中国的崛起,制度平衡,以及亚太地区(可能的)和平秩序转型

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Pacific Review Pub Date : 2022-05-13 DOI:10.1080/09512748.2022.2075439
Kai He
{"title":"中国的崛起,制度平衡,以及亚太地区(可能的)和平秩序转型","authors":"Kai He","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2022.2075439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Challenging a popular view that China’s rise will lead the United States and China to fall into the ‘Thucydides trap’—a possible hegemonic war between the two—this paper proposes an ‘institutional peace’ argument, suggesting that the ongoing international order transition will be different from previous order transitions in history. Instead of using military means to change the international order, China and the United States have relied on various institutional balancing strategies to compete with one another for an advantageous position in the future international order. The discussion on the institutional competition between China and the US around the AIIB and the ARF-related multilateral security architecture supports the ‘institutional peace’ argument: institutional competition in the form of institutional balancing strengthens the dynamics and utility of international institutions, encourages states to offer new public goods, and could lead to a more peaceful order transition in the international system. However, this institutional peace argument is constrained by two caveats: the continued validity of the MAD nuclear deterrence and a limited degree of ideological antagonism between the US and China.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"1105 - 1134"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"China’s rise, institutional balancing, and (possible) peaceful order transition in the Asia pacific\",\"authors\":\"Kai He\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09512748.2022.2075439\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Challenging a popular view that China’s rise will lead the United States and China to fall into the ‘Thucydides trap’—a possible hegemonic war between the two—this paper proposes an ‘institutional peace’ argument, suggesting that the ongoing international order transition will be different from previous order transitions in history. Instead of using military means to change the international order, China and the United States have relied on various institutional balancing strategies to compete with one another for an advantageous position in the future international order. The discussion on the institutional competition between China and the US around the AIIB and the ARF-related multilateral security architecture supports the ‘institutional peace’ argument: institutional competition in the form of institutional balancing strengthens the dynamics and utility of international institutions, encourages states to offer new public goods, and could lead to a more peaceful order transition in the international system. However, this institutional peace argument is constrained by two caveats: the continued validity of the MAD nuclear deterrence and a limited degree of ideological antagonism between the US and China.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pacific Review\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"1105 - 1134\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pacific Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2022.2075439\",\"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/10.1080/09512748.2022.2075439","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: 3

摘要

摘要本文挑战了一种流行的观点,即中国的崛起将导致美国和中国陷入“修昔底德陷阱”——两国之间可能的霸权战争——提出了一种“制度和平”的论点,表明当前的国际秩序转型将不同于历史上以往的秩序转型。中美没有利用军事手段改变国际秩序,而是依靠各种制度平衡战略,在未来的国际秩序中相互竞争优势地位。关于中美围绕亚投行和东盟地区论坛相关多边安全架构的制度竞争的讨论支持了“制度和平”的论点:以制度平衡形式的制度竞争加强了国际机构的动力和效用,鼓励各国提供新的公共产品,并可能导致国际体系中更加和平的秩序过渡。然而,这种制度性的和平论点受到两个警告的约束:MAD核威慑的持续有效性和美中之间有限程度的意识形态对抗。
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
China’s rise, institutional balancing, and (possible) peaceful order transition in the Asia pacific
Abstract Challenging a popular view that China’s rise will lead the United States and China to fall into the ‘Thucydides trap’—a possible hegemonic war between the two—this paper proposes an ‘institutional peace’ argument, suggesting that the ongoing international order transition will be different from previous order transitions in history. Instead of using military means to change the international order, China and the United States have relied on various institutional balancing strategies to compete with one another for an advantageous position in the future international order. The discussion on the institutional competition between China and the US around the AIIB and the ARF-related multilateral security architecture supports the ‘institutional peace’ argument: institutional competition in the form of institutional balancing strengthens the dynamics and utility of international institutions, encourages states to offer new public goods, and could lead to a more peaceful order transition in the international system. However, this institutional peace argument is constrained by two caveats: the continued validity of the MAD nuclear deterrence and a limited degree of ideological antagonism between the US and China.
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