FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2617824872> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2617824872 endingPage "41" @default.
• W2617824872 startingPage "1" @default.
• W2617824872 abstract "INTRODUCTIONA day after assuming office for the second time in December 2012, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe authored an opinion piece in Project Syndicate advocating the creation of a 'democratic security diamond' (DSD) to safeguard the maritime commons stretching from the Indian Ocean region to the western Pacific. Japan, The United States, India and Australia would form each point of this anticipated diamond, with Abe arguing that Chinese coercion in both the East and South China Seas directly threatened the interests and values of these four states. Together, they needed to prevent the South China Sea from becoming a Lake Beijing from which aircraft carriers and attack submarines, capable of launching missiles with nuclear warheads could be based, with the purpose of intimidating the region (Abe 2012).This paper seeks to assess Abe's DSD from Australia's perspective: how receptive might Australia be to participation in a quadrilateral initiative among these four democratic states? The paper will offer a historical background to the antecedent to the DSD, the Quadrilateral Dialogue (QD) of 2007, and explain why for Australia, such an initiative was premature. Second, it will suggest a number of ways that the contemporary strategic environment has changed since the QD ended with a whimper back in 2008. Third, the paper will assess how the present, Coalition government is likely to view quadrilateral cooperation.This will involve analysis of Australia's perception of its strategic and political environment, including the threats and risks identified in the latest 2016 Defense White Paper; Australia's existing bilateral and trilateral relationships with Japan and the United States, and whether a quad will be complementary to or undermine these relationships; whether the quad will assist in the development of closer relations with India or detract from it; and finally, is the idea of a 'democratic' community becoming more of a priority for Canberra and the Region? In making this assessment it will be necessary to also assess whether Australia will independently and proactively accept or reject a quad, or simply follow the lead of the US.I will argue that Australia's interests are served by closer quadrilateral cooperation between the four countries, but in a looser and less formal format than Abe's DSD idea. In the short term, however, the emergence of the DSD is still under question primarily because of India's reluctance to be perceived to be taking an overtly antiChina stance, and as a result of the fall-out from Australia's recent decision to procure submarines from France, rather than Japan. In the longer term, and assuming continued Chinese assertiveness in the East and South China Seas, strategic convergence between the four nations is inevitable on structural and interest based factors, providing more fertile ground for a future DSD.HISTORICAL BACKGROUND : 2007 QI AND WHY THE RUDD GOVERNMENT PULLED OUTJapan's first attempt to engender deeper strategic cooperation between Japan, Australia, India and the United States - the Quadrilateral Dialogue (QD) of 2007-was a short-lived experiment that ultimately failed to gain traction in the face of strong Chinese opposition and the loss of office by its major proponents in Australia, Japan and the US. Prime Minister Abe was widely acknowledged as the main protagonist behind the QD, with firm support from the Bush Administration, particularly US Vice President Dick Cheney.The first and only meeting between the four states took place in May 2007, on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum in Manila, and involved first- assistant secretary level foreign ministry officials. On getting wind of the planned meeting, China issued formal diplomatic demarche notes to each of the Quad countries protesting against what it perceived to be the creation of an 'axis of democracies', or a 'mini-NATO', formed with the purpose of encirclement (Nicholson 2007; Varadarajan 2007). …" @default.
• W2617824872 created "2017-06-05" @default.
• W2617824872 creator A5030253494 @default.
• W2617824872 date "2016-10-01" @default.
• W2617824872 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2617824872 title "Abe's Democratic Security Diamond and New Quadrilateral Initiative: An Australian Perspective" @default.
• W2617824872 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2617824872 type Work @default.
• W2617824872 sameAs 2617824872 @default.
• W2617824872 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2617824872 countsByYear W26178248722020 @default.
• W2617824872 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2617824872 hasAuthorship W2617824872A5030253494 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C191935318 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C2778137410 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C2778304055 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C2779010840 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C3116431 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C555826173 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C138885662 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C17744445 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C191935318 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C199539241 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C2778137410 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C2778304055 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C2779010840 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C3116431 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C41895202 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C555826173 @default.
• W2617824872 hasConceptScore W2617824872C94625758 @default.
• W2617824872 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2617824872 hasLocation W26178248721 @default.
• W2617824872 hasOpenAccess W2617824872 @default.
• W2617824872 hasPrimaryLocation W26178248721 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W1117648869 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W158542427 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W1603138962 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W1895647464 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2004031370 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2019646215 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2058645718 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2148110012 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2156458577 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2170298094 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2176651281 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2391361979 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2593147515 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W274653344 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2810472964 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2943625149 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W3194725991 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W3195329014 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W163618624 @default.
• W2617824872 hasRelatedWork W2602164999 @default.
• W2617824872 hasVolume "30" @default.
• W2617824872 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2617824872 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2617824872 magId "2617824872" @default.
• W2617824872 workType "article" @default.