russian Far East -- Russia's Changing Perceptions of China -- A Russian-Chinese Alliance : Chimera or Emerging Reality? -- Is Russia Moving into China's Economic Orbit? -- A Symbiotic Relationship : Russia's Far East and Northeast China -- Beijing Sets Its Sights on the Russian Far East -- Russia and the United States in Asia Pacific : Is Collaboration Possible? -- What Next for the Russian Far East?

A lonely but unbroken North Korea stands up against the South Korean-U.S. alliance, playing diplomatic overtures in between crises and skillfully using contradictions between other actors in Northeast Asia. Yet although North Korea has nuclear weapons, the military balance on and around the Korean Peninsula is not developing to Pyongyang's advantage. This puts North Korea's security at risk, especially due to the unpredictability of Seoul's future policy. In terms of Kenneth Waltz's structural realism, North Korea's ability to balance the mounting strategic risks internally by mobilizing its own resources is extremely limited. This leaves the option of external balancing through alliance with strong military powers. The theory of structural realism remains relevant and helps to better understand the ongoing rapprochement between Pyongyang and Moscow.