@Noahpinion's latest substack illustrates an important general lesson for how
approaches "Great Power Competition" w/
: don't ignore "small states"
[THREAD] https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/ally-with-vietnam


[THREAD] https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/ally-with-vietnam
Noah's article focuses on
-
relations, directly comparing
to the major regional powers in the "Quad": 

(+
) https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/11/asia/quad-us-india-japan-australia-intl-hnk/index.html







Sure the Quad is important, but
is also already in rivalry (
), a simmering territorial dispute (
), or full-on conflict (
) with each of those members.




As major regional powers, they are all "billiard balls" (to borrow from Wolfers) who will keep bumping into one another (as major powers are apt to do) https://www.amazon.com/Discord-Collaboration-Essays-International-Politics/dp/0801806917
As such these states are unlikely to fully align with
...or fully align with one another: major regional powers like to keep other major regional powers at arms length.

Need evidence for this claim? See
's historically lukewarm participation in European Integration. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/10/16/splendid-isolation-again-europe-as-narrated-during-the-referendum-campaign/

Of course,
-- as an external power -- should continue to support the formal alliances it has with two of the three quad members:
(via the 1952 Security Treaty) &
(via the 1951 ANZUS pact).



And
continue down the road of building up its "special relationship"/strategic partnership/etc with
https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/beca-india-us-trade-agreements-rajnath-singh-mike-pompeo-6906637/


But it is with the "small states" of that regional influence will be gained: it's where the "action is" in international politics. https://uwapress.uw.edu/book/9780295985244/small-states-in-international-relations/
Building relations with the small states in the region needs to be the focus of
policy towards, whether with
or other states. https://www.routledge.com/Small-States-and-Hegemonic-Competition-in-Southeast-Asia-Pursuing-Autonomy/Tang/p/book/9780367415228


Indeed, building relations with smaller states, in and out of the region, appears to be a focus of
policy.

Think of the RCEP agreement: a massive economic agreement that was an @ASEAN led initiative embraced by
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/11/16/rcep-a-new-trade-agreement-that-will-shape-global-economics-and-politics/

While the economic impact of RCEP remains to be seen, its creation illustrates why pulling out the TPP negotiations was a geopolitical and diplomatic "own goal" by
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/08/tpp-was-missed-opportunity-for-us-to-pressure-china-bob-corker.html

Think of
's Belt and Road Initiative: Currying favor with smaller states appears to have been a focus of the policy... https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1868102620968848

...though that initiative seems to be failing/drying up/winding down/sputtering https://rhg.com/research/bri-down-out/
Think of
's "vaccine diplomacy" efforts... https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2021-03-11/vaccine-diplomacy-paying-china

...though that is also running into issues. https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/China-cannot-win-the-great-vaccine-diplomacy-game-without-vaccines
So Noah is spot on: the focus of
policy in the region shouldn't be "The Quad" -- they'll "balance"
regardless -- but on
, the rest of @ASEAN, and other small states.
[END]



[END]