The Empire's Edge: Militarization, Resistance, and Transcending Hegemony in the Pacific
The Empire's Edge: Militarization, Resistance, and Transcending Hegemony in the Pacific
复制标题
帝国的边缘：太平洋地区的军事化、抵抗和超越霸权
DOI：
10.1111/j.1931-0846.2015.12141.x
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Alison J. Williams
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alison J. Williams
2011年，奥巴马政府发出转向亚太地区的信号，将经济、贸易和军事重点放在太平洋地区，以应对中国实力的增长以及外界认为有必要加强美国对该地区的S承诺。虽然一些人认为这是从停滞不前的欧洲舞台上重新聚焦，寻找新的市场和新的空间来展示实力，但萨莎·戴维斯温和地说明了这种转向在多大程度上只是美国与其西海岸外的海洋地区之间长期帝国接触的最新进展。在他那本引人入胜的书中，戴维斯对美国在太平洋上的军事和地缘战略影响力，以及它对散布在这片广阔海洋地区的岛屿及其社区的影响进行了详细而丰富的批评。戴维斯揭示了似乎已经成为常态化统治地位的含义-提醒我们自1898年以来美国一直是整个太平洋岛屿地区的主导军事力量-并揭示了这种军事全能如何影响那些被美国军方视为具有战略意义的岛屿上的人的生活，以及这些岛屿的环境。在一个相对简短但非常详细的描述中，戴维斯巧妙地通过大量的实证研究编织了复杂的地缘政治论点，以拆解、拆分美国军队与这些民族和地区的关系，并使其成为问题，以及随着美军的存在而成长起来的阻力。在没有介绍的情况下，戴维斯立即进入了第一章，也是最长的一章，阐述了这本书的地理和概念范围。戴维斯将他的范围扩大到涵盖美国领土--包括各州、属地、主权根据地，以及主权地位更加模糊的一系列空间和地方--包括夏威夷群岛、马里亚纳群岛、马绍尔群岛和加洛林群岛，以及日本和菲律宾的基地。戴维斯试图涵盖广泛的岛屿地点。他概述了这些地点，特别是它们如何、在哪里以及为什么属于美国地缘政治和地缘战略利益的范围，毫不奇怪地将它们定位为美国可以在更广泛的太平洋地区投射力量的地点。第一章最重要的方面是概念框架。戴维斯借鉴了十年出版的学术成果，为随后的实证分析提出了一套相当复杂的交叉概念。戴维斯
In 2011, the Obama administration signalled a pivot towards Asia-Pacific, with economic, trade, and military foci trained on the Pacific region, in response to the growth of Chinese power and a perceived need to reinforce the U.S.’s commitment to the region. Whilst some viewed this as a refocusing from a stagnant European arena, to find new markets and new spaces in which to project power, Sasha Davis cogently illustrates the extent to which this pivot was simply the latest development in a lengthy imperial engagement between the U.S. and the oceanic region off its western seaboard. In his fascinating book, Davis provides a detailed and empirically rich critique of U.S. military and geostrategic influence across the Pacific, and its impact on islands and their communities dotted through this vast oceanic region. Davis shines a much needed light on the implications of what has seemingly become a normalised dominance—reminding us that the U.S. has been the dominant military power across the island Pacific region since 1898—and uncovers how this military omnipotence has affected the lives of those on islands deemed to be strategically useful by, and to, the U.S. military, and on these islands’ environments. In a relatively short but very detailed account, Davis deftly weaves complex geopolitical arguments through thick empirical research to unpack, unpick, and problematize the relationship of the U.S. military to these peoples and places, and the resistances that have grown up to it’s presence. Dispensing with an introduction, Davis launches immediately into the first and longest chapter, which sets out both the geographical and conceptual remit of the book. Extending his scope to encompass U.S. territory—including states, dependencies, sovereign base areas, and a range of spaces and places that have more blurry sovereignty statuses— across the Hawai’ian, Mariana, Marshall, and Caroline island groups, as well as bases in Japan and the Philippines, Davis seeks to cover a vast range of island locations. He offers an overview of these locations and specifically how, where, and why they fall within the remit of U.S. geopolitical and geostrategic interest, unsurprisingly positioning them as sites upon and from which the U.S. can project its power across the wider Pacific region. The most significant aspect of the first chapter is the conceptual framework. Drawing on a decade’s worth of published scholarship, Davis sets out quite a complex set of intersecting ideas for the empirical analysis that follows. Davis