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]

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 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]

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]

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.)