Northeast Asia Forum is supervised by Ministry of Education of PRC, and sponsored by Jilin University. It is an authoritative academic journal, aiming to promote international cooperation, economic and trade, friendly exchanges, especially emphasizing on the strategic issues among Northeast Asian countries. Its scope covers studies in political, economic, historical, cultural, regional cooperation and international relations of Northeast Asia, and also lays stress on the development and new trends in all industries in Northeast Asian and Asia-Pacific areas.
The journal is included in CSSCI.
Editor-in-Chief Zhu Xianping
Deputy Editor-in-Chief Li Yingwu
Editorial Board Lowell Dittmer (U.S.); Lee Il-houng (ROK); Mikhail Titarenko (RUS); Davydov Andrey (RUS); Ogawa Yuhei(JAP); Wang Jisi; Zhu Xianping; Liu Jiangyong; Liu Debin; Li Junjiang; Li
The theory of English-American classical geopolitics stemmed from the Great Game of Anglo-Russia in the latter half of 19th century. However, this theory is confronted with two main problems. In light of this, by creating the concept of “the great rimland power” and making “the maritime hegemony” and “the pivot power” more accurately, this paper accomplishes the correction for the theory. Then using it and the historical analysis, the paper studies the structure of classical geopolitics, its trajectory, driving force and laws of transition. Contrasting to the theory, historical experience and the current situation, from the perspective of geopolitics, this paper argues that there are seven positive conditions for the continuing rise of China in the age of post-classical geopolitics.
The world now is facing with difficulties for long-term economic growth, and the coexistence of the low growth rate, low inflation, and low interest rate. The short-term cause of this is the structural changes on the supply and demand sides under the shock of the global financial crisis. But in the long run, the more fundamental cause is the historical change of the growth structure of the world economy. The financialization of the US economy since 1980s is a very important structural change of the development of global capitalism in recent five to six centuries. On the one hand, it made the US economy overcome the “geographical-real sector economic space” since 16th century, and open a new “electronic-financial economic space,” and become a “finance state” depending mainly on the advanced financial sector and free flow of capital; on the other hand, it made a double “core and periphery” structure around the US and caused a specialization between “finance states” and the “trade states” in the world, which made other developed and developing countries including the BRICS countries meet with obstacles for sustained growth. The difficulties of world economic growth has close relations with the transformation of Chinese economic growth model; the slowdown of global growth will affect the transformation of Chinese economic growth; and the latter, combined with the positive role of China in the global economic governance, development of the “Belt and Road” and the regional economic cooperation, will become new driving forces for the long-term economic growth of the world.
In June 2016, heads of China and Russia jointly proposed the initiative about the establishment of the Euro-Asian partnership, including possible absorption of members of Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The Euro-Asian partnership has become a new agenda of Sino-Russian cooperation. The construction of the Euro-Asian partnership is not only related to the development of Sino-Russian partnership of comprehensive strategic cooperation and the development of the docking of “One Belt and One Union,” but also concerns the regionalization and strategic situation of Eurasia. This paper analyzes the background of the Russian initiative about the Euro-Asian partnership, discusses the main content and the possible impact on China of the Russian initiative, and puts forward the principles of Sino-Russian cooperation in this new field.
Although the relation between China and Russia has become a model of relations among major powers in the world, the bilateral economic and trade cooperation has long lagged behind. The Silk Road Economic Belt proposed by China in 2013 and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) led by Russia in 2015 provide a realistic basis for the docking of “One Belt and One Union.” The joint declaration of the docking not only maintains a high level of cooperation for the two partners, but also provides an effective platform for economic and trade cooperation. Starting with the present situation and problems of the relations between China and Russia, this paper points out that the docking of “One Belt and One Union” is the way to realize effective cooperation. After the analysis of strategic basis and economic foundation of the docking, it puts forward policy proposals to promote further cooperation between China and Russia.
To enhance the effectiveness of compliance with the defective freedom of navigation operational assertions, on the one hand, the U.S. builds a global freedom of navigation operational assertions at the strategic level and uses all resources available to promote “the freedom of navigation rules” with other countries.① On the other hand, through the pathways to pushing forward the regime by using strength and wisdom like “building alliance” and “signing mutual trust agreements” within its global freedom of navigation operational assertions, the U.S. reshapes the environment for implementing the freedom of navigation operational assertions so as to put the U.S at an advantage in the compliance bargaining.② How the U.S. behave regarding the South China Sea is obvious and this article attempts to sort out this behavior pattern and comprehensively examine the U.S. safeguarding freedom of navigation. This study is significant for China’s decision-making to tackle its conflicts with the U.S. on the sea in regard to freedom of navigation.
Over the past 25 years since the establishment of diplomatic ties, Sino-ROK relations have developed by leaps and bounds, and its complexity cannot be ignored either. Actually, there are many uncertainty factors in the Sino-ROK relations, and to a certain extent, they have restricted the cooperation expectation between the two countries. From the perspective of the impact and control of uncertainty factors, this paper analyzed the uncertainty and certainty of Sino-ROK relations, especially the United States geo-political positioning, the ROK security strategy, the DPRK nuclear-weapon trends, and the cognitive difference between Chinese and South Korean civil societies. With that, this paper put forward the policy proposals like that: to understand the development trends of Sino-ROK relations rationally, and stress that the cooperation is still inevitable; to deepen bilateral mutual understanding and tolerance, and keep the peninsula denuclearization as the common interest; to effectively utilize the spillover effects of Sino-ROK economy and trade, and improve the effectiveness of bilateral cooperation mechanism; to promote the atmosphere in which the social values in China and ROK will be mutual tolerance and mutual reference, and consolidate the basis of civil trust.
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the global energy landscape, including energy supply and demand, energy consumption structure, regional energy production and consumption patterns, has undergone major adjustments. In the next 20 years or longer, the energy landscape would change further. The adjustment of global energy landscape caused severe competition in the international energy market, which reduced the geopolitical risks of energy to a certain extent, but resulted in shrinking international energy investment. Cooperation in Northeast Asia region should be based on both the actual conditions of Northeast Asia and the new global energy landscape. Pragmatic cooperation should be promoted in the construction of a regional energy cooperation mechanism and a common energy market, the development of conventional and unconventional energy, the interconnection of regional power facilities, and the reform of global energy governance system.
This paper proposed the concept of “Asian-European Development Community.” Connectivity seems to be at the lower end of the Belt and Road Initiative, but it is indeed of the most practical and theoretical significance, which makes it the key to realizing the Asian-European Development Community. Connectivity is in the core and priority of the Belt and Road Initiative. Meanwhile, it serves as the basis and important content of developing “Xi Jinping model,” which to some extent represents the exploration and practice of the development path by the BRICS and other developing countries, and it proves to be effective. Connectivity is the starting point for Asian-European BRICS countries (China, Russia and India) to conduct Asian-European cooperation and also offers the point cut for the integration of the Belt and Road, Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Connectivity serves both as the method and the guarantee to realize Asian-European Development Community. China is an Asian-European country with strong economic and technological strength, which provides strong support for Asian-European connectivity. With the shift of world economic and political gravity to Asia, China would shoulder responsibilities for human development. Realizing the Asian-European Development Community by connectivity under the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative is the crucial step of historical significance.
