{"id":13634,"date":"2014-05-02T06:00:13","date_gmt":"2014-05-01T20:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=13634"},"modified":"2014-05-05T06:35:16","modified_gmt":"2014-05-04T20:35:16","slug":"author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/","title":{"rendered":"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"HMS<\/a><\/p>\n

Thanks to Brigadier Will Taylor (ret.) for an elegant summary<\/a> of what seems to me to be the prevailing orthodoxy in Britain on this issue (in response to my piece here<\/a>). The core of his argument is that Britain has important interests in Asia, and that those interests are growing. So it\u2019s good policy to seek significant influence in Asia.<\/p>\n

Will makes three main points. The first notes the strength of Britain\u2019s interests in Asia, the second asserts that Britain can still achieve some objectives in the region, and the third questions my suggestion that Britain wants to be America\u2019s \u2018best friend in Asia\u2019.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s certainly true that Britain has substantial interests in Asia, and they\u2019re growing. The problem is, Britain can have interests but may still not have the heft to secure them.<\/p>\n

For example, Britain has deep economic interests in the region. But it doesn\u2019t follow that it has sufficient economic clout to get its way. Iceland\u2019s economy is almost entirely dependent on the EU\u2014nine of its top ten import and export partners are European<\/a> (the odd one out is China). Despite this deep engagement with Europe, it\u2019d be fanciful to suggest Reykjavik has much sway in Brussels, London, or Berlin.<\/p>\n

Of course Will is right to say Britain has an interest specifically in Asian security. There\u2019s a superpower competition unfolding here\u2014everyone has a deep interest. But in the 20th century Belgium had a deep interest in European security, providing it with the motivation for engagement but not the capacity to determine outcomes.<\/p>\n

The second point is about Britain\u2019s capacity in Asia. There are gradations between being irrelevant and being important; London\u2019s capacity is somewhere in the middle. Britain has been able to play a valuable role in HADR, and has some remaining partnerships in the region, typically with Commonwealth countries. \u00a0Britain is certainly capable of pursuing a modest engagement strategy along those lines.<\/p>\n

But it\u2019s a big jump from there to the assertion that Britain is \u2018strategically relevant\u2019, or to the idea that \u2018\u2026a strategic adversary must consider the possibility not only that Britain\u00a0might<\/i>\u00a0deploy a Queen Elizabeth Class carrier to a conflict half a world away, but to do so in the knowledge that it\u00a0can<\/i>, and when it\u2019s in its interests, will<\/i>.\u2019<\/p>\n

It doesn\u2019t seem credible to me that China would be influenced by the prospect of deployment of a British carrier. That\u2019s both because of the risks China could impose on the carrier itself, and because it doesn\u2019t seem credible that Britain would commit such valuable assets to a conflict in the region. The cost\/benefit calculation for Britain is simply too stark.<\/p>\n

As Will says, \u2018Britain isn\u2019t going to come riding over the horizon with a military contribution that\u2019ll shift the balance in a high-intensity war in Asia.\u2019 It wouldn\u2019t be sensible to place a carrier in a high-risk environment with no expectation of strategic effect. And if a carrier deployment isn\u2019t going to shift the balance, lesser contributions will simply have lesser effect. That doesn\u2019t look like playing a big role. So despite Britain\u2019s deep interests in Asia, its capacity is limited.<\/p>\n

On the last point, I think we agree. It\u2019d be a good thing for Britain to question whether it\u2019s important to London to be America\u2019s best friend in Asia. But because America\u2019s future role will be determined in this part of the world, and so many of its resources will be devoted here, Whitehall can\u2019t expect to be Washington\u2019s most important friend without being its most important friend in Asia. That\u2019s a place that likely will be filled by Japan.<\/p>\n

Redefining Britain\u2019s international identity away from Macmillan\u2019s idea of Greeks to America\u2019s Romans is exactly what will be hard for Whitehall. And if that\u2019s not possible, Britain risks skewing its view of its own interests, imagining a substantive role in Asia where one isn\u2019t possible and expending resources to little effect.<\/p>\n

There are some things Britain can do that\u2019ll matter to Asia. They just aren\u2019t in Asia. For example, Britain could back-fill for US forces in places like the Persian Gulf should any escalation in tensions place pressure on Washington to move forces to the Western Pacific. And London could push for a greater role for European countries in ensuring their own security, reducing Washington\u2019s burden of security provision across the Atlantic. So Britain could certainly be important for<\/i> Asia, but not important in<\/i> Asia.<\/p>\n

Harry White is an analyst at ASPI. Image courtesy of Flickr user Royal Navy Media Archive<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Thanks to Brigadier Will Taylor (ret.) for an elegant summary of what seems to me to be the prevailing orthodoxy in Britain on this issue (in response to my piece here). The core of his …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":71,"featured_media":13636,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[354,141],"class_list":["post-13634","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-asia","tag-united-kingdom"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nAuthor response: Britain not a player in Asia? | The Strategist<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia? | The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Thanks to Brigadier Will Taylor (ret.) for an elegant summary of what seems to me to be the prevailing orthodoxy in Britain on this issue (in response to my piece here). The core of his ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2014-05-01T20:00:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-04T20:35:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/HMS-Monmouth.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"480\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Harry White\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Harry White\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\",\"name\":\"The Strategist\",\"description\":\"ASPI's analysis and commentary site\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/HMS-Monmouth.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/HMS-Monmouth.jpg\",\"width\":640,\"height\":480,\"caption\":\"HMS MONMOUTH sails in company with Carrier INS VIKRAMADITYA.\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/\",\"name\":\"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia? | The Strategist\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2014-05-01T20:00:13+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-04T20:35:16+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/4d44f6ef0dee7fcc9410c23dbe005f03\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/4d44f6ef0dee7fcc9410c23dbe005f03\",\"name\":\"Harry White\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cc1c7feebee32910295c25c43b3521a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cc1c7feebee32910295c25c43b3521a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Harry White\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/harry-white\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia? | The Strategist","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia? | The Strategist","og_description":"Thanks to Brigadier Will Taylor (ret.) for an elegant summary of what seems to me to be the prevailing orthodoxy in Britain on this issue (in response to my piece here). The core of his ...","og_url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/","og_site_name":"The Strategist","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org","article_published_time":"2014-05-01T20:00:13+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-04T20:35:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":480,"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/HMS-Monmouth.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Harry White","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@ASPI_org","twitter_site":"@ASPI_org","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Harry White","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/","name":"The Strategist","description":"ASPI's analysis and commentary site","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-AU"},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/HMS-Monmouth.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/05\/HMS-Monmouth.jpg","width":640,"height":480,"caption":"HMS MONMOUTH sails in company with Carrier INS VIKRAMADITYA."},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/","name":"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia? | The Strategist","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2014-05-01T20:00:13+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-04T20:35:16+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/4d44f6ef0dee7fcc9410c23dbe005f03"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-AU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author-response-britain-not-a-player-in-asia\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Author response: Britain not a player in Asia?"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/4d44f6ef0dee7fcc9410c23dbe005f03","name":"Harry White","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cc1c7feebee32910295c25c43b3521a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cc1c7feebee32910295c25c43b3521a0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Harry White"},"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/harry-white\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13634"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/71"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13634"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13634\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13676,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13634\/revisions\/13676"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13636"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13634"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13634"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13634"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}