Thinking Inertia and Path Dependence in Indo-Pacific Strategy of the United States


  • Yulong Yang



Indo-Pacific Strategy; American Diplomacy; Sino-US Relations; Thinking Inertia; Path Dependence.


With the profound adjustment of the international pattern, the Indo-Pacific region has increasingly become one of the most active regions on the international stage and the focus of American foreign strategy has shifted from Europe to the Indo-Pacific region. By observing its policy documents and diplomatic practice on Indo-Pacific regions, we can find that the US Indo-Pacific strategy presents the thinking inertia, which is manifested by its hard power supremacy, the superiority of values, and the presupposition of imaginary enemies. Meanwhile, the United States emphasizes military means, establishes value alliances, and implements competitive blockade policies, showing its path dependence. The deployment and implementation of the US Indo-Pacific strategy are menacing and pose a long-term challenge and threat to China’s development. Based on these tensions, China may summarize and refine the foreign strategic thinking and path of the United States, so as to clarify its intentions and trends before making preventive responses.


Download data is not yet available.


Yuan, Z. (2014). How is the U.S. foreign strategy introduced?. Contemporary World, (05), 22-26.

Zhong, S. (2022). The pursuit of absolute security will only strengthen the security dilemma. People’s Daily, April 10(002).

Shi, B. (2021). On the intellectual roots of American national security strategy. The Journal of International Studies, 42(01), 11-27+5.

Wang, J. (2023). The Biden’s administration strategy of ideological containment against China and China’s countermeasures. World Socialism Studies, 8(02), 101-110+120.

Xicui, B. Z. & Gao, M. L. (2016). The end of history, the Chinese model, and the declining United States--Dialogue with Francis Fukuyama. Foreign Theoretical Trends, (05), 1-6.

Huntington, S. (2010)., Who are we? The challenges to America’s national identity. Cheng, K. X. trans. Beijing: Xinhua Publishing House, 19-21.

Heng, T. J. (2015). The shaping of the Soviet Union’s “enemy image” by the United States in the early Cold War? Russian Studies, (02), 46-75.

Arbatov, А. Г., Zhang, G. X. & Liu, Y. Q. (2020). Doomsday dialects: The arms race and its limitations. Jilin University Journal (Social Science Edition), 60(05), 116-126+237-238.

Tian, J. X. (2012). Value-oriented diplomacy of the United States and its essence. Jiang-Huai Tribune, (05), 105-110.

Yue, S. S. (2023). The NATO-ization of the Indo-Pacific region: essence, performances, and impacts. Asia-Pacific Security and Maritime Affairs, (01), 16-35+2.

Dai, B. P. (2003). Analysis of the Truman administration’s policy towards the Soviet Union from 1947 to 1950. Journal of Yuncheng University, (06), 50-52.

Zhang, J. Q. & Luo, H. T. (2022). The Biden’s administration’s compound alliance strategyagainst China and China’s response. Northeast Asia Forum, 31(06), 36-53+125.

U.S. Strategic Framework for the Indo-Pacific [OE/OL]. content/ uploads/ 2021/01/IPS-Final-Declass.pdf.

The United States [EB/OL]. 2022/02/ 11/ fact-sheet- indo-pacific-strategy-of-the-united-states/, 2022-02-11.




How to Cite

Yang, Y. (2023). Thinking Inertia and Path Dependence in Indo-Pacific Strategy of the United States. BCP Education & Psychology, 10, 148–153.