EU-US Geopolitical Strategies in Greater Eurasia: Emphasizing Ukraine-South China Crisis

Document Type : مقالات علمی -پژوهشی

Authors

• Danyal Rezapoor ¹
• Reza Simbar ²
• Ahmad Jansiz ³

¹ PhD in International Relations, University of Guilan, Guilan, Iran.

² Professor of Political Science and International Relations, University of Guilan, Guilan, Iran

³ Associate Professor of Political Science and International Relations, University of Guilan, Guilan, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22067/pg.2021.27065.0

Abstract

With the end of the war, the geopolitical structure of the great Eurasian region of Russia, China, the United States and the European Union has engaged in competing for Ukraine and the South China Sea. From the perspective of Moscow and Beijing, the expansion of the United States, NATO and the European Union to the East was aimed at limiting the regional influence of Russia and China. As a result, Ukraine and the South Sea of ​​China have also led to a conflict zone between Russia, China and Western actors over regional influence and even a factor in the disagreement between the United States and the European Union, which is the basis for intensifying tensions and increasing Uncertainty has been created in the Greater Eurasia region. By stating this introduction, the authors suggest that their main question is that the tensions and geopolitical disputes between the United States, the European Union and Russia over the Ukrainian crisis, and the US-China differences with China in the South China Sea and the failure of the European Union with hegemony On the multilateral relations of these countries? The hypothesis of the article is that the disagreements and tensions between the European Union, the United States, Russia and the hegemonic demands in the Ukrainian crisis, the intensification of US-China divisions, and the political, economic cooperation of the EU with the two countries Russia and China, while weakening the European Union's security relations with the United States, have provided the ground for transition from a monopoly to a multi-polar system. The research method in this paper is descriptive-analytical and a tool for collecting library and virtual information

Keywords

• EU
• US
• Russia
• China
• balance of power

References

1- Anderson, J. G. (2018). Rancor And Resilience In The Atlantic Political Order: The Obama Years In Crises And EU-US Relations. Journal Of European Integration 40 (5): 621–636.

2- Böller, F., And Werle.S (2016). Fencing The Bear? Explaining US Foreign Policy Towards Russian Interventions. Contemporary Security Policy 37 (3): 319–340. doi:10.1080/13523260.2016.1202653

3- Brooks, S. G., And W. C. Wohlforth. (2016). The Rise And Fall Of The Great Powers In The Twenty-First Century. China’s Rise And The Fate Of America’s Global Position International Security 40 (3)

4- Csis(2015), Perspectives on the South China Sea: Diplomatic, Legal, and Security Dimensions of the Dispute. A Report of the CSIS Sumitro Chair for Southeast Asia Studies. ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELDLanham • Boulder • New York • Toronto • Plymouth, UK.

5- Duke, S., And C. Gebhard. (2017). The Eu And NATO’s Dilemmas With Russia And The Prospect For Deconfliction. European Security 26 (3): 379–397. doi:10.1080/09662839.2017.1352577.

6- Europian Council. (2016). Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe. A Global Strategy for The European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy. https://europa.eu/global-strategy/sites/global strategy/les/pages/les/eugs_review_web_13.pdf.

7- FathAbadi, Mehdi and Ramezani, Ahmad (2017), "China's Policy in the South, Maritime Policy and Power". World Politics Quarterly, Volume Six, No. 2, Summer, pp. 84-59(in persian).
8- Firoozabadi, Seyyed Jalal and Moradi, Manouchehr (2016), "Threat of the West, Russia's Liberation, and the Ukrainian Crisis." Foreign Relations Quarterly, Eighth, No. 2, Summer, pp. 45-71(in

9- Foot, R. (2016). China’s Resurgence And Its Effects On Transatlantic Relations PacNet Nr. 17 Pacific Forum CSIS Honolulu. Hawaii Number 17 Feb. 10. Accessed 17 June 2018. https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs public/legacy_files/files/publication/160210_PacNet_1617.pdf.

10- Foreign Policy(2011), America’s Pacific Century. https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/10/11/americas-pacific-century.

11- Gehring, T., K. Urbanski, And S. Oberthür. (2017). The European Union As An Inadvertent Great Power: EU Actorness And The Ukraine Crisis. Journal Of Common Market Studies 55 (4): 727–743. doi:10.1111/jcms.12530.

12- Haine, J.-Y. (2015). A New Gaullist Moment? European Bandwagoning And International Polarity. International Affairs 91 (5): 991–1008. doi:10.1111/1468-2346.12394

13- Hafeznia, Mohammad Reza (2017), Principles and Concepts of Geopolitics. Papli Publications.(in Persian).

14- Howorth, J. (2018). Strategic Autonomy And EU-NATO Cooperation: Threat Or Opportunity For Transatlantic Defence Relations?. Journal Of European Integration 40.

15- Kirchner, J. E., T. Christiansen, And H. Dorussen. (2016). EU China Security Cooperation In Context. In Security Relations between China And The European Union: From Convergence To Cooperation?, Edited By E. Kirchner, T. Christiansen, And H. Dorussen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

16- Larson, D. W. (2018). Outsourced Diplomacy: The Obama Administration And The Ukraine Crisis. In Triangular Diplomacy Among The United States, The European Union And The Russian Federation. Responses To The Crisis In Ukraine, Edited by A. Young and V. Birchfeld, 55–76, Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan.

17- Mearsheimer, J. J., And S. Walt. (2016). The Case for Offshore Balancing. Foreign Affairs July/August. 70–83.

18- Mearsheimer, John J. (2014). Why The Ukrine crisis is The West fault. The Liberal delusions that provoked Putin, Foreign Affairs, No. 93, http:// www. foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the-ukrinecrisis-is-the-wests-fault (accessed 25 November 2015).

19- Pejsova, E. (2016). Introduction: Light At The End Of The tunnel? In Sense And Sensibility. Addressing The south China Sea disputes, EU Institute for Security Studies Report No 28, May 2016, 5–10.

20- Riddervold, M. (2018a). The Maritime Turn In EU Foreign And Security Policies. Aims, Actors And Mechanisms Of Integration. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

21- Sabouri, Ziauddin and ghiyasi, Amir (2015), "Geopolitical Developments in the South China Sea and the Strategy of Regional and Subnational Castors; Effects and Consequences". Quarterly Journal of International Relations, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 80-51(in persian).

22- Smith, M. E. (2018a). The EU, The US And the Crisis Of Contemporary Multilateralism, In ‘Crises And EU-US Relations’. Journal of European Integration 40 (5): 539–553.

23- Smith, M. E. (2018b). Transatlantic Security Relations Since The European Security Strategy: What Role for The EU In Its Pursuit Of Strategic Autonomy. Journal Of European Integration 40 (5): 605–620.

24- Tunsjø, Ø. (2015). China’s Rise: Towards a Division Of Labor In Transatlantic Relations. In Responding To China’s Rise: US And EU Strategies, edited by. V. Aggarwal And S. Newland, 151–174. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
25- Vosoughi, Saeed, Safari, Asgar and Moradi F. Saideh (2016), "Ukraine's Developments and its Influence on the International System". Strategic Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 80, Autumn, pp. 54-71(inpersian).

26- Walt, Stephen M. (3 March 2014b). No Contest", Foreign Policy, http:// www. foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/03/03/no_contest_ukrine_obama_putin (accessed 25 September 2014).

27- Walt, Stephen M. (4 January 2014a). Why Are We So Busy trying To Figure Out Vladimir Putin? Foreign Policy, http:// www. foreignpolicy. com/ articles/2014/04/01/putin_personality_ politics_first_in_age (accessed 13 October 2014).

28- Yazdani, Enayatullah, Hur, Rahbar and Bahrami, Rostam (2017), "The Role of Russia and China in the Transition of the International System from Monopoly to Multi-Political." Political Science Quarterly, Ninth Year, No. 36, Summer, pp. 67-86(in persian).

29- Young, A., and V. Birchfield. (2017). Empirical Scene Setting: The Countours Of the Crisis And Response. In Triangular Diplomacy Among The United States, The European Union, And The Russian Federation. Responses To The Crisis In Ukraine, Edited by V. Birchfield and A. Young, 21–54. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.