Asian Review of Political Economy最新文献

The growing rivalry between the United States (US) and China has made the global semiconductor supply chain a central arena for economic statecraft, with US export controls restricting China’s access to advanced chips. This paper examines why some governments and semiconductor firms cooperate with these measures, while others resist. It argues that security alignment with the US is the primary factor driving cooperation, surpassing economic power or market interests. Through case studies of South Korea, Chinese Taiwan, Germany, and the Netherlands, the analysis demonstrates that governments with stronger security ties to the US –such as Chinese Taiwan and South Korea– show higher cooperation, while Germany and the Netherlands, with weaker security alignment, show lower adherence. The article challenges arguments that emphasize the role of high-value businesses within the dominant power or firms' indirect dependence on the targeted state as the main determinants of cooperation. Instead, by extending the concept of the security dilemma in alliance politics to corporations, the paper argues that security alignment is more decisive in shaping the outcomes of economic statecraft. In doing so, it introduces the Business Security Dilemma as a tool for understanding how firms respond to the pressures of great power competition.

Military coups are the product of intense contradictions in civil-military relations. From 1931 to 2023, the Middle East witnessed at least 103 coups, which can be categorized into five periods: beginning, peaking, declining, ebbing, and resurging. Each marked by distinct characteristics. These coups can be classified into three types based on the identity of members: military faction-led coups, military faction-coordinated coups, and military faction-subordinate coups. Military elites led the former, whereas the latter two involved military elites, political elites, external members, and the public. This article finds that a military coup in the Middle East arises from various factors through a case study, including opportunities of success, strategic calculations of actors, and identity anxieties. Opportunities of success denote the possibility of a successful coup; strategic calculation of actors implies the cost–benefit assessments of military elites when launching a coup; and identity anxieties reflect military elites’ concerns about their status. The Syrian case demonstrates that, due to the high risk and cost involved, a military coup occurs when opportunities of success, strategic calculations of actors, and identity anxieties are present simultaneously.

The intricate dynamics of international relations, especially within regions like the Middle East, reveal the limitations of relying solely on single theoretical paradigms such as realism, liberalism, constructivism, and Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA). This article advocates for the advancing the application of International Relations (IR) theory through integrative approaches that incorporate insights from multiple frameworks. By critically assessing the shortcomings of isolated applications of mainstream IR theories, the paper underscores how these paradigms often fail to capture the complex interdependencies, hidden causal mechanisms, and multifaceted dynamics that define regional interactions. Utilising the bilateral relationship between China and Turkey as a case study, the analysis demonstrates the inadequacy of single paradigms in explaining the interplay of political, economic, and military dynamics shaping their interactions. The study highlights how domestic political competition, economic structural overlaps, cultural misalignments, and strategic calculations interact in ways that necessitate a more holistic analytical framework. Advocating for an “adaptive integrative approach”, this paper proposes combining multiple theoretical perspectives to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of complex interstate relations. Ultimately, the article calls for embracing theoretical eclecticism and methodological pluralism to better address the challenges of studying relations with Middle Eastern countries, thereby bridging the gap between theoretical abstraction and practical governance.

India's engagement with the Gulf region has a long-standing history, spanning cultural, economic, and diasporic dimensions. Since Prime Minister Modi's tenure, India's Gulf policy has undergone significant adjustments, aiming to enhance its geopolitical influence, ensure energy security, and advance economic and security cooperation by strengthening ties with Gulf nations. Despite achieving some successes, India continues to confront challenges such as U.S. sanctions on Iran and China's competitive presence in West Asia, particularly in the context of intensifying China-U.S. strategic competition. The impact of China-U.S. strategic rivalry on India's Gulf policy is multifaceted. Firstly, the pressure to maintain a dynamic balance in geopolitical maneuvering has increased, necessitating India to remain adaptable in a complex international environment. Secondly, the intensifying China-U.S. competition has prompted India to reassess and adjust its Gulf policy to better safeguard its interests and adapt to the evolving international landscape. Thirdly, the urgency to formulate policies that preserve India's traditional interests has escalated. In response to these challenges, the Modi administration has recalibrated India's Gulf policy, which exhibits three key shifts. Firstly, the Gulf region has gained greater prominence in India's overall diplomatic strategy. Secondly, India has deepened its economic ties with Gulf nations through enhanced trade and investment cooperation. Thirdly, India has selectively coordinated policies with the U.S. to ensure the protection of its interests in the security domain. Looking ahead, India's Gulf policy can be further refined by deepening cooperation in the region and leveraging China's development momentum to share the economic benefits in the Gulf. Additionally, it is imperative for India to formulate a pragmatic and cautious policy towards Iran, characterized by risk aversion and limited proactive engagement.

This paper explores weaponized interdependence and tipping point dynamics. The United States employs export controls to maintain technological leadership and restrict China's access to essential semiconductor technology. Conversely, China intensifies its investment in the semiconductor sector, aiming for technological independence and lessening its dependence on U.S.-controlled technologies. The paper introduces a Stackelberg nested game model to analyze the strategic interactions between the U.S., China, and Chinese semiconductor companies. A tipping point indicates a departure from a unified global network to a polarized structure of technological spheres led by the U.S. and China. Utilizing Bayesian Q-learning, the paper uncovers that continuous escalations could result in detrimental outcomes, including wasted resources and a split global technology regime. The study underscores the limitations of weaponized interdependence as a long-term strategic tool and calls for a recalibration of strategies to prevent irreversible fragmentation of the global technological landscape.

This paper examines the policies of the United States and Russia in arming non-state actors in the Middle East, analysing their objectives, consequences, and implications for regional stability. The study's central question is: How have the actions of the US and Russia in arming non-state actors impacted the conflicts and stability in the Middle East? Using a qualitative analysis of case studies from Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and Yemen, the paper explores the differing strategic approaches of the two powers—America’s tactical, short-term goals versus Russia’s long-term, strategic objectives—and the resulting consequences for the region. The findings suggest that both powers' interventions have exacerbated instability, with the arming of non-state actors often leading to prolonged wars and the emergence of new conflicts. The involvement of regional powers, such as Iran, U.A.E and Türkiye, further complicates the situation, creating an endless cycle of proxy warfare. In contrast, China’s abstention from arming non-state actors is driven by economic concerns and a preference for regional stability.

Given the significant religious connotations, political demands, and social implications associated with Islamic extremism, it is crucial that counter-extremism strategies address a wide array of areas. This is particularly vital in the realms of political participation, religious management, and social governance, all of which are essential for the prevention of Islamic extremism. The complexity and diversity present in the political, religious, and social landscapes of Middle Eastern countries have led to variations in the policies and effectiveness of governance approaches related to Islamic extremism. These variations provide valuable lessons and insights. This article aims to analyze the differences and implications of governance approaches to extremism in the Middle East through a multidimensional assessment of the interrelations among politics and religion, religious-secular relations, and state-society relations. Rather than categorizing these approaches as inherently positive or negative, it is imperative for each country to identify governance strategies that are congruent with its unique circumstances.

The recent events in the Middle East caught most political commentators, observers and thinkers by surprise. Who would have imagined that a non-state actor like Hamas could launch an attack on Israel and create such a complex condition for a powerful state, heavily supported by the USA and Western powers? However, crises in the Middle East often escalate unpredictably, defying calculations and expectations. This paper argues that since October 7th 2023, not only in the Middle East but also in several other regions worldwide, major rival powers have been struggling with crises that are leading to reshape the global order. The paper argues that the realms of Economy, Security, and Diplomacy among the primary global powers are all under scrutiny as they navigate the crises that have intensified significantly towards altering the global order.