Maritime Strategies of Rising Powers: developments in China and Russia

Abstract

This paper seeks to uncover the drivers of maritime strategy formulation in Russia and China, two active players on the international stage that have often been identified as both rising and regional powers. The paper takes as its starting point the realist theory of state power and threat perception, which provide the means and motivation for states to accumulate material capabilities in an effort to safeguard their position in the international system. Given the increasing pressures of a changing security environment, China’s and Russia’s maritime strategies show a trend towards greater complexity and capability. The paper also addresses the impact of the revolution in military affairs ( rma ) and its subsequent manifestation as force transformation in Western states, especially the USA. Given that this new, qualitatively focused way of war has gained supremacy, at least where high-intensity inter-state war is concerned, the question remains of whether the Chinese and Russians will choose to emulate the leading powers in the system or, instead, will forge into the unknown and formulate an entirely different and innovative maritime strategy.

Notes

1 D Jordan, J Kiras, D Lonsdale, I Speller, C Tuck & CD Walton, Understanding Modern Warfare, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

2 B Posen, ‘Command of the commons: the military foundation of US hegemony’, International Security, 28(1), 2003, pp 5–46.

3 G Rose, ‘Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy’, World Politics, 51(1), 1998, pp 144–172.

4 S Walt, ‘Alliance formation and the balance of world power’, International Security, 9(4), 1985, pp 3–43; and R Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Relations, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.

5 S Walt, The Origins of Alliance, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987; and J Taliaferro, ‘State building for future war: neoclassical realism and the resource extractive state’, Security Studies, 15(3), 2006, pp 464–495.

6 K Waltz, Theory of International Politics, New York: McGraw Hill, 1979.

7 J Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: WW Norton, 2001.

8 A Tellis, J Bially, C Layne & M MacPherson, Measuring National Power in the Post-industrial Age, Santa Monica, CA: rand Corporation, 2000.

9 D Flemes, Regional Leadership in the Global System: Ideas, Interests and Strategies of Regional Powers, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010.

10 J Singer, S Bremer & J Stuckey, ‘Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820–1965’, in B Russett (ed), Peace, War, and Numbers, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1972, pp 19–48; and Latest Correlates of War Project cinc database, 2012, at http://www.correlatesofwar.org/COW2%20Data/Capabilities/nmc3-02.htm.

11 A Hu & H Men, ‘The rising of modern China: comprehensive national power and grand strategy’, Seoul, 19–20, 2004, pp 22–23.

12 Latest data on military expenditures from the sipri database, 2012, at http://www.sipri.org/databases/milex.

13 C Gray, Strategy for Chaos: Revolutions in Military Affairs and the Evidence of History, London: Frank Cass, 2004.

14 D Adamsky, The Culture of Military Innovation: The Impact of Cultural Factors on the Revolution in Military Affairs in Russia, the US, and Israel, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2010.

15 SG Gorshkov, The Sea Power of the State, Moscow: Soviet Ministry of Defence, 1976.

16 Gray, Strategy for Chaos.

17 G Till, Seapower: A Guide for the Twenty-first Century, New York: Routledge, 2009.

18 A Friedberg, In the Shadow of the Garrison State: America’s Anti-statism and its Cold War Strategy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000.

19 Taliaferro, ‘State building for future war’.

20 Friedberg, In the Shadow of the Garrison State.

21 R Cohen, ‘Threat perception in international crisis’, Political Science Quarterly, 93(1), 1978, pp 93–107.

22 Walt, The Origins of Alliance.

23 J Herz, Political Realism and Political Idealism: A Study in Theories and Realities, University of California Press, 1951.

24 J Resende-Santos, ‘Anarchy and the emulation of military systems: military organization and technology in South America, 1870–1930’, in B Frankel (ed), Realism: Restatement and Renewal, London: Frank Cass, 1996.

25 Rose, ‘Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy’.

26 T Mahnken, ‘China’s anti-access strategy in historical and theoretical perspective’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 34(3), 2011, pp 299–323.

27 J Arquilla & D Ronfeldt, Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy, Santa Monica, CA: rand Corporation, 2001.

28 EH Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations, New York: Harper and Row, 1964.

29 T Christensen, Useful Adversaries: Grand Strategy, Domestic Mobilization, and Sino-American Conflict, 1947–1958, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996.

30 Ibid.

31 Till, Seapower.

32 S Blank, Russian Military Politics and Russia’s 2010 Defense Doctrine, ssi, 2011.

33 S Flanagan & M Marti, The People’s Liberation Army and China in Transition, Washington, DC: National Defense University, 2003.

34 P Bracken, ‘Sidewise technologies: national security and global power implications’, Military Review, September–October 2005, pp 64–67; and Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military Power of the People’s Republic of China, 2012, Annual Report to Congress, Washington, DC: Office of the Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense, 2012.

35 J Holmes & T Yoshihara, China’s Naval Strategy in the 21st Century: The Turn to Mahan, US Naval War College, 2007.

36 W Jisi & K Lieberthal, Addressing US–China Strategic Distrust, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2012.