scholarly journals Future of US-China Relations: Conflict, Competition or Cooperation?

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Syed Muhammad Saad Zaidi ◽  
Adam Saud
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Eastern Hemisphere ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China

In contemporary times, the geo-political agenda and geo-economic strategy of the world is being dominated by the ongoing US-China hegemonic competition. Where the United States is trying to prolong the ‘unipolar moment’ and deter the rise of China; China is trying to establish itself as the hegemon in the Eastern hemisphere, an alternate to the US. The entirely opposite interests of the two Great Powers have initiated a hostile confrontational competition for domination. This paper seeks to determine the future nature of the US-China relations; will history repeat itself and a bloody war be fought to determine the leader of the pack? or another prolonged Cold War will be fought, which will end when one side significantly weakens and collapses? Both dominant paradigms of International Relations, Realism and Liberalism, are used to analyze the future nature of the US-China relations.

Domestic legitimacy politics and varieties of regionalism in East Asia

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 583-606 ◽  
Author(s):  
IL HYUN CHO ◽  
SEO-HYUN PARK
Keyword(s):  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
East Asian ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Asian Regionalism ◽  
Regional Order ◽  
Regional Institution ◽  
The Rise Of China

AbstractWhat drives East Asian regionalism? The rise of China and the perceived decline in the influence of the United States have sparked debates about the future of the regional order, including the yet-unresolved question of whose leadership is likely to be more stable and accepted as legitimate by other regional actors. What is puzzling, however, is that persistent demands for the formation of a coherent and uniquely East Asian regional institution have come not from China or the US, as is the focus of existing studies, but rather Japan and South Korea. In this article, we propose an alternative framework that conceptualises the varieties of East Asian regionalism, emphasising the multiple pivots and variegated levels of politics involved in efforts toward regional cooperation. We find that competing proposals for East Asian regionalism since the 1990s are not determined by structural pressures or the convergence of interests but rather result from domestic legitimacy politics. Japanese and Korean leaders have, at different time periods, proposed their own alternative region-making initiatives appealing to domestically contested views on how best to seek autonomy from the region's Great Powers as a way to enhance their political standing domestically and regionally.

scholarly journals THE US POLICY SHIFT FROM ‘PIVOT TO ASIA’ TO ‘FREE INDO PACIFIC’: IMPLICATIONS FOR PAKISTAN

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Tatheer Zahra Sherazi ◽  
Amna Mahmood
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Cold War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Pivot To Asia ◽  
The Us ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Offensive Realism ◽  
Policy Shift

Asia Pacific, which is extended Eastward to the states of Oceania, Westward to Pakistan, Southward to New Zealand, and Northward to Mongolia, is currently a pivot of the globe due to its economic growth. Since last two decades, it has got status of ‘growth center’ owing to its high economic growth rate. The United States (US) had been very active in Asia Pacific throughout the Cold War period, but in post-Cold War era, it was disengaged due to its pre-occupation in Middle East. However, the rise of China attracted US again with multiple arrangements at political, economic and social fronts. There are two world views about the US presence in Asia Pacific. The first one asserts that the Asia Pacific is more secure without the presence of US, while others takes the US presence as a patron for stability and solidarity within the region. The US policy of ‘Pivot to Asia’, ‘Asia Pacific’ commonly known as ‘Rebalancing’ ensured its new commitment of deep engagement in Southeast Asia. Policy shift under Trump administration from ‘Pivot to Asia’ to ‘Free Indo-Pacific’ has direct as well indirect implications for Pakistan. The study analyses the US strategies and polices under the theory of ‘Offensive Realism,’ where ‘rational powers uncertain of intentions and capable of military offensive strive to survive’. Analytical, descriptive approaches are adopted in order to analyse US ongoing strategies.

scholarly journals The Distribution of Identity and the Future of International Order: China’s Hegemonic Prospects

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bentley Allan ◽  
Srdjan Vucetic ◽  
Ted Hopf
Keyword(s):  
International Order ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
The Future ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Near Term ◽  
Material Power ◽  
Hegemonic Transition ◽  
The Rise Of China

Existing theories predict that the rise of China will trigger a hegemonic transition and the current debate centers on whether or not the transition will be violent or peaceful. This debate largely sidesteps two questions that are central to understanding the future of international order: how strong is the current Western hegemonic order and what is the likelihood that China can or will lead a successful counter-hegemonic challenge? We argue that the future of international order is shaped not only by material power but also by the distribution of identity across the great powers. We develop a constructivist account of hegemonic transition that theorizes the role of the distribution of identity in international order. In our account, hegemonic orders depend on a legitimating ideology that must be consistent with the distribution of identity at both the level of elites and masses. We map the distribution of identity across nine great powers and assess how this distribution supports the current Western neoliberal democratic hegemony. We conclude that China is unlikely to become the hegemon in the near-term. First, the present order is strongly supported by the distribution of identity in both Western states and rising powers like India and Brazil. Second, China is unlikely to join the present order and lead a transition from within because its authoritarian identity conflicts with the democratic ideology of the present order. Finally, China is unlikely to lead a counter-hegemonic coalition of great powers because it will be difficult to build an appealing, universal ideology consistent with the identities of other great powers.

scholarly journals THE DECLINING HEGEMONY OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE GROWING INFLUENCE OF CHINA: A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE ON POWER TRANSITION THEORY IN THE 21ST CENTURY

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nasa'i Muhammad Gwadabe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Relations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transition Theory ◽  
Power Transition ◽  
Power Transition Theory ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China

The apparent eroding in the hegemonic power of the United States and the sustained growth of China has triggered debate as to whether the rise of China will be peaceful or conflictual. Structural realism posits that the world is characterised by the anarchic ordering principle in which there is no central authority sitting above the states. Therefore, the absence of a “leviathan” on the international system automatically makes every state equal on the system which created an atmosphere of competition for the maximisation of power for survival. On a similar line of reasoning, the Power Transition theory as a variant theory within realism postulates that when the international system is structured based on the principle of hierarchy, peace will reign. It means that when international relations are regulated and influenced by a dominant power, the international system becomes stable. But the emergence of a dissatisfied powerful nation to challenge the hegemon usually ends up in war. Based on this assumption, Power Transition theorists argued that the rise of China to rival the dominance of the United States could not be peaceful. The Power Transition theory has influenced many academics to have the belief that the two nations will end up in “Thucydides’ Trap”. This belief has aggravated the matter beyond the reasonable level and has instilled panic in the mind of foreign policymakers which could jeopardise world peace and international cooperation. Hence, this paper aims to critically evaluate the deficiency of the Power Transition theory in the 21st century in explaining the current United States-China relations and the prospect of peace or war between the two nations using process tracing. Accordingly, in this paper, it is argued that in the 21st century, an armed confrontation between the United States and China is highly unlikely. Because in today’s world, nations (including the United States and China) are intertwined by the forces of globalisation which created inexorable economic interdependence. Additionally, there is rapid advancement in military technology and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction which came with the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). Consequently, there is a need to revisit the Power Transition theory to accommodate contemporary factors. The inclusion of the current variables into the Theory will make it applicable and adequately fit in the discourse of international relations and global politics of the 21st-century international system.

scholarly journals The Rise of China and Contestation in Global Tax Governance

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rasmus Corlin Christensen ◽  
Martin Hearson
Keyword(s):  
Tax Avoidance ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Tax Havens ◽  
Chinese Business ◽  
Economic Politics ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Changing Economy ◽  
The Rise Of China

Debate over the taxation of international business has focused on the importance of the United States and its large tech firms, paying low tax rates by using tax havens, in shaping the global political agenda. Yet in an era of China’s rise to power, this focus has overlooked both China’s influential political engagement with the global tax system, and how its changing economy alters its interests at home and abroad. In this paper, we address this oversight by providing an account of the sources and nature of the new Chinese global tax diplomacy. We argue that China's becoming a global net capital exporter, emergence as a major consumer market, and the growth of its own digital giant firms like Baidu, Tencent and Alibaba, underpins its interest in simultaneous ‘going out’ and ‘bringing in’ foreign direct investment by selectively and strategically engaging with Western-liberal institutions. Specifically, we show how China variously challenges, defends, and develops alternatives to global tax standards in three cases: global efforts to tackle corporate tax avoidance, bilateral tax treaty negotiations, and administrative tax cooperation. A better understanding of China’s significant, distinctive and varying diplomatic engagement with Western economic institutions, will help inform debates on the Chinese business-politics nexus and expand analyses of global tax and economic politics beyond US-centrism

Hegemony in Foreign Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Ned Lebow ◽  
Simon Reich
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Policy Support ◽  
Economic Stability ◽  
American Hegemony ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China ◽  
Established Role

American realists, liberals, journalists, and policymakers speak of American hegemony as if it were an established role, although a threatened one given the rise of China. They describe hegemony as essential to international political and economic stability, and a role that only America can perform. These claims are highly questionable, as there is no evidence that the United States is a hegemon nor that it has provided the benefits American international relations theorists attribute to a hegemon. To the extent these benefits are provided, it is the result of the collective efforts of numerous states, by no means all of them great powers. American assertions of hegemony are viewed with jaundiced, if not hostile, eyes by other states. Hegemony is a fiction, propagated by Americans to gain special privileges, justify an interventionist foreign policy, support the defense industry, and buttress national self-esteem. In practice, the quest for hegemony is a threat, not a prop, to the global order.

Uncertain Times: The Reconstruction of China–US Relationship

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (04) ◽  
pp. 19-27
Author(s):  
Weixing CHEN
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Structural Level ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Rise Of China ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Trump Administration

The rise of China has shaken, to some extent, the pillars sustaining the US dominance in the world. Facing structural challenges from China, the United States has responded on three levels: political, strategic and policy. The Donald Trump administration has adopted a hard-line approach while attempting to engage China at the structural level. The China–US relationship is entering uncertain times, and the reconstruction of the relationship could take a decade.

Over the Horizon

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Edelstein
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Face ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Cold War

This book examines how existing great powers in international relations respond to the rise or resurgence of other great powers. More specifically, it seeks to account for why existing powers often cooperate with rising powers despite the long-term threat that they potentially pose. To account for this behavior, the theory presented in the book focuses on the time horizons of political leaders . Leaders are unlikely to adopt competitive and costly strategies in the face of uncertainty about a rising power’s long-term intentions. Instead, they profit from cooperation in the short-term while they await more and better information about the rising state’s interests and intentions. To test this argument against alternative arguments, the book presents case studies of four modern examples of rising great powers and their strategic interactions with existing great powers: the rise of late nineteenth century Germany, the emergence of the United States at the turn of the twentieth century, the resurgence of interwar Germany, and the development of the Soviet Union at the beginning of the cold war. The book concludes with a discussion of the implications of the argument for international relations theory and the contemporary rise of China.

The End of MAD? The Nuclear Dimension of U.S. Primacy

2006 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 7-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keir A. Lieber ◽  
Daryl G. Press
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Long Range ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Nuclear Exchange ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The U.S

For nearly half a century, the world's most powerful nuclear-armed states have been locked in a condition of mutual assured destruction. Since the end of the Cold War, however, the nuclear balance has shifted dramatically. The U.S. nuclear arsenal has steadily improved; the Russian force has sharply eroded; and Chinese nuclear modernization has progressed at a glacial pace. As a result, the United States now stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy, meaning that it could conceivably disarm the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia and China with a nuclear first strike. A simple nuclear exchange model demonstrates that the United States has a potent first-strike capability. The trajectory of nuclear developments suggests that the nuclear balance will continue to shift in favor of the United States in coming years. The rise of U.S. nuclear primacy has significant implications for relations among the world's great powers, for U.S. foreign policy, and for international relations scholarship.

The ‘New Cold War’ in ‘critical International Relations studies’

1986 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 163-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Kubalkova ◽  
A. A. Cruickshank
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
New Left ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Cold War

In the historiography of the Cold War a small but active group of American historians influenced by New Left radicalism rejected the view prevailing in the USA at the time in regard to the assignation of responsibility for the beginning and continuation of the Cold War.1 Although their reasoning took them along different routes and via different perceptions as to key dates and events, there were certain features all US revisionists had in common (some more generally recognized than others). Heavily involved as they were in the analysis of the US socio-economic system, the Soviet Union was largely left out of their concerns and it was the United States who had been found the ‘guilty’ party. The revisionists, of course inadvertently, corroborated Soviet conclusions, a fact gratefully acknowledged by Soviet writers.2

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document