Search

This paper argues that amid intensifying Sino-U.S. rivalry, middle powers in East Asia have contributed towards regional peaceful change through the exercise of good regional citizenship, a concept which draws on and modifies from the more commonly known good international citizenship which is closely associated with middle powers. Specifically, good regional citizenship involves proactively strengthening inclusive multilateralism, enhancing the rules-based order, and contributing to bridging efforts in East Asia. The paper examines the good regional citizenship of two middle powers, namely Australia and Indonesia. It finds that while both countries have exercised good regional citizenship, their specific strategies or the outcomes of their initiatives on regional dynamics have varied as a result of their relations with the respective major powers and their general foreign policy approaches. Australia's good regional citizenship has supported the preservation of U.S. leadership in East Asia vis-à-vis the rise of other regional powers, while Indonesia's good regional citizenship has helped to narrow the gaps among regional actors through mechanisms led by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of TEME: Casopis za Društvene Nauke is the property of TEME: Casopis za Drustvene Nauke and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

How do Taiwanese officials view democracy and culture and how do they plan to utilise these two soft power resources as part of advancing the island's international position? Based primarily on interviews conducted with state officials in Taiwan, this paper analyses Taiwan's soft power repositioning in the regional and global soft power competition and examines its advantages and disadvantages. It discusses the institutional and geopolitical constraints Taiwan faces when trying to implement its soft power policy and addresses the internal disagreements over utilising its cultural and democratic achievements. It concludes that despite the utility of soft power in pursuing its foreign policy agenda, Taiwan faces a few major institutional and conceptual obstacles, keeping Taiwanese diplomacy in a transitional period from old thinking about culture and diplomacy while hesitantly evaluating its soft power resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Humania del Sur: Revista de Estudios Latinoamericanos, Africanos y Asiáticos is the property of Humania del Sur. Estudios Latinoamericanos Africanos y Asiaticos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

East Asia's security environment is changing rapidly. Over the past five years or so, the security order has become increasingly unsettled as it is buffeted by a complex array of forces. The region is entering a period of growing rivalry and animosity states are uncertain over the strategic intentions of great and rising powers, nationalism is an increasingly pervasive force, and military spending has been ramping up in many countries over the past decade. That the security environment is changing is unarguable. But what is the extent of these changes? And what are the implications of these shifts for regional states? This paper introduces the special issue "East Asia's Contested Security Order". It begins by discussing the broad contours of the changing East Asian security order and what is at stake for regional powers. It then introduces the seven articles in this edition that challenge existing conceptualisations of the East Asian security order, articulate diverse perspectives on that order held by regional, middle and smaller powers, examine their complex and different security strategies that contribute to shaping the regional order, and consider the extent to which the regional security order may be said to be "contested". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia's security order is experiencing significant change as it moves from a stable and peaceful geopolitical setting into one of increasingly open contestation. There is no scholarly consensus about the core character of East Asia's old security order, thus making analysis of this period of change especially challenging. The aim of this paper is two‐fold. Firstly, it seeks to provide some order to the broader debate about East Asia's regional security environment. Secondly, it provides a novel account of East Asia's security order that better captures the key dynamics at play in the region than the literature currently does. The paper's first part discusses the different types of security orders identified by scholars and analysts. The second examines the ways in which scholars have attempted to explain East Asia's security order and explores the key forces that they have argued shaped their form. The third part develops a distinctive account of Asia's security order which focuses on the interplay of domestic and international factors and argues that it was the political consensus that existed across the region about its structure and purpose that made the region stable and it is the breakdown of that consensus that is destabilising East Asia today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia offers a fertile ground for applying dominant theoretical perspectives in International Relations and understanding their relevance and limitations. As this region has seen much conflict and cooperation historically and is re-emerging as a key theater of great power competition in the 21st century even when states maintain high levels of economic interactions, our understanding of the regional order will be enhanced by the theoretical tools available in the larger mainstream IR perspectives. The existence of a peculiar regional order of no war, yet a number of simmering disputes (along with high levels of economic interdependence) can be characterized as cold peace which deserves an explanation. The paper applies two variants of realism—balance of power and hegemonic stability – and the key arguments in liberalism to analyze the cold peace in Northeast Asia and normal peace in Southeast Asia from a historical perspective. It finds both grand theoretical approaches have partial applications for understanding the East Asian order. A hybrid approach is more valuable to better explain regional order during diverse time periods and different sub-regions of East Asia. Although the presence of both hegemony and balance of power can prevent major wars for a period, they do not help resolve the pre-existing disputes. Deepened economic interdependence mitigates some spiraling tendencies as states fearful of losing too much economically do not escalate crises beyond a point. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given that there is no recent research on decomposition for global inequality, the aim of this study is to fill the gap in the literature by investigating global inequality with decomposition technique. The data of this study were compiled from the World Bank and decomposition by subgroups was conducted to evaluate the driving forces behind the evolution of inequality. Almost all the countries in the world were included in this study, and the study period spans from 2000 to 2017. The analysis was carried out in several stages to evaluate the issue of North–South divide, as well as the impacts of regional and income subgroups. There are several salient findings derived from this study. First, the results show that there was a gradual decline of international inequality within the study period. Second, there was still a large disparity between the developed and developing countries, and the inequality within the developing countries has aggravated further. Third, geographical location has exerted great impacts on global inequality and East Asia contributed about 40% to the overall decline in international inequality. Fourth, decline in inequality amongst the upper-middle-income countries also contributed substantially to the fall in international inequality. The results derived from this paper can provide pertinent information for the formulation of a comprehensive and coherent strategy in coordinating international efforts and managing inequality while promoting human development under the framework of the newly established Sustainable Development Goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, maritime sovereignty disputes have become highly visible microcosms of broader contests between security orders in East Asia. Escalating tensions over seas provoke questions about how historical and territorial conceptions of sovereignty map onto maritime areas, and the continuing effectiveness of the so‐called "rules‐based order" in maintaining regimes for deciding jurisdiction of islands, rocks and other maritime land features. The paper examines sovereignty claims and the international law of the sea across various cases, including the contested claims over Dokdo/Takeshima, Senkaku/Diaoyu Dao and China's nine‐dash line. These case studies reveal the tensions between two legal regimes: territorial rules of acquisition (sovereignty) and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This article concludes by considering the ways that the symbolic nature of these disputes has implications for the capacities of UNCLOS and other legal instruments in the US‐led "rules‐based order" to establish orderly relations among states in the maritime arena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite its relevance and importance in the emerging global order, the partnership between South Korea and the Middle East somehow has failed to capture due attention from the pundits of geostrategy and international political economy. In the conventional discourse, the two entities have neither been characterized as natural allies nor have they been considered as equal trade partners. The engagement and interaction between South Korea and the Middle East has been limited to a story revolving around the narrative of energy security and construction assignments. In an effort to provide a more inclusive view on South Korea-Middle East relations, this paper examines the context and catalysts that are shaping the evolving partnership between the two sides and are opening new vistas for further consolidation. The paper argues that even in the current geopolitical constraints, South Korea and the Middle East have a compelling case than ever before to reignite their partnership for mutual prosperity and peace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper contributes to the discussion on East Asian capitalism as a distinct and path dependent economic model. Taking the discussion on the "varieties of capitalism" (VoC) as a departure point, we distinguish East Asian capitalism from Anglo-American liberal market economies and European coordinated market economies. We show that the core East Asian capitalist countries Japan, Korea and China follow a coordinated approach in business-finance relations, while business-labor affairs remain largely uncoordinated. These findings identify some limitations of the classic VoC approach, which is based on the dichotomy of the liberal and the coordinated model as well as the hypothesis of institutional complementarity. The second contribution of this paper is to investigate the changes in the above-described two-dimensional relationships. We find that there is no clear trend and few evidences that East Asian countries have been converging with an Anglo-American liberal model of managing economic relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

India's ambitions in East Asia are evident and pragmatic. It has a growing bonhomie with Japan to collaborate with on bilateral level and within multilateral frameworks as well. In consideration of Japan's caution towards the US and China, it is looking for a sustainable partnership that has mutually appreciative policy axes and the capabilities to achieve bilateral objectives with it. It has repeatedly identified India as the most viable option to adopt this role. The author has taken into consideration multilateral arrangements and larger international relations with countries like China to understand the limitations to Indo-Japanese relations, with recommendations on how to overcome them. Furthermore, the article explores the possibility of a larger multilateral security regime with the Republic of Korea and Taiwan, in light of mutual interests and the latest trends of multilateralism that have swept Asia in the twenty-first century. Finally, the paper observes that India's role in East Asia does not have to be fundamentally defined by or structured on the basis of the actions of a third party. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The decline of the U.S. and the rise of China have been one of the main drivers of change in the foreign policy of the countries in East Asia. Although having been often called "hedging," recent developments show more variation in states' response in the region. President Duterte's leaning towards China, possibly in response to the economic opportunities given by the Belt and Road Initiative, has reversed the predecessor's position. This poses puzzles that demand explanations beyond the state-level analysis. This paper examines what accounts for the shift and whether it is sustainable. Although the Philippines' foreign policy has traditionally been driven by the ruling elites, the election of President Duterte in 2016 has drawn renewed attention to the public as one of the domestic factors that influence foreign policy. Duterte's pivot to China appears to be conflicting with the general sentiments of the public about the U.S. and China, but in line with their aspirations for economic prosperity, considering the potential economic benefits that China can offer. This paper argues that recent policies can be explained by the dominant sentiment present in East Asia called "econophoria" (Buzan & Segal, 1994), which refers to the prioritization of economic growth to the point that legitimacy comes from rising living standards. It contends that econophoria is not something imposed by the state, but it is a choice by society as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why is the East Asia region so important for the European Union? What are its interests and what challenges does it face? How it approaches its main strategic partners in the region, the People's Republic of China and Japan? The current paper is trying to answer these questions providing an analysis of the foreign policy of the EU in the region as it has formed throughout the last decade. It focuses mainly on a brief review of the literature and the research progress which has been accomplished so far with the purpose of identifying new challenges, weaknesses and factors that need to be included in future research. In the first part, there will be an effort to describe the interests, priorities and challenges of the Union. In the second part, there will be an analysis and description of the EU foreign policy towards its two major partners in East Asia, highlighting the main elements of their bilateral relationships. Lastly, there will be an effort to provide the future trends and possible actions to be taken by the EU, in order to further consolidate its presence in the area via a multifaceted strategy as presented at the EU Global Strategy of 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the economic integration of the East and South Asian economies in the global economy. East Asian economies are shown to be achieving much more of their potential trade than South Asian economies, both in terms of intra-regional trade and in trade with the rest of the world. Examination of the China- Japan, India- Pakistan and Taiwan-mainland China bilateral relationships shows that integration of these economies into the global economy has allowed economic relations to dominate and constrain difficult bilateral political relations in East Asia while in South Asia adverse political relations have hampered development of bilateral economic relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The East China Sea (ECS) is one of the region's most significant and oft-times under-addressed potential flashpoints. In this article we take a holistic approach and reexamine the recent actions of East Asia's two most significant powers, China and Japan, in relation to this important body of maritime space, as well as those of the United States (US), as the incumbent regional hegemon. Specifically, we examine the efficacy of each. This highlights a dynamism in Chinese actions, as well as elucidating how the US and Japan have come to adopt policies that are of dubious efficacy as a means of alleviating or nullifying the escalation of unwanted tensions across the ECS. In so doing, we draw upon two key concepts, immobilism and confirmation bias, that help us to understand why the US and Japan are failing to achieve their assumed objectives of regional stability and the maintenance of the status quo. Ultimately, we argue that a combination of immobilism and confirmation bias in American and Japanese foreign policy, in response to the greater dynamism and adaptability of regional great powers such as China, has led to latent changes in the status quo that risk undermining stability across the ECS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The One Belt One Road (OBOR) project is perhaps China's most significant international relations initiative in recent times. It is based on openness, harmony, inclusivity, mutual benefit and market operations and aims to connect the economically vibrant East Asia and the developed Europe by land and by sea, and in the process, it brings growth and development to tens of countries along the modern Silk routes. In this paper, we compare the impact of the main initiatives of OBOR, namely enhancements in physical infrastructure and improvements in border administration, on the trade of countries that have signed on to this project, especially countries along the six economic corridors. We find overwhelming evidence that shows improvements in border administration has the greatest impact on exports of corridor countries. Although physical infrastructure is important for trade, the Chinese government should place equal attention to improvements in trade facilitation to ensure trade routes operate seamlessly across the various corridors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will deal with selected developments in the decade of the sixties which can be considered as contributing to the erosion of the bi-polar power structure of the immediate post-war period. They are: the development of the European Economic Community as a power pole, the Sino-Soviet conflict resulting in a split within the "Communist bloc," as well as the loosening of dyadic ties between the United States and Japan and their impact upon East Asian international politics. These developments will be projected against the background of the collective-bilateral security systems existing in different parts of the world, including East Asia, and the emergence of Panch Shila in the fifties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the roles of co-chairs in international negotiations. This study attempts to fill the research gap by scrutinizing co-chairs' effectiveness, defined as an ability to shape agreement details in one's direction, to better understand chairs' and co-chairs' influence in negotiations. I argue that a co-chair's effectiveness is not a function of resource possession, but is rooted in its resource management, or ability to convert the existing resources into bargaining influence. To validate my argument, I analyze the Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralization (CMIM) negotiation rounds from 2005 to 2010, focusing on the members' financial contributions and vote shares. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

It is obvious that the security environment in East Asia is more unstable and unpredictable. In the South China Sea, tensions over disputed islands initiate a more severe Sino–American rivalry. In the East China Sea, China disputes the control over the Senkaku Islands, and is escalating military activities around those islands. North Korea continues provocative activities including launching of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons tests. This naturally leads to the idea that Japan needs to play a larger role to restore stability in the international order. This paper explores the challenges facing East Asian security in the face of the passage of Japan's new security bills in 2015 and how they impact the future of Japanese security policy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this interconnected world, the multilateral mechanisms become more and more present and relevant. However, East Asia is a notable exception with no such institutionalised tool. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) remains the most troubling state and the main reason why collaboration has not resulted in strengthening the stability in East Asia. Although a formal dialogue called the Six Party Talks exists, it currently remains in deadlock after two nuclear tests conducted by Pyongyang in 2009. The actions that took place throughout last year have once again drawn greater attention to the Korean Peninsula, raising the possibility of resuming the negotiations. Nevertheless, the question about what this new agenda should include remain relevant. The purpose of this paper is to outline international relations in Northeast Asia from both theoretical and practical perspective and provide ideas on what can be done to facilitate the cooperation between the states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper applies a neoclassical realist approach that combines systemic- and domestic-level variables to explain important aspects of the current global delegitimation phase. The key unit-level variable is nationalism, which interacts with structural-systemic factors to create unexpected behaviors for both the rising power and its threatened neighbors. With respect to China, nationalism interacts with its power status and trajectory to produce an increasingly assertive foreign policy regardless of whether it continues rising or stalls. With respect to China's neighbors, nationalism makes it easier for leaders to mobilize public support for military preparation and sacrifices associated with internal balancing behaviors. But nationalism and other powerful domestic factors interact with system structure to constrain China's neighbors from aligning with each other. These domestic restrictions that reduce the apparent flexibility of alliances under multipolarity partly explain the puzzling absence of a counter-balancing coalition against a rising and increasingly assertive China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the center of world economic growth and world politics is shifting to East Asia, the region is undergoing a strategic transformation due to the ongoing power shift. As a result, major regional powers, namely the USA, China, Japan, India, South Korea, Australia and South East Asian states are building up their military potential, in particular naval forces, amid aggravating regional security problems and escalation of maritime disputes. This paper aims to assess regional strategies and military buildup in the Indo-Pacific. With the USA seeking to preserve dominance in the region, China trying to realign the regional power dynamics in its favor, Japan aiming to preserve its place as one of the regional leaders, India and Russia with their goals to become independent powers, and middle and small powers searching for an adequate answer to regional challenges, East Asia and the Indo-Pacific are clearly showing a complex dynamics of competing regional strategies and visions of regional order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyzes the geopolitical landscape in East Asia, focusing on the possibility of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. It explores China's strategic objectives, military preparations, and the challenges it would face in executing such an operation. Despite China's growing military capabilities, Taiwan's geographic advantages, robust defense systems, and significance in global supply chains make an invasion a formidable and risky undertaking. The article also considers the potential involvement of allies and the broader implications for international relations. It concludes that maintaining the status quo is in the best interest of all parties involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Interactions is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article unpacks the dynamics of group hedging in international relations by examining the Southeast Asian states' collective efforts to use ASEAN-led multilateral institutions as a platform to hedge against a range of risks surrounding intensifying big-power rivalry and increasing global uncertainties. It argues that ASEAN's collective hedging is a converged but not necessarily coordinated act. Despite the states' diverging attributes and outlooks, they converge on shared vulnerabilities, collective memories, and disadvantaged positions. Southeast Asian states thus view ASEAN-based multilateralism as an indispensable, albeit insufficient, means to engage big powers and manage other challenges. Through the functions of institutional binding, buffering, and building, ASEAN's group hedging serves to mitigate and offset risks while shaping Asian order amid deepening uncertainties in the age of the Indo-Pacific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia is essential to the UK's post-Brexit international strategy. Within a complex web of bilateral and multilateral arrangements, the UK needs to manage historical ties, new strategic objectives and ongoing partnerships. Underpinning these interactions is trust and some of the dynamics more commonly associated with formal security alliances. Post-Brexit, there is a need to assure these states of the UK's place in the world and particularly its commitment to, and strategic objectives in, the region, but also recognise that there is an increasing risk of moral hazard for the UK in seeking to achieve some of its objectives. Catherine Jones offers a framework for understanding the challenges and opportunities for the UK's current planning in the region.◼ [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia is increasingly at the centre of debates among International Relations (IR) scholars. China's political, economic, and military ascendency is increasingly considered as a crucial test case for main approaches to IR. Despite this renewed attention, mainstream theories employed to analyse contemporary Asia are still remarkably Euro-centric. A wave of studies has argued in favour of a broad 'decolonization' of theoretical concepts used to analyse East Asia as well as other regions. These efforts have produced several distinct research agendas. Firstly, critical and post-colonial theorists have worked on the par destruens, highlighting the inherent Euro-centrism of many IR concepts and theories. Secondly, scholars such as Buzan and Acharya have promoted the idea of Global IR, seeking to advance a 'non-Western' and non-Euro-centric research agenda. This agenda has found fertile ground especially in China, where several scholars have tried to promote a Chinese School of IR. This article has three main purposes. Firstly, it briefly explores the issue of Eurocentrism in IR studies dedicated to East Asia. Secondly, it maps the theoretical debates aimed at overcoming it, looking in particular at the 'Global IR' research programme and the so-called Chinese School. Finally, it sketches a few other possible avenues of research for a very much needed cooperation between Global IR and area studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the coverage of Sun Yatsen's pan-Asianism speech in November 1924 by three colonial-era Korean daily newspapers (Dong-A Ilbo, Chosun Ilbo and Mai-Il Shinpo), in the context of the events immediately before and after the speech. My interest lies in illuminating how Sun's message was interpreted differently by these dailies. On the one hand, the Dong-A Ilbo, as a nationalist newspaper, sought to evoke anti-Japanese sentiments and the desire for national independence in its readers through Sun's voice. For the Dong-A's Korean readers, Sun was a symbol of anti-colonial nationalism. On the other, the Mai-Il Shinpo, which was published by the Japanese colonial government, reported enthusiastically on Sun's pan-Asianism speech to promote the idea of Japan–China cooperation and a Japan-centred regional order in East Asia. A closer examination of Sun's anti-colonial and pro-Japanese political stance and how these newspapers interpreted his pan-Asian vision provides an opportunity to reconsider how political East Asia was envisioned differently from the Korean, Japanese and Chinese perspectives. In addition, analysing Sun's speech, in which a Sinocentric mindset was incorporated into the newly conceptualised trans-national vision, deepens our understanding of the complicated relationship between nationalist and internationalist thinking in East Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia has become more salient on the international stage, economically and strategically. Considering its significance, many scholars have paid attention to the regional security environment. They consider East Asia a peaceful region because there has been no inter–state war, and attempt to explore factors preventing wars in East Asia. We believe that the focus on the absence of war would not only fail to provide a whole picture of the current East Asian security condition but also give a false impression that this region is stable and secure. Accordingly, we attempt to provide a detailed descriptive look at the current security environment of East Asia by focusing on various aspects of the security environment. We show that East Asia suffers from intense tensions, while it has avoided serious interstate conflict. By drawing on various perspectives, we attempt to explain the seemingly contradictory phenomenon in this region, a co-existence of intense hostility and negative peace. The U.S.–China competition, territorial disputes, and the ineffectiveness of regional institutions have intensified intra–regional tension, undermining potentials for developing security cooperation. Nevertheless, the security role of the United States and a high level of intra–regional economic integration have prevented the occurrence of serious militarized conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Academic Inquiries / Akademik Incelemeler Dergisi is the property of Akademik Incelemeler Dergisi (Journal of Academic Inquiries) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy & Peace is the property of Ihsan Dogramaci Peace Foundation, Center for Foreign Policy & Peace Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

From 1959 to 1984, over 93,000 Koreans moved to North Korea from Japan as part of a repatriation project conducted during this time. Among them were people who had escaped from North Korea and immigrated to Japan and South Korea as well as the descendants of such people. This research examines the immigration trajectories of North Korean defectors related to the repatriation project and its effects on international relations in East Asia in a migration systems context. Specifically, it focuses on 26 North Korean defectors who have connections with Japan and settled in Japan and South Korea. It argues that the migration pathways of North Korean defectors linked with the repatriation project have been constructed with the cooperation of and amidst conflict between East Asian countries. To respond to the situation, North Korean defectors used their connections with Japan in amicable relations between Japan and China. However, after the relations went sour, defectors turned to informal transitional networks. If these strategies were unavailable, the defectors faced difficulties, unless they received social or capital support from the destination countries. After entering the destination country, those who settled in Japan have experienced different situations due to the inconsistency in administrative proceedings, while those in South Korea have been treated equally as other defectors. In this sense, some defectors have faced precarious situations in their immigration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the Trump administration, Sino-American relations have deteriorated to the point where the new consensus in the U.S. foreign policy establishment is that a new Cold War has begun between the U.S. and China. This article looks at the origins of the "first Cold War" for insight into how a second Cold War might be avoided. There is a danger of the Cold War turning hot because of power transition dynamics. This article also invokes the pre-1914 Anglo-German rivalry, and argues that if conflict is to be avoided, the U.S. must accommodate China's rise by yielding hegemony in East Asia and meeting China's status claim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Without direct fieldwork access, one can nevertheless imagine what possible changes can happen in the everyday life of North Koreans, by references with conditions elsewhere in East Asia which resonates with current conditions in North Korea. First, the division between North and South Korea can be referenced with the other instances of nations divided by a communist and a capitalist regime; namely, the present China and Taiwan and the previous North and South Vietnam. In contrast to these references to possible routes to reunification, it also can be referenced to instances of peaceful separations, such as the case of Malaysia and Singapore. Second, now that a nascent private market economy has been introduced, the experiences of Vietnam and China in marketizing their respective centrally planned economy can serve as references to imagine the possible economic transformation of North Korea. Third, the penetration of imported media/popular cultures into North Korean media consumption may stimulate new aspirations of local population for a different material future, as it has done in other parts of East Asia. Drawing on the experiences of other East Asian nations as reference points, potential and possible changes in the everyday life in North Korea can be imagined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rise of China and how other countries respond to China's rising is widely studied. But little has been done on how other countries reacted to the rise of China throughout history and how China strategically interacted with them. The conventional wisdom holds East Asian international relations did not operate in the Westphalian way and China's rising in history did not trigger regional balancing actions. In this article, we challenge that view. We argue East Asian international relations were not exceptional to basic rules of the Westphalian system. Each time China rose up, it triggered balancing actions from neighboring regimes, including nomadic empires and settled kingdoms. The neighboring regimes would accommodate China only after they were defeated by China or pro-China regimes propped up in these countries. The Chinese hegemony in East Asian history could not be taken for granted. Over last 2,000 plus years, only during three periods of time (the Qin-Han 秦汉, Sui-Tang 隋唐, and Ming-Qing 明清 dynasties) China could successfully overpower regional resistance and enjoyed a stable tributary relationship with neighboring states. In the rest of time, the Chinese state could not retain hegemony in East Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study of religion and international religions has witnessed an exponential growth in recent decades. Courses and programs exploring the complex entanglements between faith and global politics have likewise mushroomed around the world. Despite this ferment, reflections on teaching religion and international relations have so far lagged behind. This forum seeks to remedy this general silence. It brings together a diverse range of scholars from a multiplicity of national, religious, methodological, and theoretical backgrounds who teach across a variety of different geographical settings including North America, Europe, and East Asia. Contributors reflect on three broad themes. First, how do we engage with the contested character of religion as a category of analysis and practice, and with the multidisciplinary nature of its study? Second, how does the context within which we operate—be it geographical, cultural, institutional, or historical—influence and shape who, what, and how we teach? Third, how do we address the important and, at times, contentious personal and ethical challenges that our research and teaching on religion and politics inevitably raises in the classroom? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia is currently in a transitional period. Recognizing the challenges presented by China's rise to the current regional order, existing literature analyses the security situation in Asia by focusing on the material aspects of power distribution between the US and China. Few works substantively discuss the roles played by middle powers such as Japan in shaping the regional order and how they can deal with the challenges of great power competition and threats to the global rules‐based order. By employing Japan's involvement in the South China Sea issues as a case study, this article examines how a middle power attempts to shape or underpin the regional security order and if such attempts are effective. The investigation of Japan's engagement illustrates that a middle power's practical support can indirectly and gradually contribute to sustaining and defending the regional "rules‐based order". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the initiatives of Indonesia to reform the rules and norms of ASEAN member countries to secure regional stability and create order in East Asia. Topics discussed include the non-interference principle for ASEAN and its importance for security and stabilization, consensus-based decision-making rule, the ASEAN charter-drafting process, post-Cyclone Nargis crisis management and liberal democratic principles.

East Asia is a region of signal importance for global order because of its economic dynamism and growing heft, China's challenge to the United States as incumbent regional and global hegemon, and other conflict hotspots like the Korean peninsula. This requires academic analysis that both appreciates the subtleties inherent to this region and can relate them to the wider systemic context. Many analysts have begun to allude to the challenging characteristics that are present in the international relations of East Asia, in particular struggling to explain how growing levels of economic interdependence can coexist with heightened security tensions. This article offers a research prospectus that suggests ways of analyzing these apparently contradictory trends. It proposes the development of research questions and approaches that are more suited to studying the international relations of a region with characteristics that we define as dual, hybrid, and contingent. We propose a Conjunctions Analytical Framework that explores what happens at the conjunctions of the regional-global and the unit-regional/global levels of analysis—the "grey areas" where social formations meet and interact. We aim to help shape the future study of the IR of East Asia and to suggest more effective ways of analyzing the complex reality of East Asia's regional and global politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), formerly known as One Belt One Road (OBOR), has emerged as one of the top priorities for Chinese President Xi Jinping ever since he unveiled the initiative in 2013. This special issue surveys the reception of BRI in East Asia. As China's immediate neighborhood, this region will play an important role in determining whether Beijing's signature project will succeed in the mid- to long term. However, research has thus far mostly focused on BRI's reception in Central Asia and (Eastern) Europe. In this introduction, we first provide an overview of the literature by identifying three main strands of interpretation on BRI, namely those focusing on geoeconomics, on geopolitics, and on international norms as well as order. Next, we provide a review of the contemporary research on both Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian perceptions of and policy responses to BRI. Finally, we discuss research gaps in the literature and provide an overview of case studies and findings in this special issue. We conclude by identifying recurring themes and characteristics in East Asian responses to BRI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Hua-Yi 華夷 system that spread in East Asia in the form of tribute relationships during the Ming dynasty [1368-1644] began as a system based on China's perceived cultural superiority, but slowly evolved into a system centered on nationalism. Accordingly, the kinship networks embedded in the Hua-Yi system were also continually evolving, breaking down, and reforming in a cycle that repeated itself multiple times. Amid this process, ethnocentrism [ zi minzu zhongxin zhuyi 自民族中心主義] and "interest centralism" [ liyi zhongxin zhuyi 利益中心主義] played key roles in the formation and eventual dissolution of the Hua-Yi system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of East Asian Science, Technology & Society is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Despite recent interest in the history of international law, the question of historical justice is a challenging issue due to the principle of intertemporal law. However, such a formalistic application renders historical injustice on a structural level alongside its substantial level. The injustice issue arising from conflicting normative structures is the focus here. Why is it that European international law was considered the only legitimate rule of law when the case in question occurred and when complicated plural or parallel orders coincided and conflicted with each other? This spatial issue seems to be one of the premises that has not been addressed sufficiently. This study suggests that for the positivistic tenet of the principle of intertemporal law to stand, the interspatial aspects of international law are relevant in the discourse on issues of historical justice, especially in the context of East Asian civilizations. International legal discourse should take into account the social space of law or interspatial law. This study does not attempt to deconstruct the validity of current international law or demand reparation for historical wrongs. Instead, it suggests that interspatial law may contribute to the international legal system on two counts. First, interspatial law may supplement the agonistic, positivistic application of intertemporal law to historical cases. Second, the recognition of the spatiality of law may promote the idea that differences can be accepted while avoiding the monopolization of the so‐called "universal international law." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

East Asia is still politically and diplomatically divided while increasingly becoming integrated economically. East Asian states, excluding Japan, share a common experience in that they were deprived of their sovereignty, in part or as a whole, by Western or Japanese colonial powers. The experience still defines current international relations among East Asian countries, raising the issue of justice in international law. International lawyers, however, have been, in general, reluctant to talk about justice in international law. Before the 19th century, international law was dominated by naturalism or natural law doctrine. The international community was composed of European states, excluding non‐Christian and non‐European states. From the early 19th century to the end of World War II, international law was dominated by these states' will. International law had developed various principles to facilitate Western powers' colonial occupations and in the 19th century, international law was a tool for Western colonialism and imperialism. After World War II, international law almost abolished the divide between European and non‐European, Christian and non‐Christian, and civilized and non‐civilized states. Colonization is not allowed anymore and many parts of the world that had belonged to former colonies in Africa and Asia became independent states. Further, human rights are no longer considered internal affairs of a state. Asia met with Western powers when positivism was prevalent. The relationship between China and neighboring countries, such as Korea, Burma, Thailand, Vietnam, and the Ryukyu Islands, had been maintained by a tributary system until the mid‐19th century. The China‐centered tributary system, maintained for centuries in East Asia, was replaced, however, by a capitulation system from the mid‐19th century. East Asian states concluded many unequal treaties with Western powers and East Asian people might have been confused by the paradox of the principle of equality among sovereign states and the unequal nature of the treaties that were forced against them. Efforts to recover sovereignty and to decolonize after World War II in East Asia seem to be far from satisfactory. Japan has never recognized its legal responsibility from colonialism. Even with the conclusion of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, many territorial issues still remain unresolved in East Asia. The Peace Treaty did not settle various colonialism‐related claims between Japan and neighboring countries, failing to render an effective remedy for past human rights violations. Thomas Franck argues that a rule's legitimacy enhances its compliance. Steven R. Ratner argues that international law rules would be deemed just if they were to (i) advance international peace, and (ii) respect basic human rights. If the international community is really a legal community where states are bound by rights and duties, it should be naturally based on justice. The legacy of past colonialism in East Asia that might hinder global peace and respect for human rights should be addressed in the near future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article seeks to critically assess the relevance of International Relations Theory (IRT) for East Asia International Relations (IR). After identifying the shortcomings of IRT in explaining East Asia IR, the article provides several ways to modify it with a goal to make it more suitable for East Asia IR. Its central claim is that the IRT's bias toward European experiences and great power politics generates unsatisfactory accounts for and inaccurate predictions about East Asia IR. This does not mean, however, that we should treat IRT as completely irrelevant and develop an indigenous theory of East Asia IR. Given that no single theory is complete and perfectly relevant across time and space and that many core concepts and key variables of IRT are also pertinent for East Asia IR, our efforts should instead be made to refine the existing IRT and make it more suitable for East Asia IR by problematising its major assumptions and central claims on the basis of East Asian experiences. This will save IRT from being a region-specific and a country-specific theory of IR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2013, Japan established its first-ever National Security Council (NSC) as the leading edge of ambitious reforms to its foreign-policy-relevant institutions. Within weeks, Japan’s new national security tripod was firmly in place: the top-level, political NSC ‘control tower’ as well as Japan’s first-ever National Security Strategy and National Security Secretariat. Ever since, the NSC has played a central role in every major aspect of the Japanese strategic trajectory that has attracted so much global attention (and controversy) in the ‘Abe era’. This study analyzes the motivations driving Japan’s decision to establish an NSC, the institution’s key characteristics and functioning, and offers a preliminary assessment of the current and likely future implications of this historic institutional reform. Beyond the NSC’s impact on policy, of potentially greater long-term significance is its effects on Japan’s foreign-policy decision-making processes: in particular, expanded Kantei-centered political leadership of national security affairs and more ‘whole-of-government’ approaches specifically designed to transcend the ‘vertical hurdles’ traditionally dividing Japan’s powerful bureaucracies. The goal of these reforms is as straightforward as it is ambitious: to transform Japan’s ability to flexibly and independently cope with a rapidly changing, increasingly complex, and ever more uncertain security environment in East Asia and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critically reviewing David Kang’s China-centred hierarchical model, his interpretation of historical interactions between China and Vietnam favours Sinocentrism whilst claiming to rescue historical East Asian international relations theories from Eurocentrism. This analysis provides a nuanced account of Vietnam’s agency in pursuing its national interests in the context of a rising China, showing that Vietnam today continues to draw on the historical tradition of deference/resistance to China to orient its strategies and tactics in dealing with its northern neighbour. Vietnam’s stance toward China is akin to balancing Great Power influence, which entails enlisting other Great Powers to defend its core interests vis-à-vis China. The result is that Vietnam simultaneously pursues a mixture of deference and resistance to China that does not resemble balance of power—against China, or balance of threat—bandwagon with China's behaviours. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]