Long-term security of the Asia-pacific are elusive because of the unpredictable geopolitical alignments and characteristics. The regional geo-politicos is far from acquiring stability, in fact, it may worsen further. This is especially applicable for Asia-pacific, as the states are long away from acquiring European character. Despite the claims for emerging security community, it is far from fructifying in reality. Thus, conjectured two-power system in Asia-pacific (between US and Chine), will not be able to assure a peaceful and stable future. the regional 'knot' of relations will be a persistent stumbling block, in any top down stable encapsulating of emerging relations. To solve this dilemma, however, writers have pointed to a rule based order in Asia-Pacific, where many international legal principles, norms and ethics are to guide emerging problems and issues. To what extent this is possible, it is difficult to propose. Yet keeping in mind the nature of the states and history of relations they are more likely to root for competition than cooperation. challenges to US primacy may not be a military challenge but a 'riot' of major powers in different regional domains, which is difficult to control as well as prevent until it fully runs its course (in terms of victors and vanquished). US geographical insularity may prevent in getting adversely effected or getting embroiled in any such eventuality all together, but China's neighbours may not be as lucky. As security analysts, one can hope and pray that precarious peace holds forever.
A conscientious student of international relations may be intrigued by the thought of another book on Asia-Pacific presumably arguing that China is the States the necessary balancer, emerging threat and United saving world from imminent security crisis. Their may not be entirely wrong, neither perception entirely correct, but partially true to the various degrees. In short, it depends upon how you look at it. This book is just not about the which may take a emerging rivalry, turn towards catastrophe, but a deeper analysis on how the key marker of emerging world politics can be seen and understood, and perhaps managed. This is pertinent, because an unprecedented deluge of force in the name of globalisation has been unleashed on the world. According to many scholars, this may radically change the traditional organisation of world, with a new global society of world citizens with common
cultural experiences or aspirations evolving. But what this may actually mean on the ground nobody is clear. This leads to paralysing confusion on the emerging world.
Lang-term secunity trends of the Asia-Pacific are elusive because of the unpredictable oeopolitical alignments and characteristies. The regional geo-politics is far from acquiring stability, in fact, it may worsen further. This has precisely to do with changing
strategic reality. China's rise as the most powerful constituent in Asia-Pacific, sends existing regional relations into tail-spin. But entirely focusing on China's rise, or its role in geopolitical stability, will be taking a traditional exclusively statist view. It will be
imposing a structural straitjacket to the multiple inter-relationships developing in the region. As, multiple social, economic and political relationships are developing in the region. They have their own value and impact, which cannot be lightly dismissed.
Though, it has been already pointed out earlier that this study anchors itself in state-centric analysis. But it is not the traditional billiard ball perspective, which is the focus. States, in their intermal and external characteristics, and role may have changed over the years. Especially, after undergoing more than two decades of rapid globalisation. It seems that the character of international relations is unlikely to revolutionary change for near future. States inter-relationship as well as their characteristics may have evolved over the years. State continues to be a central feature of global polity,
Geopolitical thinkers have pointed out that territory or space continues to be important determinant of relations. Many analyses on globalisation has begun to rethink on the centrality of territory. The quest for regional hegemony, if it's not a contest for territory, then what it is? Further, people's allegiances, loyalties and identities are bound up with nation-states. Nationalism remains one of the most powerful organising forces, especially in Asian societies. Migration, both inward and outward is likely to be a divisive factor. European societies may have undergone catharsis for the vinulent nationalism in two World Wars. Which may have led to overcoming of such divisive tendencies. But traditional Asian relations are susceptible to virulent nationalism. It is only in the last few years to decades that under an unprecedented economic growth, states have been able to bridle this nationalism. It is unlikely such nationalism can be effectively checked in real moments of crisis. Occasionally, this has proven to be correct by the people's opinions and demonstrations in case ot Japan, Philippines or Vietnam.

Indian Council of Social Science Research

English