Explaining the Proliferation and Endurance of Overseas Military Basing by Jiayu Zhang BA in Inter
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Casting the Shadow of Power: Explaining the Proliferation and Endurance of Overseas Military Basing by Jiayu Zhang B.A. in International Politics, June 2018, Fudan University A Thesis submitted to The Faculty of The Elliott School of International Affairs of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts May 16, 2021 Thesis directed by Alexander B. Downes Associate Professor of Political Science and International Affairs Abstract of Thesis Casting the Shadow of Power: Explaining the Proliferation and Endurance of Overseas Military Basing States keep maintaining and seeking overseas military bases despite many predictions of their decline and potential political and economic risks. This paper argues that states’ pursuit of overseas bases is motivated by different imperatives in different eras and contexts while all these incentives are rooted in their desire to muster their power. The case of U.S. basing in Japan illustrates the persistence of traditional basing logic that originated from the Cold-War preparation for wars. On the military dimension, access to overseas military posts enhances the projection of military power and improves military effectiveness, both promoting basing states’ capabilities to wage war. On the political dimension, basing strengthens alliance assurance by consolidating the credibility of security guarantees to defend allies should they are attacked. With the end of the Cold War that led to the change of the international structure and diversification of militaries’ missions, second-tier powers and rising powers begin to pursue bases according to emerging basing logic. In the cases of Turkey, Japan, and China, overseas bases are sought for the purpose of asserting great power status, participating in global governance, and safeguarding broad political and economic agendas, all of which promote states' hard and soft power. Basing states also mitigate potential backlashes by adapting and choosing proper forms of bases ranging from large permanent presence to cheaper and low-profile light footprints. ii Table of Contents Abstract of Thesis ............................................................................................................. ii 1.Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 2. A Brief History of Overseas Basing ............................................................................... 6 3.Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 11 4.Therotical Framework .................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Traditional Basing Logic ......................................................................................... 19 4.1.1 Military Dimension........................................................................................... 19 4.1.2 Political Dimension .......................................................................................... 25 4.2 Emerging Basing Logic ........................................................................................... 29 4.2.1 Status Assertation ............................................................................................. 30 4.2.2 Global Governance ........................................................................................... 34 4.2.3 Economic and Value Interests .......................................................................... 36 4.3 Form of Basing ........................................................................................................ 39 4.4 Summary ................................................................................................................. 43 4.5 Testing Theory ........................................................................................................ 44 5. Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 46 5.1 Traditional Logic in U.S. Basing ............................................................................ 46 5.1.1 History of U.S. Basing in Japan ....................................................................... 47 5.1.2 Structure of U.S. Basing in Japan ..................................................................... 53 5.1.3 Analysis of U.S. Basing in Japan ..................................................................... 56 5.2 Overseas Basing in the New Era ............................................................................. 64 5.2.1 Turkey: Empire Strike Back ............................................................................. 65 5.2.2 Japan: Borrowing the Boat to Sail .................................................................... 75 5.2.3 China: The Dawn of a New Superpower? ........................................................ 86 6. Conclusion and Looking Forward ................................................................................ 97 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 102 iii 1.Introduction Establishing Overseas military bases and maintaining access to essential installations in strategic locations are crucial instruments for great powers to interfere in regional affairs, consolidate alliance relations, project military forces, demonstrate national strengths, and safeguard economic interests. They frequently appear in the analysis of international politics issues such as great power competition, grand strategy, alliance politics, and force posture. However, to some extent, overseas military bases are like stage props: essential to the show, but never commanding center stage. As the experts from U.S. Naval War College claimed, “the ongoing reconfiguration of America’s foreign military ‘footprint’ abroad …… has so far received little systematic attention from national security specialists and still less from the wide public.”1 Modern overseas military bases are the legacy of colonial expansion and the Cold War. Born with the demand of imperialist powers to dominate their vast colonies, overseas bases networks reached the peak during the Cold War when both rival superpowers used forward basing for functions ranging from nuclear deterrence to alliance assurance. After the Cold War, a radical reduction of the scale of global military bases networks was anticipated by both the officials and the public. According to the Department of Defense’s report, the United States was ready for “reducing overseas base structures to the minimum level” in 1994.2 C.T. Sanders indicated that the U.S. was showing an appreciation of the fact that 1 Andrew I. Yeo, “The Politics of Overseas Military Bases,” Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 15, No. 1 (March 2017), p. 129. 2 Department of Defense Report to the President and Congress, January 1994. 1 good guests should not outstay their welcome.3 Meanwhile, academic and journalist pieces echoed such anticipations by illustrating the global resistance against U.S. overseas deployment and how overseas military bases of great powers harm the world.4 Evidence including financial burden, ideological resistance, grassroots opposition, jurisdiction disputes, and external countermeasures are provided by these efforts to prove basing is a costly, vulnerable, and doom action.5 By reviewing the rise and fall of the empires in history, Paul Kennedy proposed “imperial overstretch”, arguing that overextension of global interests and obligations will lead to the decline of great powers. 6 He even made a dire prediction that American’s worldwide military presence would collapse from imperial overstretch.7 The challenges and troubles caused by overseas basing seem to have already overwhelmed the strategic benefits brought by it. Yet after about three decades, counties are still attempting to maintain their remaining bases and seeking new posts. In 2018, the official document released by the Pentagon indicated that the United States possessed 514 bases on foreign soil all over the world.8 Due to the lack of a wide-accepted definition of “military bases”, some analysis estimates 3 C. T. Sandars, America’s Overseas Garrisons (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 19. 4 David Vine, Base Nation: How American Military Bases Abroad Harm America and the World (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2015). 5 See Stacie L. Pettyjohn and Jennifer Kavanagh, Access Granted: Political Challenges to the U.S. Overseas Military Presence, 1945-2014. (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2016) and Michael J. Lostumbo, Michael J. McNerney, Eric Peltz, Derek Eaton, David R. Frelinger, Victoria A. Greenfield, John Halliday, et al. Overseas Basing of U.S. Military Forces: An Assessment of Relative Costs and Strategic Benefits. (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2013). 6 Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000 (New York: Random House, 1987), p. 515. 7 Sandars, America’s Overseas Garrisons, p. 18. 8 U.S. Department of Defense, Base Structure Report: Fiscal Year 2018 Baseline. (Washington, D.C.: Office of Deputy Secretary of Defense, 2018), p. 18. 2 that the actual number of U.S. military facilitates in other countries is more than 800.9 After founded its first overseas military base in Djibouti in 2017, China keeps seeking overseas outposts in other strategic