hence American engagement with China is indirectly a contribution to Japan’s security and well-being. Given this dynamic, China would not view American support for Japan’s security as a threat, and nor would Japan view the pursuit of a closer and globally more extensive American-Chinese partnership, verging in effect on a very informal geopolitical G-2 arrangement, as a threat to its own interests. A deepening triangular relationship could also diminish Japanese concerns over the eventual elevation of the renminbi to the status of the world’s third currency, thereby further consolidating China’s stake in the existing international system and thus mitigating American anxieties over China’s future role.
In brief, an active American role in Asia is essential not only in order to promote stability in the region but, even more so, to create circumstances in which the American-Chinese relationship evolves peacefully and cooperatively, and eventually grows into a wide-ranging political and economic global partnership. Indeed, the relationship between America and China may well become the crucible of the ability of the world’s most populated and economically most dynamic Eurasian continent to blend domestic success with regional stability.
Historically, America has shown that it rises to the occasion when challenged. But the world of the twenty- first century presents far different challenges than those in the past. The world is now almost everywhere politically awakened—with millions stirring restlessly in pursuit of a better future. It is also experiencing the dispersal of global power—with several new aspirants rapidly rising in the East. Consequently, today’s world is much less susceptible to domination by a single power, even by one as militarily powerful and politically influential as the United States. But, since America is not yet Rome and China is not yet its Byzantium, a stable global order ultimately depends on America’s ability to renew itself and to act wisely as the
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Writing a book is a lonely process, but an intellectually stimulating and congenial setting can make the task much easier. Likewise, the assistance of a professionally skillful staff can provide essential research backup and helpful suggestions while shielding the author from disruptive distractions. The publisher’s editor, as the source of the first external appraisal of the significance and clarity of the author’s message, can help to refine the manuscript into an actual book. And last but far from least in importance, a critically minded but sympathetic spouse can be the vital source both of blunt criticism and of occasionally badly needed encouragement. I was fortunate in all these respects, and I feel most grateful.
The CSIS, superbly headed now for more than a decade by John Hamre, provided countless opportunities for refining my geopolitical perspective on world affairs and on America’s role in them. Similarly, SAIS of Johns Hopkins University gave me a platform for a critical dialogue with its faculty headed by its intellectually dynamic Dean Jessica Einhorn. One could not ask for a better combination. My office at CSIS—skillfully, reliably, and cheerfully managed by Diane Reed—kept me focused on the essentials and thus free of time-consuming distractions.
My two very gifted and energetic research assistants, Ted Bunzel and Matt King, both recruited from Yale University’s demanding international affairs program, provided a talented testing ground for my “strategic vision” as well as vitally essential research support. More specifically, Ted, present at the book’s inception, helped to refine my initial outline for the book and to assemble the supporting data, especially for the book’s first half. He also helped to organize the critical socioeconomic analysis of US prospects in the book’s Part II. Matt then took over, and in Part III he ably transformed my initial topical outline for the sections dealing with Mexico and the global commons into actual drafts for my review. He was creative in developing the maps and the charts for the second half of the book. In the concluding stages of our work, he played a truly vital role in helping me to tighten the entire manuscript, to refine its central argument, and also to respond to the many questions raised by the publisher’s editor. Finally, he actively participated in the deliberations concerning the choice of the title for the book.
Tim Bartlett, the meticulous editor of Basic Books, was a challenging critic. He exposed weaknesses in my reasoning, he was relentless in drawing attention to my repetitions and thus helped to shape a leaner and more focused manuscript, he raised pointed questions regarding the broader historical canvas of the book’s geopolitical argument, and he was constructively engaged in our discussions concerning the book’s title. Credit is also due to others at Basic Books for their input: notably Michele Jacob, director of publicity; Kay Mariea, director of editor services; and Paula Cooper, copy editor. They all helped to make the book better and thus, I hope, more widely read.
As in the case of all of my books, my wife, Muska, was the essential source of personal encouragement. She pushed me to write it. She challenged me to persist. She read and ruthlessly dissected my initial drafts. She was as relentless in her constructive critiques as in her urging that I be bold in advocating a more promising strategic vision of tomorrow than merely a continuation of what is today.
Примечания
1
Peter Nolan, Crossroads (London, 2009), 220. See also Daniel Yergin,The Prize(New York, 1993), 401.
2
World Bank: World Development Indicators, April 26, 2011.
3
Donald J. Puchala, “The History of the Future of International Relations,”Ethics and International Relations 8 (1994): 197.
4
James Thomson, A House Divided (Arlington, VA, 2010), 17.
5
“China’s Future Global Position,” Liaowang, October 19, 2008.
