从吸引力到强硬的对冲:美国盟友对奥巴马和特朗普任期内华盛顿缺乏安全保障的反应

IF 2.3 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Contemporary Politics Pub Date : 2023-10-11 DOI:10.1080/13569775.2023.2268880
Jonathan Paquin, Pierre Colautti-Féré
{"title":"从吸引力到强硬的对冲:美国盟友对奥巴马和特朗普任期内华盛顿缺乏安全保障的反应","authors":"Jonathan Paquin, Pierre Colautti-Féré","doi":"10.1080/13569775.2023.2268880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTAmerica’s allies have reacted differently to the uncertainty surrounding US global leadership and the return to hard power politics in the 2010s. Some allies have remained steadfast in their commitment to Washington, while others distanced themselves from the United States. Why is it so? This article develops an integrated argument that brings together different strands of the literature on alignment, to better make sense of cross-national and within-case variations in allies’ strategic behavior. By examining three case studies from distinct regional contexts – Japan, Poland and Turkey – the paper shows that although these allies all shared concerns about the Obama and Trump administrations’ security commitment, it was their differing perceptions of the threats posed by China and Russia’s power that influenced their pursuit of either stronger alignment with the US security patron – through internal balancing for ‘attractiveness’ and internal hedging –, or increased strategic autonomy from Washington by pursuing hard hedging.KEYWORDS: AlignmentbalancinghedgingJapanPolandTurkey AcknowledgmentsWe wish to express our gratitude to the following individuals for their invaluable feedback on earlier drafts of this paper: John Ciorciari, Jacob Fortier, Steve Jackson, Dominika Kunertova, Christopher Layne, Darren Lim, Justin Massie, Takuya Matsuda, and the anonymous reviewers. This paper also benefited from feedback at the 2021 and 2022 ISA Meetings. Final responsibility for the article remains with us.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant number: 435-2018-1279].Notes on contributorsJonathan PaquinJonathan Paquin is Full Professor of Political Science at Laval University, Canada. He has written numerous articles on foreign policy and international relations, including in International Studies Quarterly, Foreign Policy Analysis, and Cooperation and Conflict. He recently co-edited America’s Allies and the Decline of US Hegemony, Routledge, 2020; and coauthored Foreign Policy Analysis: A Toolbox, Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Jonathan Paquin received a Ph.D. in Political Science from McGill University and was a Fulbright visiting scholar and Resident Fellow at the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS, Johns Hopkins) in Washington DC. Paquin was also Fulbright Canada Research Chair in Humanities and Social Sciences at the Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina. He is currently codirector of the Network for Strategic Analysis, which is funded by the Canadian Department of National Defence.Pierre Colautti-FéréPierre Colautti is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science at Laval University, Canada. He recently co-published an article ‘Loyalty or autonomy? Canadian and French divergent strategic behaviours in time of power transition', Canadian Studies, Vol. 91, p. 165-187.","PeriodicalId":51673,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From attractiveness to hard hedging: US allies’ response to Washington’s lack of security assurance under the Obama and Trump presidencies\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Paquin, Pierre Colautti-Féré\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13569775.2023.2268880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTAmerica’s allies have reacted differently to the uncertainty surrounding US global leadership and the return to hard power politics in the 2010s. Some allies have remained steadfast in their commitment to Washington, while others distanced themselves from the United States. Why is it so? This article develops an integrated argument that brings together different strands of the literature on alignment, to better make sense of cross-national and within-case variations in allies’ strategic behavior. By examining three case studies from distinct regional contexts – Japan, Poland and Turkey – the paper shows that although these allies all shared concerns about the Obama and Trump administrations’ security commitment, it was their differing perceptions of the threats posed by China and Russia’s power that influenced their pursuit of either stronger alignment with the US security patron – through internal balancing for ‘attractiveness’ and internal hedging –, or increased strategic autonomy from Washington by pursuing hard hedging.KEYWORDS: AlignmentbalancinghedgingJapanPolandTurkey AcknowledgmentsWe wish to express our gratitude to the following individuals for their invaluable feedback on earlier drafts of this paper: John Ciorciari, Jacob Fortier, Steve Jackson, Dominika Kunertova, Christopher Layne, Darren Lim, Justin Massie, Takuya Matsuda, and the anonymous reviewers. This paper also benefited from feedback at the 2021 and 2022 ISA Meetings. Final responsibility for the article remains with us.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant number: 435-2018-1279].Notes on contributorsJonathan PaquinJonathan Paquin is Full Professor of Political Science at Laval University, Canada. He has written numerous articles on foreign policy and international relations, including in International Studies Quarterly, Foreign Policy Analysis, and Cooperation and Conflict. He recently co-edited America’s Allies and the Decline of US Hegemony, Routledge, 2020; and coauthored Foreign Policy Analysis: A Toolbox, Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Jonathan Paquin received a Ph.D. in Political Science from McGill University and was a Fulbright visiting scholar and Resident Fellow at the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS, Johns Hopkins) in Washington DC. Paquin was also Fulbright Canada Research Chair in Humanities and Social Sciences at the Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina. He is currently codirector of the Network for Strategic Analysis, which is funded by the Canadian Department of National Defence.Pierre Colautti-FéréPierre Colautti is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science at Laval University, Canada. He recently co-published an article ‘Loyalty or autonomy? Canadian and French divergent strategic behaviours in time of power transition', Canadian Studies, Vol. 91, p. 165-187.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Politics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2023.2268880\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2023.2268880","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要美国的盟友对美国全球领导地位的不确定性和2010年代硬实力政治的回归做出了不同的反应。一些盟友仍然坚定地忠于华盛顿,而另一些盟友则与美国保持距离。为什么会这样呢?本文发展了一个综合的论点,汇集了关于结盟的不同文献,以更好地理解盟国战略行为的跨国和个案差异。通过研究来自不同地区背景的三个案例研究——日本、波兰和土耳其——本文表明,尽管这些盟友都对奥巴马和特朗普政府的安全承诺感到担忧,但正是它们对中国和俄罗斯实力构成的威胁的不同看法,影响了它们要么寻求与美国安全保护人加强结盟——通过内部平衡“吸引力”和内部对冲——或者通过采取强硬的对冲来增强华盛顿的战略自主权。我们要感谢以下个人对本文早期草稿的宝贵反馈:John Ciorciari, Jacob Fortier, Steve Jackson, Dominika Kunertova, Christopher Layne, Darren Lim, Justin Massie, Takuya Matsuda以及匿名审稿人。本文还受益于2021年和2022年ISA会议的反馈。我们对这篇文章负有最终责任。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。本研究得到了加拿大社会科学与人文研究理事会的支持[资助号:435-2018-1279]。作者简介jonathan Paquin,加拿大拉瓦尔大学政治学正教授。他撰写了大量关于外交政策和国际关系的文章,包括在《国际研究季刊》、《外交政策分析》和《合作与冲突》上发表。他最近与人合编了《美国的盟友和美国霸权的衰落》,劳特利奇出版社,2020年;并与人合著了《外交政策分析:工具箱》,帕尔格雷夫·麦克米伦出版社,2018年。乔纳森·帕奎因获得麦吉尔大学政治学博士学位,曾是华盛顿特区约翰·霍普金斯大学高级国际研究学院富布赖特访问学者和常驻研究员。帕奎因也是富布赖特加拿大人文和社会科学研究主席在查尔斯顿城堡,南卡罗来纳州。他目前是由加拿大国防部资助的战略分析网络的联合主任。Pierre Colautti,加拿大拉瓦尔大学政治学系博士研究生。他最近与人合作发表了一篇文章《忠诚还是自主?》权力转移时期加拿大和法国的不同战略行为”,《加拿大研究》,第91卷,第165-187页。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
From attractiveness to hard hedging: US allies’ response to Washington’s lack of security assurance under the Obama and Trump presidencies
ABSTRACTAmerica’s allies have reacted differently to the uncertainty surrounding US global leadership and the return to hard power politics in the 2010s. Some allies have remained steadfast in their commitment to Washington, while others distanced themselves from the United States. Why is it so? This article develops an integrated argument that brings together different strands of the literature on alignment, to better make sense of cross-national and within-case variations in allies’ strategic behavior. By examining three case studies from distinct regional contexts – Japan, Poland and Turkey – the paper shows that although these allies all shared concerns about the Obama and Trump administrations’ security commitment, it was their differing perceptions of the threats posed by China and Russia’s power that influenced their pursuit of either stronger alignment with the US security patron – through internal balancing for ‘attractiveness’ and internal hedging –, or increased strategic autonomy from Washington by pursuing hard hedging.KEYWORDS: AlignmentbalancinghedgingJapanPolandTurkey AcknowledgmentsWe wish to express our gratitude to the following individuals for their invaluable feedback on earlier drafts of this paper: John Ciorciari, Jacob Fortier, Steve Jackson, Dominika Kunertova, Christopher Layne, Darren Lim, Justin Massie, Takuya Matsuda, and the anonymous reviewers. This paper also benefited from feedback at the 2021 and 2022 ISA Meetings. Final responsibility for the article remains with us.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant number: 435-2018-1279].Notes on contributorsJonathan PaquinJonathan Paquin is Full Professor of Political Science at Laval University, Canada. He has written numerous articles on foreign policy and international relations, including in International Studies Quarterly, Foreign Policy Analysis, and Cooperation and Conflict. He recently co-edited America’s Allies and the Decline of US Hegemony, Routledge, 2020; and coauthored Foreign Policy Analysis: A Toolbox, Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. Jonathan Paquin received a Ph.D. in Political Science from McGill University and was a Fulbright visiting scholar and Resident Fellow at the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS, Johns Hopkins) in Washington DC. Paquin was also Fulbright Canada Research Chair in Humanities and Social Sciences at the Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina. He is currently codirector of the Network for Strategic Analysis, which is funded by the Canadian Department of National Defence.Pierre Colautti-FéréPierre Colautti is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science at Laval University, Canada. He recently co-published an article ‘Loyalty or autonomy? Canadian and French divergent strategic behaviours in time of power transition', Canadian Studies, Vol. 91, p. 165-187.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Contemporary Politics
Contemporary Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Exploring the edges of clientelism: ideology, ethnicity, and partisanship in Belize When and how the ‘Neighbours’ matter: ‘Immediate’ opportunity structures in the Eastern neighbourhood and policy frame-alignment by the EU The web of Big Lies: state-sponsored disinformation in Iran The meeting of two worlds: strategic corruption as an emerging concept in (anti-)corruption studies and international relations Fraternisation and repression during the 2020–2021 attempted revolution in Belarus
×
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