SR: Given the many political, social, environmental and economic problems China faces, which you list in your previous answer (see Richard Rosecrance interview Part 1), what is the imperative for the grand coalition between the US, Europe and Japan that you argue for in your book? Why is it important for these powers to band together economically and strategically? And do you see American-led initiatives such as the Trans Pacific Partnership as a nascent form of the type of global coalition you recommend?
RR: Yes, I believe very strongly that grand coalitions tend to attract others while bipolar ones merely reify the division in world politics. After 1950 the US sought to create such a coalition in Europe but initially only achieved a somewhat unstable form of bipolarity. Over time, however, with more nations joining and the world economy making the Western coalition richer, a grand coalition and overbalance of power was achieved.
Now this is being challenged by Russia's move into the Crimea, but the longer term effect of the Russian expansion will make the West stronger and more resolute. The pro-Western government in Kiev will want to make stronger EU connections than was true in the past and new countries will seek to join the European Union, like Moldova. This would not necessarily mean that Ukraine will join NATO but that is not required for the economic powerhouse to be created in Europe and the West.
In Asia, the TPP (especially as Japan joins) will become the Eastern analogue of the strengthening West in Europe. I need not add that Australia will be a central member of that coalition. In time, China will also join, but not right away. It is too far from meeting OECD arrangements at the moment.