Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

3 results

  • 3 - Vying for Top Dog: The Navy–Army Struggle in Maritime East Asia

  • Kuan-Jen Chen, Academia Sinica, Taiwan
  • Book:
    Charting America's Cold War Waters in East Asia
    Published online:
    23 May 2024
    Print publication:
    30 May 2024, pp 78-101

  • Summary

    The author takes a detailed look at decision-makers’ plans for unified commands in the Pacific from 1947 onwards and elaborates on the debates within the Truman administration over naval deployment in post-war East Asia and its overall international security goals. The author further argues that the wartime competition for leadership in the Pacific between MacArthur and Nimitz did not end with World War II but persisted in the immediate post-war period. The United States regarded the Pacific as its lake, but the United States’ Navy–Army division resulted in it being a divided lake in terms of authority: the Army led the Far East Command and the Navy held the Pacific Command according to the 1947 unified command plan. This chapter also shows the inextricable link between international and regional turbulence and America’s construction of unified commands in the Pacific. Mainland China, which the US Navy chose as a springboard where it could build its maritime order in post-war East Asia, was not included in either the Far East Command or the Pacific Command. Truman administration’s ambiguous China policy and the Navy–Army competition for leadership in the Pacific blurred the contours of America’s maritime East Asia.

  • 5 - The 1950 Crises and America’s Changing Posture of Defence

  • Kuan-Jen Chen, Academia Sinica, Taiwan
  • Book:
    Charting America's Cold War Waters in East Asia
    Published online:
    23 May 2024
    Print publication:
    30 May 2024, pp 128-159

  • Summary

    The author argues that the outbreak of the Korean War drove the United States to rethink the geostrategic value of the Navy in the maritime space. The US Navy demonstrated its capability of sea–air warfare to delay Kim II-sung’s pace of occupying the whole Korean Peninsula when the US/UN ground troops underwent tragic setback during the first three months of the war. The Navy’s contributions were not only to save time for the Army to launch Operation Chromite but also to provide logistics support which laid the groundwork to push North Korea back to the 38th parallel. The US Navy successfully lent credence to its indispensable significance in defence of America’s security in maritime East Asia and persuaded Washington to adopt a more sea-oriented approach in its strategic thinking.

  • Reshaping US Navy Pacific Response in Mitigating Disaster Risk in South Pacific Island Nations: Adopting Community-Based Disaster Cycle Management

  • Erik J. Reaves, Michael Termini, Frederick M. Burkle, Jr.
  • Journal:
    Prehospital and Disaster Medicine / Volume 29 / Issue 1 / February 2014
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    23 December 2013, pp. 60-68
    Print publication:
    February 2014

  • The US Department of Defense continues to deploy military assets for disaster relief and humanitarian actions around the world. These missions, carried out through geographically located Combatant Commands, represent an evolving role the US military is taking in health diplomacy, designed to enhance disaster preparedness and response capability. Oceania is a unique case, with most island nations experiencing “acute-on-chronic” environmental stresses defined by acute disaster events on top of the consequences of climate change. In all Pacific Island nation-states and territories, the symptoms of this process are seen in both short- and long-term health concerns and a deteriorating public health infrastructure. These factors tend to build on each other. To date, the US military's response to Oceania primarily has been to provide short-term humanitarian projects as part of Pacific Command humanitarian civic assistance missions, such as the annual Pacific Partnership, without necessarily improving local capacity or leaving behind relevant risk-reduction strategies. This report describes the assessment and implications on public health of large-scale humanitarian missions conducted by the US Navy in Oceania. Future opportunities will require the Department of Defense and its Combatant Commands to show meaningful strategies to implement ongoing, long-term, humanitarian activities that will build sustainable, host nation health system capacity and partnerships. This report recommends a community-centric approach that would better assist island nations in reducing disaster risk throughout the traditional disaster management cycle and defines a potential and crucial role of Department of Defense's assets and resources to be a more meaningful partner in disaster risk reduction and community capacity building.

    Reaves EJ, Termini M, Burkle FM Jr. Reshaping US Navy Pacific Response in Mitigating Disaster Risk in South Pacific Island Nations: Adopting Community-Based Disaster Cycle Management. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2014;29(1):1-9 .