US MORALIZING, SOFT BALANCING, AND SANCTIONS ON JAPAN IN THE INTERWAR PERIOD: GOVERNANCE OR ANARCHY?

International relations scholars who have traditionally seen the world system as "anarchic" have lately been challenged to view it under the rubric of "global governance." It is not always an easy matter to distinguish between acts of "governance" and acts of "anarchy," nor between the soft assertion of moral norms and the soft deployment of power-balancing. A case in point is the evolving US response toward Japanese actions and policies in the Far East (especially China) 1931- 1941, from the Mukden Incident to Pearl Harbor. US policy repeatedly withheld approval or expressed disapproval of Japanese actions and policies, while avoiding any highly explicit threat or official use of force. Anarchic and power-balancing moves are clearly present; yet there is also a distinct element, if not of governance, then of a struggle for governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]