Commentary
Despite the agreement’s uncertainty, it’s still a significant development in regional and nuclear policy.
Andrew Leber, Jane Darby Menton
Book
Great Power Competition and Overseas Bases: Chinese, Russian, and American Force Posture in the Twenty-First Century
This book examines the emerging dynamics of geostrategic competition for overseas military bases and base access.
Published on Aug 27, 2024
What challenges and risks do Chinese and Russian bases pose to the United States’ military strategy? How do the military postures of great powers interact and with what consequences for regional and global security? This book examines the emerging dynamics of geostrategic competition for overseas military bases and base access. The comparative framework adopted in this volume examines how the geopolitical interests of the United States, China, and Russia and their respective underlying force posture interact in different regions including the Indo-Pacific, Europe, sub-Sahara Africa, the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, and the Arctic Circle.
By exploring the security, political economic, and domestic political dynamics of specific regions, the contributors to this volume reveal varied motivations for overseas military bases and base access among great powers. With analysis on the particular dynamics of overseas bases in major regional theaters, the book offers a valuable window into the nature and scope of the broader “great power competition” underway in the twenty-first century.
Advance Reviews
"Superb. A timely and thoughtful examination of the drivers and consequences of past and future military basing considerations and decisions that have and will shape the geostrategic landscape. A must read by those who ponder the future of great power competition and military force design."
— Gary Roughead, Admiral, U.S. Navy (Retired), Former U.S. Navy Chief of Naval Operations
"The book presents a measured and deeply informed assessment by tremendously talented thinkers from both academic and policy of three different, but potentially effective, approaches to overseas bases and international politics. This is essential reading on an underappreciated subject."
— Jon Caverley, Professor of Strategy, United States Naval War College
About the Authors
Andrew Yeo
Senior fellow and the SK-Korea Foundation Chair, Brookings Institution’s Center for Asia Policy Studies
Andrew Yeo is a senior fellow and the SK-Korea Foundation Chair at the Brookings Institution’s Center for Asia Policy Studies. He is also a professor of politics at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.
Isaac B. Kardon
Former Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Isaac B. Kardon was a senior fellow for China studies in the Asia Program.
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Deal
- A Path Forward on AI Safety for the United States and ChinaCommentary
“AI safety in parallel” is modest and pragmatic but vital.
Matt Sheehan
- Why Europe Must Take Charge of its Russia Diplomacy NowCommentary
Trump is distracted and Ukraine wants Europe to step up. The continent’s leaders must find their voice and assert it in talks with Russia.
Alissa de Carbonnel
- Negotiating an Age of Conquest: Converting American Power Into Durable Political OutcomesPaper
There is a deeply rooted assumption in post–Cold War American statecraft that overwhelming military and economic power translates directly into favorable political outcomes. But force alone is rarely enough. To meet the challenges of the mid-21st century, Washington needs a cultural shift toward a mindset that takes negotiation far more seriously.
Cecily Brewer
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk
