ABSTRACTS

01 New Developments in the United States’ Deployment of the Indo-

26 An Assessment of the Effect and Prospect of the US Indo-PacificPacific Strategy and Its Impact on China’s Peripheral Security, by Su Xiaohui, Deputy Director and Associate Research Fellow at Department for American Studies, CIIS.Since the Biden administration issued the Indo-Pacific Strategy of the United States in February 2022, it has stepped up regional strategic deployment and focused on piecing together various mini-multilateral security mechanisms to contain China and other competitors: strengthening military and security cooperation between the United States and the Philippines with active participation of Japan and Australia; promoting the “institutionalization” of US-Japan-ROK cooperation; accelerating and expanding the trilateral security partnership among the US, the UK and Australia; and consolidating the QUAD mechanism including the US, Japan, India and Australia.The United States takes Southeast Asia as the center stage for the implementation of its Indo-Pacific Strategy and uses the “offshore balance” strategy to build a multilevel and networked alliance and partner system to deter China.At the same time, it vigorously promotes the transformation of maritime military strategy, strives to create the linkage effect between the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, and intends to coerce regional allies to jointly intervene militarily.This makes it more difficult for China to maintain stability in its neighborhood and the region, especially to defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity, and the risk of conflict between China and the US also rises.In the face of these severe challenges, China should adhere to the bottom-line thinking, resolutely defend its national interests,and actively shape the surrounding security environment to break through the strategic layout of the United States.Strategy, by Chen Jimin, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the Institute of International Strategic Studies, Party School of the Central Committee of CPC (National Academy of Governance).The United States has four resource advantages in advancing its Indo-Pacific Strategy, namely, the historical basis laid by its long-term ties with the Indo-Pacific region, the important material basis provided for by its strong comprehensive strength,the external conditions created by the complex geopolitical ecology in the Indo-Pacific region, and the rich strategic experience accumulated in its long-term strategic competition.The Indo-Pacific Strategy of the United States has made some progress at the cognitive, policy and strategic levels.Firstly, the proposition and promotion of the Indo-Pacific Strategy has enhanced the bipartisan understanding of the importance of the Indo-Pacific region in the United States, and also promoted the attention and policy follow-up of other major countries (or groups of countries) on the Indo-Pacific region.Secondly, the overall framework of the US Indo-Pacific Strategy has been formed and is being improved.Lastly, the US Indo-Pacific Strategy poses a severe challenge to China, which is regarded as its main competitor.However, the promotion of the strategy is also faced with six constraints, namely, the goal positioning of the Indo-Pacific Strategy, the domestic political and economic situation in the United States, the predicament of the US’ alliance strategy, the integration degree of the US Indo-Pacific Strategy and the regional strategies pursued by countries in the region, China’s development and response, and the change of the global security situation.The future of the strategy therefore depends not solely on the will and actions of the United States, but also on the combined influence of multiple elements.

52 Breakthroughs and Dilemmas of the Macron Government’s “NewAfrica Policy”, by Gu Mingfei, Associate Professor at the School of International Relations and Deputy Director at the Institute of European Studies, Sun Yat-Sen University; Huang Kaiyue, Undergraduate at the School of International Relations, Sun Yat-Sen University.On February 27, 2023, French President Emmanuel Macron delivered an important speech on Africa policy for his second term in office.This speech together with the French National Strategic Review released by the end of 2022 set the tone of the Macron government’s “New Africa Policy”.This “New Africa Policy” is embodied as follows: France will reduce its intervention in Africa; give African countries more autonomy in military and economic fields; accelerate the return of works of art to African countries; and push ahead the reconciliation process with Algeria, a major North African country.In this process, France’s “concession” to Africa is the basic line,strategic contraction is the overall choice, and diplomatic multilateralism is a long-term trend, aimed at improving France’s image, wooing African countries, and counterbalancing the influence of non-Western countries.It cannot be denied that the Macron government’s “New Africa Policy” has certain progressive significance and helps to promote the normalization and development of France-Africa relations.However, the decline of France’s relative strength greatly reduces the effectiveness of its policy,and many unresolved historical issues in France-Africa relations will seriously undercut France’s strategic credibility in Africa.

75 Technical Characteristics, Political Constraints, and US Foreign ArmsSales: An Examination Centering on US Dilemma of UAV Sales to the Middle East, by She Gangzheng, Associate Professor at the Department of International Relations and Director of the Overseas Security Research Center, School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University; Luo Tianyu,Doctoral Student at the Department of International Relations, School of Social Sciences, Tsinghua University.Since the beginning of the 21st century, many new players and types of weapons have emerged in the global arms market, and the arms sales policy of the United States has also undergone a series of changes.In the United States’ foreign arms sales,the sale of military drones to the Middle East is particularly worthy of investigation.The United States has been retrenching strategically in the Middle East for nearly a decade, looking to allies in the region to shoulder more of the security burden.However, the United States has never sold the highly concerned and badly needed military drones to its allies in the Middle East, and instead has “sat idly by” watching several countries to enter this growing high-tech military market.This paper argues that the politicization of disputes between political parties over human rights issues and concerns about the proliferation of its own technology are the main constraints for the United States to sell UAVs to Middle Eastern countries, while the US has not officially prevented its regional allies from importing military UAVs from other channels, including China, due to the consideration of weapon and equipment systems and regional strategic balance.The characteristics of weapons and equipment themselves, the reality of the political multi-polarization trend in the Middle East and the constraints of domestic political polarization have currently caught the US’UAV sales to the Middle East in a dilemma, but we should pay attention to the possibility of the United States to make corresponding adjustments to its arms sales policy in the face of major challenges.

102 The Ambition and Limits of the EU’s New Green Industrial Deal, by Dr.Dong Yifan, Assistant Research Professor at the Institute of European Studies, CICIR; Zhao Hongtu Research Professor and Director of the Energy Security Research Center, CICIR.In February 2023, the European Commission published the “Green Deal Industrial Plan for the Net-Zero Age”, which is the first industrial policy developed by the EU in recent years to support the development of green industries.Its introduction shows that in the face of growing geopolitical tensions, intensified competition in green industry and the internal driving force wrought by energy economic transformation, the EU will lead the development of green industry with a “competition-focused” and “government-led”industrial policy on the basis of actively promoting green transformation and encouraging green industry.This is a major departure from the EU’s previous green industrial policies.In order to enhance the competitiveness and influence of its green industry and rules, and achieve the “de-risk”of the supply chain, the EU has constructed a green industry New Deal that includes encouraging the development of production capacity and innovation capacity, boosting active government intervention, embedding protectionist policies and carrying out “camp” cooperation.Given the strong protectionist and geopolitical overtones of the Green New Deal,its implementation may have a negative impact on the development of the global green industry and related supply chains, and the practice of setting China as a “de-risk” target will also have an impact on the relevant China-EU cooperation, which is not conducive to its goal of green industry development and energy transformation.

128 “Survival Crisis” and Related Situations and Japan’s PolicyOrientation towards Taiwan, by Lyu Yaodong, Professor at the School of International Politics and Economics, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and Senior Research Fellow and Doctoral Supervisor at the Institute of Japanese Studies, CASS; Ju Jiaying, Doctoral Student at the School of International Politics and Economics, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.From 2015, when the concept of “survival crisis situation” was put forward, to 2021, when Japan declared that “something happening to Taiwan” would lead to a “survival crisis situation”, Japan has made a lot of preparation to intervene in the Taiwan issue from the perspective of domestic legislation.As a dynamic variable,the “survival crisis situation” is regarded by the Japanese government as a “situation with important impact” when the situation is not very serious; and when the situation is serious, it is identified as a “situation involving armed attacks”.In response to the “Taiwan crisis”, the Japanese government tends to identify the “situation” as the “survival crisis situation”, the “situation with important impact” or the “situation involving armed attacks”, but under the influence of factors such as the political shift to the right, the orientation of national interests, and the Japan-US alliance,the Japanese government tends to arbitrarily interpret the “situation”,which is essential to find the most favorable justification for its armed intervention in the Taiwan Strait.It is also a pretext for it to follow the US to suppress China on the Taiwan issue.Japan’s increased involvement in the Taiwan issue through public opinion campaigning, strengthening domestic legislation, enhancing the Japan-US alliance mechanism and other measures will inevitably have a serious impact on China-Japan relations and regional security.

150 The Biden Administration’s Arms Sales Policy towards Taiwan andIts Implications, by Chen Yiyuan, Lecturer at the Institute of Overseas Chinese and Regional Studies, Huaqiao University.Arms sales to Taiwan are the most direct and effective means of the US government to improve Taiwan’s ability to “hold on for assistance” under the existing policy framework.The basic policy purpose of the US arms sales to Taiwan is to maintain the existence of Taiwan as an independent “political entity”,and the realistic goal of the policy is to demonstrate security commitment to Taiwan, send a clear signal of deterrence to the mainland, and avoid falling into China-US conflict.The Biden administration has accelerated the pace of arms sales to Taiwan, and has made detailed and leapforward adjustments to its arms sales policy to Taiwan in terms of policy framework, sale forms, communication mechanisms, dialogue channels,and sale principles.The US arms sales to Taiwan have changed from paid arms sales to free military aid, from all-American weapons to joint production, and from second-hand old used equipment to weapons at the same level currently in service with the US military.All these changes reflect the policy trend of the US government towards Taiwan from “strategic ambiguity” to “strategic clarity”.Affected by the Ukraine crisis,the Biden administration is using arms sales policy to Taiwan to promote the Ukrainization of the Taiwan issue, create a “porcupine island”,and strengthen the strength and guts of the Democratic Progressive Party authorities to “reject reunification with military force” and “seek independence”.On the one hand, the US government intends to arm Taiwan through its arms sales policy; on the other hand, it tries to avoid the United States and Taiwan embroiled in military conflict, reflecting the two-sided arms sales policy of the United States towards Taiwan,which indicates that a consensus has not been reached within the US government to abandon the traditional strategic ambiguity policy toward Taiwan.The Biden administration’s arms sales policy to Taiwan has undoubtedly intensified tensions across the Taiwan Strait and thrown new and complicated variables into China-US relations.