Polarity in the Context of U.S.-China Competition: Reassessing Analytical Criteria

Ahead of Print Pub Date : 2023-03-28 DOI:10.51870/xvbp8977
Lauro Borges, Regina Lucena
{"title":"Polarity in the Context of U.S.-China Competition: Reassessing Analytical Criteria","authors":"Lauro Borges, Regina Lucena","doi":"10.51870/xvbp8977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How can polarity be used as a pertinent conceptual asset to inform the description of the distribution of military capabilities amongst the most powerful states in the international system today, especially in consideration of U.S.-China competition? Using the military power approach to polarity, this article analyses the literature that emerged in the 2010s to critically examine this concept. In order to enhance the analytical value of polarity and propose verifiable indicators of it, this study draws on Thompson’s lead-sector model as well as Posen’s and Lee and Thompson’s research on the military foundations of polarity. When doing so, we distinguish latent enabling capabilities (as a secondary dimension of polarity) and the actual military power that primarily characterises polarity as a label. When following this operationalisation of polarity, we show that the international system is still unipolar because the U.S. has unmatched global power projection capabilities and first-rate economic and technological might to sustain its military forces. In other words, the current distribution of military capabilities in the system reflects that the contemporary international system is still U.S.-led and unipolar and that China’s rise is still too confined by regional dynamics to constitute a preface of a military-hegemonic rivalry at a global level.","PeriodicalId":257158,"journal":{"name":"Ahead of Print","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ahead of Print","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51870/xvbp8977","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

How can polarity be used as a pertinent conceptual asset to inform the description of the distribution of military capabilities amongst the most powerful states in the international system today, especially in consideration of U.S.-China competition? Using the military power approach to polarity, this article analyses the literature that emerged in the 2010s to critically examine this concept. In order to enhance the analytical value of polarity and propose verifiable indicators of it, this study draws on Thompson’s lead-sector model as well as Posen’s and Lee and Thompson’s research on the military foundations of polarity. When doing so, we distinguish latent enabling capabilities (as a secondary dimension of polarity) and the actual military power that primarily characterises polarity as a label. When following this operationalisation of polarity, we show that the international system is still unipolar because the U.S. has unmatched global power projection capabilities and first-rate economic and technological might to sustain its military forces. In other words, the current distribution of military capabilities in the system reflects that the contemporary international system is still U.S.-led and unipolar and that China’s rise is still too confined by regional dynamics to constitute a preface of a military-hegemonic rivalry at a global level.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中美竞争背景下的两极:重新评估分析标准
如何将极性作为一种相关的概念资产来描述当今国际体系中最强大的国家之间的军事能力分布,特别是考虑到美中竞争?本文使用军事力量的方法来分析极性,分析了2010年代出现的文献,以批判性地审视这一概念。为了提高极性的分析价值,提出可验证的极性指标,本研究借鉴了Thompson的lead-sector模型,以及Posen、Lee和Thompson对极性的军事基础的研究。在这样做时,我们区分潜在的支持能力(作为极性的次要维度)和实际的军事力量,后者主要将极性作为一种标签。在遵循这种两极化的运作时,我们表明,国际体系仍然是单极的,因为美国拥有无与伦比的全球力量投送能力和一流的经济和技术实力来维持其军事力量。换句话说,当前体系中军事能力的分布反映了当代国际体系仍然是美国主导的单极体系,中国的崛起仍然受到地区动态的限制,不足以构成全球层面军事霸权竞争的序幕。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Exploring Russia’s Postponed War Against Ukraine: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Strategic Studies Institutes’ Publications from 1991 to 2014 Agents of Social Change: Cultural Work, Institutions, and the (De)securitisation of Minorities Conflictual Rebordering: The Russia Policies of Finland and Estonia Ukraine at War: Resilience and Normative Agency Polarity in the Context of U.S.-China Competition: Reassessing Analytical Criteria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1