Acceso usuarios
Raquel I. León de la Rosa, Marisol Pérez Díaz
La segunda década del siglo XXI marca un momento importante en Asia Pacífico, pues la República Popular China se comenzó a posicionar en la región a partir de iniciativas institucionales. Al mismo tiempo, esto evidenció el espacio de poder que Estados Unidos dejó en Asia Pacífico tras la reconfiguración del sistema internacional después de la Guerra Fría. Ante el posicionamiento chino, Estados Unidos ha buscado reafirmase en la región, entre otros, insertando el concepto de Indo-Pacífico. Bajo este contexto, esta investigación tiene como objetivo revisar el concepto de Indo-Pacífico como una narrativa dominante desde Occidente, que surge en oposición al posicionamiento chino. Para lograr esto, se utiliza el enfoque decolonial en las Relaciones Internacionales, mismo que hace una crítica al eurocentrismo en la disciplina, impactando en la manera en cómo se estudian los fenómenos internacionales. La primera parte del texto se enfoca en rescatar las críticas a las Relaciones Internacionales, desde la decolonialidad. En este sentido, se retoma el término de colonialidad y las tres dimensiones que lo componen: colonialidad del poder, colonialidad del saber y colonialidad del ser. El segundo apartado describe la narrativa del Indo-Pacífico y la búsqueda de interacciones en la región por parte de Estados Unidos para legitimar tanto la propuesta como las estrategias de seguridad que derivan de esta, con la finalidad de limitar el posicionamiento chino. Esto a través de reafirmar alianzas con actores como: India, Australia y Japón. La tercera parte retoma el posicionamiento chino a través de la Comunidad de Destino Compartido y la Iniciativa de la Franja y la Ruta y se contrastan con el Indo-Pacífico a través de la colonialidad y sus dimensiones. Esto da paso a las conclusiones y algunas reflexiones finales.
The twenty first century brings several changes to the international system, mainly in Asia. Currently, the notion of Indo-Pacific has been encouraged to move away from the concept of Asia Pacific. This responds to the confrontation between two key powers in the international system, which are China and the United States. The second decade of the twenty first century marks an important moment in the Asia Pacific, when the People’s Republic of China began to position itself in the region through non Western institutional initiatives that threaten Western hegemony in this part of the world. At the same time, this evidenced the lack of power that the United States had in the Asia Pacific following the reconfiguration of the international system after the Cold War. Given this, the United States has sought to reaffirm itself in the region by inserting the concept of the Indo-Pacific; this as a review of the geographical delimitation of Asia Pacific, which no longer responds to Western interests in the face of the challenging power agent that today is China.In this context, this research aims to review the concept of the Indo-Pacific as a dominant narrative from the West, which arises in opposition to chinese positioning. To achieve this, it is proposed to incorporate the decolonial approach into International Relations. This methodological proposal seeks to diversify and go beyond eurocentrism in the discipline, which impacts how international phenomena are studied. The incorporation of non Western theories and/or approaches into the discipline, such as the decolonial approach, has made it possible to make important gaps visible that Western contributions have not been able to remedy when trying to explain issues such as: regionalisms, security, development, governance, etcetera.The result is an article with an introduction, three sections and conclusions. The first section reviews decolonial criticism within the study of International Relations. Here, authors such as Amitav Acharya (2015) are explored, who have emphasized the importance of going beyond western approaches. Likewise, the concept of the geopolitics of knowledge from Syed Wajeeh Ul Hassan and Fatima Sajjad (2022) is reviewed, to reaffirm the need for the insertion of the decolonial approach into International Relations. In this sense, the Latin American decolonial approach is taken up as a starting point. Throughout the section, the key concepts and evolution of the discussions on decoloniality are reviewed. This decolonial approach is understood as a critique that questions the way in which the project of modernity has been understood and how it has been complicit with the current system of hegemony. Among the authors, Aníbal Quijano (2000) and Juliane Rodrigues Teixeira (2020) are reviewed through the three dimensions of coloniality: power (economic political oppression); of knowledge (epistemic oppression) and of being (racial oppression of other subjects). For the purposes of this investigation, we delve into the first two. One of the important points to make in the discussion about incorporating the decolonial approach in International Relations are the attempts that have been made from other regions. Before this, it is necessary to achieve a transregional, transterritorial and transcultural link that includes not only the experiences from the Americas but also from Asia and Africa. It is a complex task when many of the initiatives only remain declarations that express wills. From Serrano-Muñoz (2021), five mistakes are identified to build a decolonial approach from Asia.Then, in a second section, the geographical space of the Indo-Pacific is analysed. Furthermore, we identify how this concept was born in the context of the confrontation between two powers, China and the United States. This section notes the Indo-Pacific as a concept that originated to limit Chinese positioning in the region. The following section delves into the perspective of Western and pro Western actors in the Indo-Pacific region, who view security as an imperative. This section reviews authors from different latitudes and how they have studied the Indo-Pacific, mainly through this concept. The findings of these authors serve to identify the narrative promoted from the United States and its evolution through the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations. In these periods the pivot to Asia strategy has reactivated the United States in this region (Dian, 2013). At the same time, through this strategy, Washington has promoted interactions with key actors such as: Japan, India and Australia. This review of interactions explains the connection of these actors with the West, the importance and scope they have in the materialization of the Indo-Pacific, as a Western narrative.The third section inserts examples of Chinese positioning, such as the Community of Shared Future for Humanity and the Belt and Road Initiative. Liu Yongtao (2013) describes these Chinese initiatives based on well being based security. Therefore, the Community of Shared Future for Humanity and the Belt and Road Initiative have been institutionalized in the region, which is based on cooperation, peaceful coexistence, connectivity, etcetera. From the Chinese academy, it is highlighted that both initiatives are related and are an innovative proposal for global governance (Zhang, 2018). In addition to this, the Indo-Pacific and Chinese initiatives are contrasted with the decolonial approach. A table is presented that rescues the main concepts of the decolonial approach. At the same time, the decolonial approach is rescued to explain this geographical reconfiguration in Asia based on the actors involved and the search to reaffirm the structure of the international system based on colonial power relations, mainly through the coloniality of power and knowledge. This takes the aim of building preliminary conclusions that either affirm or not the Western narrative in the region.In the conclusions, the research emphasizes how the Indo-Pacific is an example of coloniality, mainly through power and knowledge. The evolution of the United States policy of pivot towards Asia uses the Westernization of the international system to legitimize and reaffirm itself in this part of the world. However, one of the findings when contrasting Chinese initiatives with the decolonial approach is that some of the errors that identify Serrano Muñoz are identified. This finding leaves the door open for further research.
