Since the end of WWII, multilateralism has consistently grown as the go-to alliance structure for the United States. Despite this, the U.S. opted to create a series of bilateral alliances after WWII in Asia, dubbed the Hub-and-Spokes system. This alliance system has not only sustained itself, but also continues to fortify itself in the face of a rising threat in Asia. China has increased its assertiveness and has shifted the balance of threat in the region, while also being the primary economic and development option for regional states. This major change in the structure of Asian power has surfaced the questions of why multilateralism does not exist in Asia, and why the United States did not and has not pursued an Asian NATO. I argue that the existing system benefits both the United States and regional powers, and that burgeoning multilateral institutions and forums have been used to bolster bilateral and inter-spoke relations, rather than try and replace the existing system opting for a “bilateral-multilateral” approach to alliances in Asia. The United States and regional actors are responding to China’s actions, but not heading towards formal multilateral security alliances akin to NATO.
","abstract_html":"<p>Since the end of WWII, multilateralism has consistently grown as the go-to alliance structure for the United States. Despite this, the U.S. opted to create a series of bilateral alliances after WWII in Asia, dubbed the Hub-and-Spokes system. This alliance system has not only sustained itself, but also continues to fortify itself in the face of a rising threat in Asia. China has increased its assertiveness and has shifted the balance of threat in the region, while also being the primary economic and development option for regional states. This major change in the structure of Asian power has surfaced the questions of why multilateralism does not exist in Asia, and why the United States did not and has not pursued an Asian NATO. I argue that the existing system benefits both the United States and regional powers, and that burgeoning multilateral institutions and forums have been used to bolster bilateral and inter-spoke relations, rather than try and replace the existing system opting for a “bilateral-multilateral” approach to alliances in Asia. The United States and regional actors are responding to China’s actions, but not heading towards formal multilateral security alliances akin to NATO.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Lombardo, Gian Marc"],"institution":"The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York","degree_name":"Master of Arts","degree_level":"Master","degree_discipline":"Political Science","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Peter Liberman"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2023,"date_issued":"2023-09-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2023-09-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:58:39Z","subjects":["International Relations","Hub-and-spokes","Multilateralism","Alliances","East Asia","Quad","FOIP","U.S-China"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/5580","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Peter Liberman"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Lombardo, Gian Marc"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2023-09-14T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Master"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["International Relations","Hub-and-spokes","Multilateralism","Alliances","East Asia","Quad","FOIP","U.S-China"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/5580"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Since the end of WWII, multilateralism has consistently grown as the go-to alliance structure for the United States. Despite this, the U.S. opted to create a series of bilateral alliances after WWII in Asia, dubbed the Hub-and-Spokes system. This alliance system has not only sustained itself, but also continues to fortify itself in the face of a rising threat in Asia. China has increased its assertiveness and has shifted the balance of threat in the region, while also being the primary economic and development option for regional states. This major change in the structure of Asian power has surfaced the questions of why multilateralism does not exist in Asia, and why the United States did not and has not pursued an Asian NATO. I argue that the existing system benefits both the United States and regional powers, and that burgeoning multilateral institutions and forums have been used to bolster bilateral and inter-spoke relations, rather than try and replace the existing system opting for a “bilateral-multilateral” approach to alliances in Asia. The United States and regional actors are responding to China’s actions, but not heading towards formal multilateral security alliances akin to NATO.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Rewiring the Spokes: The Future of U.S. Bilateralism in Asia"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Peter Liberman"],"dc:creator":["Lombardo, Gian Marc"],"dc:date.available":["2023-09-14T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Since the end of WWII, multilateralism has consistently grown as the go-to alliance structure for the United States. Despite this, the U.S. opted to create a series of bilateral alliances after WWII in Asia, dubbed the Hub-and-Spokes system. This alliance system has not only sustained itself, but also continues to fortify itself in the face of a rising threat in Asia. China has increased its assertiveness and has shifted the balance of threat in the region, while also being the primary economic and development option for regional states. This major change in the structure of Asian power has surfaced the questions of why multilateralism does not exist in Asia, and why the United States did not and has not pursued an Asian NATO. I argue that the existing system benefits both the United States and regional powers, and that burgeoning multilateral institutions and forums have been used to bolster bilateral and inter-spoke relations, rather than try and replace the existing system opting for a “bilateral-multilateral” approach to alliances in Asia. The United States and regional actors are responding to China’s actions, but not heading towards formal multilateral security alliances akin to NATO.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/5580"],"dc:subject":["International Relations","Hub-and-spokes","Multilateralism","Alliances","East Asia","Quad","FOIP","U.S-China"],"dc:title":["Rewiring the Spokes: The Future of U.S. Bilateralism in Asia"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Political Science"],"thesis:degree_level":["Master"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts"],"thesis:institution_name":["The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:58:39Z"}