现实主义、自由主义与东亚地区秩序:走向混合路径

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Pacific Review Pub Date : 2022-05-16 DOI:10.1080/09512748.2022.2075443
T. V. Paul
{"title":"现实主义、自由主义与东亚地区秩序:走向混合路径","authors":"T. V. Paul","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2022.2075443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract East Asia offers a fertile ground for applying dominant theoretical perspectives in International Relations and understanding their relevance and limitations. As this region has seen much conflict and cooperation historically and is re-emerging as a key theater of great power competition in the 21st century even when states maintain high levels of economic interactions, our understanding of the regional order will be enhanced by the theoretical tools available in the larger mainstream IR perspectives. The existence of a peculiar regional order of no war, yet a number of simmering disputes (along with high levels of economic interdependence) can be characterized as cold peace which deserves an explanation. The paper applies two variants of realism—balance of power and hegemonic stability – and the key arguments in liberalism to analyze the cold peace in Northeast Asia and normal peace in Southeast Asia from a historical perspective. It finds both grand theoretical approaches have partial applications for understanding the East Asian order. A hybrid approach is more valuable to better explain regional order during diverse time periods and different sub-regions of East Asia. Although the presence of both hegemony and balance of power can prevent major wars for a period, they do not help resolve the pre-existing disputes. Deepened economic interdependence mitigates some spiraling tendencies as states fearful of losing too much economically do not escalate crises beyond a point.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"1028 - 1048"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Realism, liberalism and regional order in East Asia: toward a hybrid approach\",\"authors\":\"T. V. Paul\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09512748.2022.2075443\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract East Asia offers a fertile ground for applying dominant theoretical perspectives in International Relations and understanding their relevance and limitations. As this region has seen much conflict and cooperation historically and is re-emerging as a key theater of great power competition in the 21st century even when states maintain high levels of economic interactions, our understanding of the regional order will be enhanced by the theoretical tools available in the larger mainstream IR perspectives. The existence of a peculiar regional order of no war, yet a number of simmering disputes (along with high levels of economic interdependence) can be characterized as cold peace which deserves an explanation. The paper applies two variants of realism—balance of power and hegemonic stability – and the key arguments in liberalism to analyze the cold peace in Northeast Asia and normal peace in Southeast Asia from a historical perspective. It finds both grand theoretical approaches have partial applications for understanding the East Asian order. A hybrid approach is more valuable to better explain regional order during diverse time periods and different sub-regions of East Asia. Although the presence of both hegemony and balance of power can prevent major wars for a period, they do not help resolve the pre-existing disputes. Deepened economic interdependence mitigates some spiraling tendencies as states fearful of losing too much economically do not escalate crises beyond a point.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pacific Review\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"1028 - 1048\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pacific Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2075443\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2075443","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

东亚为运用国际关系的主流理论观点并理解其相关性和局限性提供了肥沃的土壤。由于该地区在历史上经历了许多冲突与合作,并且在21世纪重新成为大国竞争的关键舞台,即使各国保持着高水平的经济互动,我们对地区秩序的理解将通过更大的主流国际关系视角中可用的理论工具得到加强。存在一种特殊的区域秩序,即没有战争,但一些酝酿中的争端(以及高度的经济相互依存)可以被定性为冷和平,这值得解释。本文运用现实主义的两种变体——权力平衡与霸权稳定,以及自由主义的核心论点,从历史的角度分析了东北亚的冷和平与东南亚的正常和平。它发现,这两种宏大的理论方法都有部分适用于理解东亚秩序。混合方法对于更好地解释东亚不同时期和不同次区域的区域秩序更有价值。虽然霸权和均势的存在可以在一段时间内防止重大战争,但无助于解决已有的争端。加深的经济相互依存缓解了一些螺旋式上升的趋势,因为担心在经济上损失太多的国家不会将危机升级到一定程度以外。
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
Realism, liberalism and regional order in East Asia: toward a hybrid approach
Abstract East Asia offers a fertile ground for applying dominant theoretical perspectives in International Relations and understanding their relevance and limitations. As this region has seen much conflict and cooperation historically and is re-emerging as a key theater of great power competition in the 21st century even when states maintain high levels of economic interactions, our understanding of the regional order will be enhanced by the theoretical tools available in the larger mainstream IR perspectives. The existence of a peculiar regional order of no war, yet a number of simmering disputes (along with high levels of economic interdependence) can be characterized as cold peace which deserves an explanation. The paper applies two variants of realism—balance of power and hegemonic stability – and the key arguments in liberalism to analyze the cold peace in Northeast Asia and normal peace in Southeast Asia from a historical perspective. It finds both grand theoretical approaches have partial applications for understanding the East Asian order. A hybrid approach is more valuable to better explain regional order during diverse time periods and different sub-regions of East Asia. Although the presence of both hegemony and balance of power can prevent major wars for a period, they do not help resolve the pre-existing disputes. Deepened economic interdependence mitigates some spiraling tendencies as states fearful of losing too much economically do not escalate crises beyond a point.
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
Pacific Review
Pacific Review Multiple-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Pacific Review provides a major platform for the study of the domestic policy making and international interaction of the countries of the Pacific Basin. Its primary focus is on politics and international relations in the broadest definitions of the terms, allowing for contributions on domestic and foreign politics, economic change and interactions, business and industrial policies, military strategy and cultural issues. The Pacific Review aims to be global in perspective, and while it carries many papers on domestic issues, seeks to explore the linkages between national, regional and global levels of analyses.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Blue Pacific’ strategic narrative: rhetorical action, acceptance, entrapment, and appropriation? Beyond the ‘North’-’South’ impasse: self-effacing Japan, emancipatory movements of the Global South and West-Engineered aid architecture Deter together or deter separately?: time horizons and peacetime alliance cohesion of the US-Japan and US-ROK alliances The Technopolitics of THAAD in East Asia Informal governance and China’s influence in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
×
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