What Will Dominate the Asia Pacific Century - Literature review Example

ESSAY By Name Course Instructor Institution City/State Date Whom or What will dominate the Asia Pacific Century? Introduction Global power distribution is changing fast, given that China together with other developing countries is hastily climbing the pecking order. On the other hand, the Western world’s three pillars comprising of Japan, Europe, and the United States are plagued by persistent economic depression as well as dissatisfied electorates. However, in spite of the widespread acknowledgment that the global landscape is changing, scholarly thoughts widely differ as to which nation will dominate the Asia Pacific century. Without a doubt, the Asian ‘century’ is the certainty, and the miracle behind it will not be brought about by its fast growth, rather by the growing standard of living. Undoubtedly the Asian story stirs a certain level of journalistic excitement, but it is not easy to embellish the remarkable connotation of an occurrence through which 50% of the world’s population has been lifted out of poverty. In the previous ten years, living standard in the developing Asian countries has increased just 20% percent of the United States level. That is to say, Asia is still in the genesis of a fresh fiscal era, but its development has a substantial momentum. That is for the reason that China decided to fast-track her modernization program by allowing the international business community to invest within the country. Certainly, financial liberalization in Asia is on the horizon, and China continuous committed to its modernization agenda has helped it promote social stability and may turn out to be dominant entity in the Asia Pacific Century. The essay talks about whom and what will dominate the Asia Pacific Century. Discussion Asia’s unevenness, complexity and diversity are deemed to complicate further the rise of an Asian Century. As mentioned by Pan (2013, p.38), economic development is not experienced evenly in Asian countries, with lots of people still being poor and with no jobs. The inequality is noticeable not just across nations, but as well within them. The current India and China economic rise has surpassed the expectation of many, but the rise is yet to be experienced by other Asian countries (Gilboy & Heginbotham, 2012, p.212). Different from North America and Europe, Asia lacks a common market and its entity is not coherent. Actually, as noted by both Chinese and Western scholars, ‘Asia’ as an ostensibly consistent cultural/geographical space possesses a European construct. Even though Korea, Japan, and China have all signed an agreement of free trade with ASEAN, the negotiations of the trilateral free trade agreements amongst these three nations have just started, but are facing fierce competition from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that is led by US (Peterson Institute, 2012, p.82). Even though the US has not admitted openly that the TPP is partly intended for consolidating the Pacific Century, scholars such as Pan (2013, p.39) agree to that argument and further adds that US intends to us TPP to frustrate the rise of Asian Century led by china. Strategically, Choi and Moon (2010, p.344) posit that Asia is still an extremely volatile region, and up to the present time, the Asian Century prediction has largely been based on economic performance of Asia. Still, economy for all its significance is the only quota of the Asia Pacific Century equation. So, political power is similarly crucial in shaping the delineations of the 21st century. Precisely, the present question is whether U.S or China will rise to dominate the Asia Pacific century in terms of economic, military and political power. Certainly, China has been equipped well with the rational resources to socially create a peace by means of Buddhism, Daoism as well as Confucianism (Dellios, 2005, p.1). As a whole, Kupchan (2012) posits that the rise of China may epitomise an option to U.S worldwide dominance. Whether this will be another form of complementary balance similar to the Chinese symbol of yin-yang, or a risky global domination competition, is still a matter of much heated debate. Global economic power is gradually shifting towards the East (Dellios, 2005, p.2). As mentioned by The International Economy (2013, p.13), the Asia Pacific Century will depend on the making of a novel economic architecture, characterised by the supply chain and production generated to make technology ubiquitous. This can be evidenced by iPhone, where its parts that are highly specialised and subassemblies are developed by companies in South Korea, Japan, Germany, and in U.S, while the end products are assembled by companies like Foxconn in Taiwan in the offshore firms of Malaysia, Vietnam, and Southern China, Vietnam. So, this architecture will by no means be substituted in the coming years by one focusing on Asia, whether in India or China. Just a few of best may lack the authority of universal ideas so as to draw international talent. Equally, the Asia Pacific Century relies on the hardworking labour as well as cultures of Asia (The International Economy, 2013, p.18). The Atlantic-centred society known for shaping the world from the 17th century onwards is currently being displaced by a trans-Pacific merging culture, mostly for people living in the Pacific beltway down to Mumbai and Silicon Valley. Majority of analysts predict an Asia Pacific century that will be dominated by China, whose steady rise appears inexorable after decades of remarkable economic growth (Mearsheimer, 2010, p.387; Gungwu & Wong, 1998, p.358). Scores of politicians in America, with support of critics like Robert Lieber as well as Robert Kagan, refute the likelihood of a change in guard, maintaining that United States domination is and will remain to be well as well as alive (Lieber, 2012, p.118). They hold the view that the economy of United States will recover and its military authority is unchallenged. In this case, Brazil and India are the dark horse candidates. By 2025, it is projected that India will have the largest population in the world, while Brazil is sanctified with profuse resources as well as a considerate geopolitical environment (Roberts, 2009). Both India and Brazil have egalitarian governments that could offer them the rightfulness and moral governance required to dominate the Asia Pacific century (Harte, 2014, p.395). The absenteeism of agreement concerning which nation will superintend the Asia Pacific century is merely as it should be. This is for the reason that no nation has exhibited adequate authority, politically and economically dominate the Asia Pacific century. According to Gungwu and Wong (1998, p.359), the US will perform fairy during the Asia Pacific century since the primacy era of Western countries is fading away. On the other hand, not any of the rising countries in the world will have a combined ideological and material strength required to exercise global domination. And even though rising countries have forged a new alliance commonly known as the BRICS (meaning Brazil, Russia, India, China, as well as South Africa) so as to combine their strength and coordinate their policies, they lack a shared coherent vision of the future (Kupchan, 2012). They are in opposition of a world that is continuously dominated by the West; however, they lack a common view of what is needed. So the Asia Pacific century will not be dominated by US, Brazil, India, or China, or any other country (Kupchan, 2012). According to Berger and Borer (2002, p.1), the non-polar international system, at odds with multi-polarity and pigeonholed by numerous distinctive monopolisations of power governing the world, is characterised by several centres that have meaningful power. The Asia Pacific century will make the world seem multipolar considering that the major powers host nearly half of the people of the world and are in charge of 75 per cent of the world GDP as well as more than 80 per cent of defence expenditure in the world (Ikenberry, 2011, p.58). Arguably, the US, because of its rising population, economic resilience, as well as military dominance, will rise into the top ranks in the coming decades. However, the hegemony that the US together with its Western allies has revelled in since Second World War is declining fast. This can be evidenced by the fact that in 1950s the US and the Western allies contributed almost 70 per cent of the global output, but they now merely half of it and this is expected to reduce further. For this reason, the wealth of China is projected to exceed that of the US by 2025 (Holz, 2008, p.1665). Moreover, it is foreseen by the World Bank that the China's renminbi, euro, and dollar will be co-equal by 2025. It is further expected that the collective GDP of Russia, India, china, and Brazil will equal the current leading developed countries by 2032. India exists in an unsafe neighbourhood, which according to Holz (2008, p.1667) will surround its geopolitical ascension. Territorial disputes and rivalry with China, explicit aggression from Pakistan, as well as closeness to Iran and Afghanistan will prevent India from dominating the Asia Pacific century Conclusion In conclusion, scholars have hypothesized that China will dominate the worldwide economy during the Asia Pacific century; but, this will not be the case because China does not have egalitarian system of government, so, this will counterweight its competence and performance. Besides that, China success depends heavily on resources that it has, and which other countries do not have, such as superior industrial and transport infrastructure, massive labour pool, meritocratic as well as bureaucracy leadership, among others. As argued in the essay, there is country that will play a dominating role during the Asia Pacific century, because no country will have a combination of ideological and material forte required to dominate. Technology, political environment, resources, and economic power are among the factors that will dominate the Asia Pacific Century. References Berger, M. & Borer, D., 2002. The Rise of East Asia: Critical Visions of the Pacific Century. London: Routledge. Choi, J.K. & Moon, C.-i., 2010. Understanding Northeast Asian regional dynamics: inventory checking and new discourses on power, interest, and identity. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.343-72. Dellios, R., 2005. The Rise of China as a Global Power. The Culture Mandala, vol. 6, no. 2, pp.1-10. Gilboy, G.J. & Heginbotham, E., 2012. Chinese and Indian Strategic Behavior: Growing Power and Alarm. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Gungwu, W. & Wong, J., 1998. China's Political Economy. Bukit Batok, Singapore: World Scientific. Harte, J., 2014. Management Crisis and Business Revolution. Piscataway Township, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Holz, C.A., 2008. China’s Economic Growth 1978–2025: What We Know Today About China’s Economic Growth Tomorrow. World Development, vol. 36, no. 10, pp.1665–91. Ikenberry, G.J., 2011. The Future of the Liberal World Order: Internationalism After America. Foreign Affairs, vol. 90, no. 3, pp.56-62, 63-68. Kupchan, C.A., 2012. Why Nobody Will Dominate the Twenty-First Century. [Online] Available at: http://www.cfr.org/history-and-theory-of-international-relations/why-nobody-dominate-twenty-first-century/p27958 [Accessed 19 March 2015]. Lieber, R.J., 2012. Power and Willpower in the American Future: Why the United States Is Not Destined to Decline. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Mearsheimer, J.J., 2010. The Gathering Storm: China’s Challenge to US Power in Asia. Chinese Journal of International Politics , vol. 3, no. 4, pp.381-96. Pan, C., 2013. The Asian/Chinese Century from the Chinese Perspective. Griffith Asia Quarterly, vol. 1, no. 1, pp.30-52. Peterson Institute, 2012. The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Asia-Pacific Integration: A Quantitative Assessment. Washington, D.C: Peterson Institute. Roberts, S., 2009. In 2025, India to Pass China in Population, U.S. Estimates. [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/16/world/asia/16census.html?_r=0 [Accessed 19 March 2015]. The International Economy, 2013. The Asian Century: Reality or Hype? Washington, D.C: The International Economy. Read More