This paper analyses the strategic evolution of France and India in response to the intensification of Sino-American great power competition. The theoretical foundation is that the world order...Show moreThis paper analyses the strategic evolution of France and India in response to the intensification of Sino-American great power competition. The theoretical foundation is that the world order transitioned to multiplexity. A multiplex world order is defined by interaction capacity, which is a state’s capability to move ideas, goods, people, money, and armed forces across the system. A key observation is that emerging powers can more easily assume leadership positions in a multiplex world than during polarity. The case study of France and India demonstrates that both states recognise a changing world order. As an established middle power, France is concerned about a changing order. India, on the other hand, views it as a chance to gain power and influence. Both focus on diplomacy and capacity-building measures in their relationships with others, especially other middle powers. Additionally, both reject balancing and bandwagoning while instead building strategic autonomy. The study underscores how multiplexity empowers middle powers to strengthen their autonomy and actively shape global dynamics amid great power competition, contributing to a deeper understanding of contemporary international relations.Show less
This thesis analyses the changes in the United States (U.S.) South China Sea (SCS) security strategy since the start of the Trump administration. By researching the rhetoric and the actions of the...Show moreThis thesis analyses the changes in the United States (U.S.) South China Sea (SCS) security strategy since the start of the Trump administration. By researching the rhetoric and the actions of the Trump administration and recent previous administrations in a realist framework, this paper tries to determine the impact of the current presidency in this field. This research argues that the SCS security strategy of the Trump administration is significantly different from its predecessors. Its rhetoric is transactional instead of value-driven, holistically confrontational instead of partially cooperative and erratic instead of long term. The actions of the Trump administration remain focussed on strategic deterrence but have increased in intensity and have discarded the risk-averse nature of past policies.Show less
