STST3002 Study Guide - Final Guide: Uch, Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Lowy Institute For International Policy
Reading journal week 6 – u6071409
Heinrichs, Raoul, 'Little Power, Big Choices', Strategic Snapshot, Lowy Institute, No.4,
September 2010.
http://www.lowyinstitute.org/files/pubfiles/Heinrichs,_Little_power,_big_choices_web.p
df
Summary / Thesis statement
• Raoul Heinrichs argues that Australian security is dependent on two external factors
– first, a hegemonic ally that dominates the Asia-Paifi ad prootes Australia’s
interests, and, an order which is stable and maintains relative peace between states,
whether adversaries or allies.
• He argues that a balance of powers is likely to eventuate in the region, and Canberra
should be more prepared, and stop relying on the U.S. alliance.
• He ars that Australia should ot fall ito to possile diploay traps –
reliance on multilateral institutions, balancing negotiations to accommodate China
(defer these instead), and falling into abandonment or entrapment by the U.S.
Analysis / points I agree with
• The first part of the reading describes the potential outcoes for Australia’s seurity
future, the best being stability of U.S primacy or a concert of powers, and the worst
being a balance of power or Chinese primacy (p1-2).
o Heinrichs adds that the optimistic options are increasingly unlikely to occur,
and Australian strategists should make preparations for the inevitable
balance of power.
o I agree that U.S. primacy is optimal for Australia as we will not feel the
pressure to choose between the military weight of the US and the economic
benefits of relations with China.
• To counter the negative factors of a decline in U.S. primacy, Heinrichs argues that
Australia should baluster its independent strategic weight which has three main
benefits.
o As, ignoring future shifts in the Asian order would be irresponsible of
Australian policy makers.
Critique / points I disagree with or require more explanation
• I do’t completely agree that a balance of power between China and the U.S. would
necessarily be negative for Australian security, as long as tensions did not escalate to
war.
• Heinrichs argues that, in the circumstance that U.S. hegemony declines, Australia
could face an Asian cold war or Chinese primacy.
o I do not believe it will be as simple or inevitable as this statement alludes.
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
