Sino-American Competition and the Future of America’s European Strategy

Simón, Luis; Desmaele, Linde; Becker, Jordan

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3732228

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Added to this development was the specific defence policy stance of the Trump administration to NATO and European security, with warnings from the president that the United States could potentially leave NATO or not meet its responsibilities for collective defence under Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. Again, this was largely read as a US downgrading of Europe in Washington's overall grand strategy towards rivalry with China (Simón et al, 2021). To be sure, calls for Europeans to do more for their security from the United States are not new, but the prospect of a sitting US president being responsible for the wholesale deterioration of the NATO alliance had a seismic effect on how European governments viewed defence co‐operation through the EU.…”

Section: The Edf and The Eu's Geoeconomic Turnmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Liberalisation to Industrial Policy: Towards a Geoeconomic Turn in the European Defence Market?

Fiott

2024

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European defence market can be described as a geoeconomically relevant sector that forms part of Europe's overall economy, not least in the way that it is a producer of military capabilities and technologies and a repository of scientific skills. Traditionally, European Union (EU)‐level steps to support and liberalise the sector have reflected a regulatory approach marked by soft law, but in recent years, the EU has also developed financial tools to incentivise defence co‐operation. Looking specifically at the European Defence Fund (EDF), this article views this transition as evidence of a ‘geoeconomic turn’ in European defence market policy that is a response to structural challenges related to technology control, security of supply and geopolitical competition. Employing relative gains theory and liberal intergovernmentalism, this article charts the transition from market liberalisation to industrial policy in EU defence market initiatives based on specific intra‐ and extra‐political dynamics.

show abstract

Section: The Edf and The Eu's Geoeconomic Turnmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Liberalisation to Industrial Policy: Towards a Geoeconomic Turn in the European Defence Market?

Fiott

2024

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are also many publications on the international scientific market which analyze the position of the European Union in a world defined by American-Chinese rivalry. In addition to the works on its political and geopolitical dimension, it is possible to get acquaint with the reflection on its technological dimension (i.e., Aho & Duffield, 2020;Biba & Wolf;Cameron, 2019;Chen, 2016;Grosse, 2014;Kaska, Beckvard, & Minárik, 2019;Lehne, 2020;Lippert & Perthes, 2020;Count, 2021;Perthes, 2021;Peterson, 2016;Pop & Grigoras, 2021;Rühlig & Björk, 2020;Santander, 2014;Simón, 2021;Simón, Desmaele, & Becker, 2021;Smith & Taussig, 2019;Starrs & Germann, 2021;Umbach, 2021;Walkowski, 2019).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

European Union at the Dawn of Technological Cold War

Gajewski

2023

TIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the study was to construct a picture of the EU’s global position in a world defined by the US-Chinese technological Cold War. Morphological analysis has been used to enable a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between the technological and social domains. Structured interviews were also used to support the analytical process. The results of the exploration showed a picture of the EU’s multi-level technological weakness compared to competing powers. While the EU is not a weak entity, its future international position will depend on the creation of its own technological capabilities and on cooperation with the United States. Both lines of action are subject to multiple risks. Firstly, some aggressive technological developments (such as the plans to place microchips production in Europe) can generate more problems than diversification. Secondly, the EU must extend its work on high-tech (primarily AI) beyond the logic of market regulation and focus on their geopolitical and military dimension. It must also be ready for possible obstacles in cooperation with the United States. The alternative to this track, as the analysis shows, is the technological, and hence the political and economic peripheral status, where two technological superpowers – the United States and authoritarian China will compete. The most negative result for the EU is the status of “digital colony”. The paper aspires to be a part of the effort to fill the existing void in the scientific output of Polish social sciences, regarding exploration of the geopolitical dimension of technological progress, especially its impact on EU’s position in the new power distribution model, which will be the result of the rivalry between the US and China.

show abstract

NATO-People’s Republic of China Competition

Tekir

2023

Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti’nin (ÇHC) ekonomik, teknolojik ve siyasi alanlarında yükselişi, Soğuk Savaş’ın sona ermesinden sonra, Atlantik bloğuna yönelen en ciddi sistemik meydan okumadır. Amerika Birleşik Devletleri (ABD) Başkanı Donald Trump döneminde ÇHC’nin bu yükselişine yönelik önlemler, Trump’ın NATO ittifakına yönelik şüpheci tavrı nedeniyle tek taraflı olarak kalmıştır. Joe Biden’ın ABD başkanlığına seçilmesiyle transatlantik ittifakını güçlendiren politikası NATO’nun ÇHC konusunda ortak bir tutum almasını kolaylaştırmıştır. ÇHC’nin Rusya’nın Ukrayna işgalinde Rusya’yı destekleyen bir tutum alması, Şincan bölgesinde Uygurlara yönelik uygulamaları ve Tayvan konusunda sertleşen üslubu Avrupa’nın ÇHC konusundaki tehdit algılamasını değiştiren faktörlerdir. Böylece, Avrupalı ülkeler de ÇHC konusunda ABD ile benzer konuma gelmeye başlamıştır. NATO, 2021 yılında ÇHC’yi sistemik bir meydan okuyucu olarak tanımlamış ve 2022 yılında da ÇHC’nin neden olduğu güvenlik tehditleri karşısında ortak hareket edeceğini açıklamıştır. NATO, politik, ekonomik ve dijital alanları ÇHC ile rekabet alanları olarak tanımlamıştır. NATO’nun ÇHC ile mücadele kapsamında Asya-Pasifik bölgesinde ortaklıklarını güçlendireceği, politik olarak ABD-Avrupa ülkeleri arasında ÇHC konusunda ortak bir tutum almak için iş birliğini tahkim edeceği ve ÇHC’nin siber alandaki faaliyetleri için siber güvenlik alanında aktif bir pozisyon alacağı beklenmelidir.

show abstract

Sino-American Competition and the Future of America’s European Strategy

Cited by 3 publications

References 31 publications

From Liberalisation to Industrial Policy: Towards a Geoeconomic Turn in the European Defence Market?

From Liberalisation to Industrial Policy: Towards a Geoeconomic Turn in the European Defence Market?

European Union at the Dawn of Technological Cold War

NATO-People’s Republic of China Competition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About