Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1998206
Thuy T. Do
Abstract The world is witnessing a dual process of power shift from West to East and power diffusion from the major states to the lower layers of the global power structure. However, inadequate scholarly endeavour is devoted to exploring the foreign policy thinking and practices of weaker states amid these dynamics. This paper analyses the changing patterns of Vietnam’s post-Cold War worldview, its engagement with the regional security order, particularly its current threat perception and strategic response to regional challenges such as China’s rise and the South China Sea disputes. It will trace how Vietnam, previously perceived as a small to medium country, has increased its agency in the twenty first century to the extent that an emerging middle power can maneuver in a multifaceted and fluid world. It argues from the case of Vietnam that weaker states are not merely dictated by structural developments but may now have greater agency in contributing to shaping regional or world orders. Such investigation will help enrich both the existing Western-dominated and structure-oriented accounts on small and middle powers.
{"title":"Vietnam’s growing agency in the twenty-first century","authors":"Thuy T. Do","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1998206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1998206","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The world is witnessing a dual process of power shift from West to East and power diffusion from the major states to the lower layers of the global power structure. However, inadequate scholarly endeavour is devoted to exploring the foreign policy thinking and practices of weaker states amid these dynamics. This paper analyses the changing patterns of Vietnam’s post-Cold War worldview, its engagement with the regional security order, particularly its current threat perception and strategic response to regional challenges such as China’s rise and the South China Sea disputes. It will trace how Vietnam, previously perceived as a small to medium country, has increased its agency in the twenty first century to the extent that an emerging middle power can maneuver in a multifaceted and fluid world. It argues from the case of Vietnam that weaker states are not merely dictated by structural developments but may now have greater agency in contributing to shaping regional or world orders. Such investigation will help enrich both the existing Western-dominated and structure-oriented accounts on small and middle powers.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"319 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43167639","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-28DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1998202
I. Wicaksana
Abstract Recent developments in the Asia-Pacific or Indo-Pacific region have illustrated the emergence of a contested region and unfolding regional order. Within the multiplicity, as argued in the introduction of the special issue, all stakeholders, including the weak state actors, not necessarily the superior ones, are participating in the process of order-building. This article looks at how Indonesia, the largest member country of ASEAN, pursues its agency amid the contested regional formulations between China and the US. The argument is that Indonesia promotes its concept of a rules-based interaction beyond the dominant great power politics, as a potential agency enabling the creation of a pluralised regional order. This agential position provides the basis to rethink the relevance of the established conceptual framework of hedging commonly used to understand small and middle powers’ foreign policies toward the major players. The author sees that Indonesia hedges in different ways, demonstrating a distinct conceptualisation which is likely to make a contribution to the project of Global IR.
{"title":"How does Indonesia exercise agency in the contested and complex regional environment?","authors":"I. Wicaksana","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1998202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1998202","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recent developments in the Asia-Pacific or Indo-Pacific region have illustrated the emergence of a contested region and unfolding regional order. Within the multiplicity, as argued in the introduction of the special issue, all stakeholders, including the weak state actors, not necessarily the superior ones, are participating in the process of order-building. This article looks at how Indonesia, the largest member country of ASEAN, pursues its agency amid the contested regional formulations between China and the US. The argument is that Indonesia promotes its concept of a rules-based interaction beyond the dominant great power politics, as a potential agency enabling the creation of a pluralised regional order. This agential position provides the basis to rethink the relevance of the established conceptual framework of hedging commonly used to understand small and middle powers’ foreign policies toward the major players. The author sees that Indonesia hedges in different ways, demonstrating a distinct conceptualisation which is likely to make a contribution to the project of Global IR.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"297 - 318"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49014550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-28DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1996451
Enze Han
Abstract This paper makes a novel contribution by examining the puzzle of one Southeast Asian nation, Myanmar, and its dramatic shift of ‘fortune’ in its international status and the domestic consequences of that shift during the decade of 2010–2020. It highlights how the country’s changing international relations affected its domestic political decision-making process. It puts forth the argument that the amount of international attention the country received since 2011 as the target of competitive courtship between China, United States, and the West in general, and the consequent feeling of being valued as a geostrategic asset, created strong conditions for overconfidence on part of Myanmar’s government and military. This favorable international environment also coincided with perceived progress in democratization domestically. Similar to its past patterns of behavior toward ethnic minorities, the Myanmar military and the government overestimated their likelihood of success in dealing with the Rohingya minority while underestimating the likelihood of punishment by the international community.
{"title":"Overconfidence, missteps, and tragedy: dynamics of Myanmar’s international relations and the genocide of the Rohingya","authors":"Enze Han","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1996451","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1996451","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper makes a novel contribution by examining the puzzle of one Southeast Asian nation, Myanmar, and its dramatic shift of ‘fortune’ in its international status and the domestic consequences of that shift during the decade of 2010–2020. It highlights how the country’s changing international relations affected its domestic political decision-making process. It puts forth the argument that the amount of international attention the country received since 2011 as the target of competitive courtship between China, United States, and the West in general, and the consequent feeling of being valued as a geostrategic asset, created strong conditions for overconfidence on part of Myanmar’s government and military. This favorable international environment also coincided with perceived progress in democratization domestically. Similar to its past patterns of behavior toward ethnic minorities, the Myanmar military and the government overestimated their likelihood of success in dealing with the Rohingya minority while underestimating the likelihood of punishment by the international community.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"581 - 602"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44563886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-27DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1980605
Enrico V. Gloria
Abstract China remains reluctant in claiming unilateral economic sanctions as a valid form of statecraft. China has consistently withheld official acknowledgment of its use of unilateral sanctions despite using them in different disputes. This has resulted to observations arguing that China is increasingly approaching the use of sanctions in a stealthier, therefore, more aggressive manner. It begs to ask, how does China’s reluctant attitude towards its use of unilateral economic sanctions fit into China’s overall foreign policy logic? More specifically, how does China’s victimhood discourse justify unilateral sanctions and at the same time, promote a positive identity of itself in light of coercion? This paper argues that China’s consistent vague acknowledgment and denial in claiming a direct hand on unilateral sanctions comes from its broad foreign policy objective of maintaining a positive identity through its discourse of victimhood. To uncover this understanding, this paper analyzes China’s official positions in six bilateral disputes where China has resorted to unilateral sanctions. While existing observations only stop at ‘plausible deniability’ as primary explanation for China’s vague rhetoric, analyzing China’s predication strategies provides a necessary nuancing in terms of how this peculiar behavior remains consistent with China’s overall foreign policy logic.
{"title":"Justifying economic coercion: the discourse of victimhood in China’s unilateral sanctions policy","authors":"Enrico V. Gloria","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1980605","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1980605","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract China remains reluctant in claiming unilateral economic sanctions as a valid form of statecraft. China has consistently withheld official acknowledgment of its use of unilateral sanctions despite using them in different disputes. This has resulted to observations arguing that China is increasingly approaching the use of sanctions in a stealthier, therefore, more aggressive manner. It begs to ask, how does China’s reluctant attitude towards its use of unilateral economic sanctions fit into China’s overall foreign policy logic? More specifically, how does China’s victimhood discourse justify unilateral sanctions and at the same time, promote a positive identity of itself in light of coercion? This paper argues that China’s consistent vague acknowledgment and denial in claiming a direct hand on unilateral sanctions comes from its broad foreign policy objective of maintaining a positive identity through its discourse of victimhood. To uncover this understanding, this paper analyzes China’s official positions in six bilateral disputes where China has resorted to unilateral sanctions. While existing observations only stop at ‘plausible deniability’ as primary explanation for China’s vague rhetoric, analyzing China’s predication strategies provides a necessary nuancing in terms of how this peculiar behavior remains consistent with China’s overall foreign policy logic.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"521 - 551"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48541175","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-17DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1977684
W. Moon, Takumi Sakuyama
Abstract This paper contrasts agricultural protection of Japan and Korea with the West and identifies major differences between them. It characterizes agricultural protection of Japan and Korea (net heavy food importers) as “tariff-based and scarcity-sensitive” aimed at promoting survival and the West (net food exporters) as “subsidy-based and surplus-inducing” aimed at enhancing farm income. We then identify factors underlying the coevolution and divergence in the extent of agricultural trade liberalization between Japan and Korea since the launch of the Uruguay Round in 1986. Korea accepted deep cuts in agricultural tariffs in bilateral FTAs with the US and EU during the 2000s while Japan continued to protect farm interests by concluding low levels of FTAs with politically sensitive products excluded from tariff concessions. The two countries’ stances reversed since 2013 with Japan becoming proactive in pursuing high levels of FTAs with major agricultural exporting countries and Korea decelerating its opening of agricultural markets. To explain such divergences, this paper develops a political economy framework in which the incumbent political leadership would consider both national interests and sectoral (farm as import competing industries and business/manufacturing as exporting industries) special interests. Our analysis shows that President Roh (2002–2007)’s embracing of neoliberal paradigm in formulating foreign trade policies that would promote national interests underlies the unprecedented level of agricultural trade liberalization in Korea during the 2000s, while Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s determination not to be outcompeted by the rising China and Korea’s ambitious FTA strategies underlies Japan’s proactive bilateral and mega-FTA drives since 2013.
{"title":"The political economy of agricultural trade liberalization in Northeast Asia: comparisons with the West and between Japan and Korea","authors":"W. Moon, Takumi Sakuyama","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1977684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1977684","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper contrasts agricultural protection of Japan and Korea with the West and identifies major differences between them. It characterizes agricultural protection of Japan and Korea (net heavy food importers) as “tariff-based and scarcity-sensitive” aimed at promoting survival and the West (net food exporters) as “subsidy-based and surplus-inducing” aimed at enhancing farm income. We then identify factors underlying the coevolution and divergence in the extent of agricultural trade liberalization between Japan and Korea since the launch of the Uruguay Round in 1986. Korea accepted deep cuts in agricultural tariffs in bilateral FTAs with the US and EU during the 2000s while Japan continued to protect farm interests by concluding low levels of FTAs with politically sensitive products excluded from tariff concessions. The two countries’ stances reversed since 2013 with Japan becoming proactive in pursuing high levels of FTAs with major agricultural exporting countries and Korea decelerating its opening of agricultural markets. To explain such divergences, this paper develops a political economy framework in which the incumbent political leadership would consider both national interests and sectoral (farm as import competing industries and business/manufacturing as exporting industries) special interests. Our analysis shows that President Roh (2002–2007)’s embracing of neoliberal paradigm in formulating foreign trade policies that would promote national interests underlies the unprecedented level of agricultural trade liberalization in Korea during the 2000s, while Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s determination not to be outcompeted by the rising China and Korea’s ambitious FTA strategies underlies Japan’s proactive bilateral and mega-FTA drives since 2013.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"463 - 493"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47743722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-13DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1977685
Yaechan Lee
Abstract This article examines how South Korea has used the ASEAN Plus security platforms to hedge between the US and China and why it has not participated in the FOIP strategy. It argues that the platforms’ neutral guise, owing to ASEAN centrality and their global norms-based agenda has allowed Korea to passively voice its alignment with the US, thereby answering to the pressure for a higher commitment from the US and clearing the political risk of linking the alignment decision to its own views. It asserts, therefore, that access to effective multilateral security platforms allows higher leverage to the weaker ally in an asymmetric alliance relationship.
{"title":"Riding the tide: assessing South Korea’s hedging strategy through regional security initiatives","authors":"Yaechan Lee","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1977685","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1977685","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines how South Korea has used the ASEAN Plus security platforms to hedge between the US and China and why it has not participated in the FOIP strategy. It argues that the platforms’ neutral guise, owing to ASEAN centrality and their global norms-based agenda has allowed Korea to passively voice its alignment with the US, thereby answering to the pressure for a higher commitment from the US and clearing the political risk of linking the alignment decision to its own views. It asserts, therefore, that access to effective multilateral security platforms allows higher leverage to the weaker ally in an asymmetric alliance relationship.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"494 - 520"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46392708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-24DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1968020
X. Yan, Li La
Abstract Today, authoritarian states, such as that of China, strive to cultivate political allegiance among their diasporic subjects through state-run propaganda operations beyond national borders. Aiming to construct a stable, exclusive, and institutionalized diasporic network of influence within host societies, autocratic states use extraterritorial propaganda to amass integrative capacity by dispersing carefully tailored discourses, penalizing opposing voices, promoting a unified interpretive framework for conceptualizing socio-political reality, forming a standard meaning system for diasporic communities, coordinating collective action, and forging an integrated patriotic identity through the repetition of codified communication. The early 21st century has witnessed the rise of pro-regime solidarity among diasporic Chinese, a global force buttressing China’s communist regime. In this article, we argue that this unprecedented forging of solidarity is the product of China’s extra-territorial propaganda. The ruling party-state consistently uses concise, catchy, and carefully tailored symbolic resources, such as ‘China insult’ (ruhua) incidents, to extend its political influence beyond national borders. This poses novel challenges to the Westphalian sovereign state. The state’s tactic overseas propaganda operations have facilitated the emergence of an extraterritorial Chinese ‘symbolic state’ that relies on shared symbolism and identity, rather than territorially defined Weberian coercion, to project control over a transnational socio-political domain.
{"title":"Propaganda beyond state borders: the deployment of symbolic resources to mobilize political support among the Chinese diaspora","authors":"X. Yan, Li La","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1968020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1968020","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Today, authoritarian states, such as that of China, strive to cultivate political allegiance among their diasporic subjects through state-run propaganda operations beyond national borders. Aiming to construct a stable, exclusive, and institutionalized diasporic network of influence within host societies, autocratic states use extraterritorial propaganda to amass integrative capacity by dispersing carefully tailored discourses, penalizing opposing voices, promoting a unified interpretive framework for conceptualizing socio-political reality, forming a standard meaning system for diasporic communities, coordinating collective action, and forging an integrated patriotic identity through the repetition of codified communication. The early 21st century has witnessed the rise of pro-regime solidarity among diasporic Chinese, a global force buttressing China’s communist regime. In this article, we argue that this unprecedented forging of solidarity is the product of China’s extra-territorial propaganda. The ruling party-state consistently uses concise, catchy, and carefully tailored symbolic resources, such as ‘China insult’ (ruhua) incidents, to extend its political influence beyond national borders. This poses novel challenges to the Westphalian sovereign state. The state’s tactic overseas propaganda operations have facilitated the emergence of an extraterritorial Chinese ‘symbolic state’ that relies on shared symbolism and identity, rather than territorially defined Weberian coercion, to project control over a transnational socio-political domain.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"433 - 462"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42651929","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-30DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1947356
H. Yoshimatsu
Abstract In the new millennium, Japan found a renewed interest in infrastructure investment and engaged in this policy issue with diplomatic initiatives and external partnerships with due attention to China’s geo-economic presence. In formulating strategies for infrastructure investment, Japan has presented and disseminated a specific idea of ‘quality infrastructure’ as a principal component of its external infrastructure push. This article seeks to trace the evolution of Japan’s ideational principles for quality infrastructure and elucidate policy motivation, policy objective, and external influence. It argues that Japan’s advocacy of quality infrastructure derived from domestic impetus to expand infrastructure exports and external impetus to compete against China’s infrastructural push through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Japan advocated quality infrastructure as a strategic tool to pursue multiple policy objectives that shifted from justifying Japanese infrastructural push to using as means to check and accommodate the BRI, and to legitimising common governance principles for infrastructure investment. In relations to external influence, Japan’s persistence in norm-setting encouraged China to incorporate normative principles first at business dialogues and then embed common governance principles in its policy approach to infrastructure investment.
{"title":"Japan’s strategic response to China’s geo-economic presence: quality infrastructure as a diplomatic tool","authors":"H. Yoshimatsu","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1947356","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1947356","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the new millennium, Japan found a renewed interest in infrastructure investment and engaged in this policy issue with diplomatic initiatives and external partnerships with due attention to China’s geo-economic presence. In formulating strategies for infrastructure investment, Japan has presented and disseminated a specific idea of ‘quality infrastructure’ as a principal component of its external infrastructure push. This article seeks to trace the evolution of Japan’s ideational principles for quality infrastructure and elucidate policy motivation, policy objective, and external influence. It argues that Japan’s advocacy of quality infrastructure derived from domestic impetus to expand infrastructure exports and external impetus to compete against China’s infrastructural push through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Japan advocated quality infrastructure as a strategic tool to pursue multiple policy objectives that shifted from justifying Japanese infrastructural push to using as means to check and accommodate the BRI, and to legitimising common governance principles for infrastructure investment. In relations to external influence, Japan’s persistence in norm-setting encouraged China to incorporate normative principles first at business dialogues and then embed common governance principles in its policy approach to infrastructure investment.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"148 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09512748.2021.1947356","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47824806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-24DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1955950
Parul Bakshi
Abstract Japan has historically been a major player within the Indo-Pacific region due to its rapid post-war economic expansion, technological advancement, massive overseas development aid as well as its cultural outreach. As the Indo-Pacific today is marred with various challenges in the form of maritime and energy security, border conflicts, booming population, developing economies, and rising carbon emissions, among others. The region requires a multipolar balance of power wherein nations can lead by example and concerted action towards creating a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable future for an extensively dynamic Indo-Pacific. This paper focuses on one of the critical variables of the region, i.e., the energy sector, and attempts to place Japan’s role and contribution to the region’s ongoing energy transitions. The extent and means through which Japan can propel itself and the region towards a just transition with the help of regional and international cooperation have been analysed.
{"title":"Japan’s contribution to peace, prosperity & sustainability: energy transitions in the Indo-Pacific region*","authors":"Parul Bakshi","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1955950","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1955950","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Japan has historically been a major player within the Indo-Pacific region due to its rapid post-war economic expansion, technological advancement, massive overseas development aid as well as its cultural outreach. As the Indo-Pacific today is marred with various challenges in the form of maritime and energy security, border conflicts, booming population, developing economies, and rising carbon emissions, among others. The region requires a multipolar balance of power wherein nations can lead by example and concerted action towards creating a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable future for an extensively dynamic Indo-Pacific. This paper focuses on one of the critical variables of the region, i.e., the energy sector, and attempts to place Japan’s role and contribution to the region’s ongoing energy transitions. The extent and means through which Japan can propel itself and the region towards a just transition with the help of regional and international cooperation have been analysed.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"203 - 226"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09512748.2021.1955950","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46960240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-14DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2021.1948912
Egemen Bezci
Abstract The Anthropocene is an emerging concept that defines the challenges for international relations due to human activity altering the Earth on a planetary scale. The debates around the Anthropocene as a study of international relations are in infancy without a comprehensive theory to articulate its ramifications on the foreign and security policies of nation-states. This study aims to examine the challenges and opportunities posed for Taiwan in the Anthropocene. The research concludes that the Taiwanese foreign and security policy in the Anthropocene can find opportunities by seeking new social, economic, and political alliances as proposed by the Shelter Theory. These opportunities could help mitigate the dangers of this new phenomenon and allow Taiwan to reach its economic and foreign policy aims without exposing itself to future shocks.
{"title":"Seeking shelter in the anthropocene: challenges and opportunities for Taiwan","authors":"Egemen Bezci","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1948912","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1948912","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Anthropocene is an emerging concept that defines the challenges for international relations due to human activity altering the Earth on a planetary scale. The debates around the Anthropocene as a study of international relations are in infancy without a comprehensive theory to articulate its ramifications on the foreign and security policies of nation-states. This study aims to examine the challenges and opportunities posed for Taiwan in the Anthropocene. The research concludes that the Taiwanese foreign and security policy in the Anthropocene can find opportunities by seeking new social, economic, and political alliances as proposed by the Shelter Theory. These opportunities could help mitigate the dangers of this new phenomenon and allow Taiwan to reach its economic and foreign policy aims without exposing itself to future shocks.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"177 - 202"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1,"publicationDate":"2021-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46913935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：