{"title":"后冷战时期中国亚洲外交的新思考:制度模式选择与中美关系。兼容性","authors":"Shi Yuan-hua, Qi Huaigao","doi":"10.1080/10163271.2010.500005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Drawing support from international institution theory, this article analyzes China's new thinking about Asian diplomacy after the Cold War. Institutionalism was flexibly utilized by China in its peripheral regions—Central Asia, Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia and South Asia, which have adopted institutional models—dominant participation, deep participation, active participation, and moderate participation models. China tries to handle the presence of U.S. interests well and has responded reasonably to U.S. pragmatic institutional engagement. To realize the aim of compatibility and coexistence between China and the United States in Asia, the two countries should establish interconnecting institutions in both economic and political fields. With regard to the future interactive trends of China and the United States in Asia, the author, from the dimension of international institutionalism, works out an institutional interplay—nested and overlapping institutions—for China and the United States to achie...","PeriodicalId":43274,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis","volume":"22 1","pages":"303-320"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2010-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10163271.2010.500005","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The new thinking on China's Asia diplomacy during the post-Cold War era: institutional model choices and Sino-U.S. compatibility\",\"authors\":\"Shi Yuan-hua, Qi Huaigao\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10163271.2010.500005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Drawing support from international institution theory, this article analyzes China's new thinking about Asian diplomacy after the Cold War. Institutionalism was flexibly utilized by China in its peripheral regions—Central Asia, Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia and South Asia, which have adopted institutional models—dominant participation, deep participation, active participation, and moderate participation models. China tries to handle the presence of U.S. interests well and has responded reasonably to U.S. pragmatic institutional engagement. To realize the aim of compatibility and coexistence between China and the United States in Asia, the two countries should establish interconnecting institutions in both economic and political fields. With regard to the future interactive trends of China and the United States in Asia, the author, from the dimension of international institutionalism, works out an institutional interplay—nested and overlapping institutions—for China and the United States to achie...\",\"PeriodicalId\":43274,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"303-320\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10163271.2010.500005\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10163271.2010.500005\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10163271.2010.500005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The new thinking on China's Asia diplomacy during the post-Cold War era: institutional model choices and Sino-U.S. compatibility
Abstract Drawing support from international institution theory, this article analyzes China's new thinking about Asian diplomacy after the Cold War. Institutionalism was flexibly utilized by China in its peripheral regions—Central Asia, Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia and South Asia, which have adopted institutional models—dominant participation, deep participation, active participation, and moderate participation models. China tries to handle the presence of U.S. interests well and has responded reasonably to U.S. pragmatic institutional engagement. To realize the aim of compatibility and coexistence between China and the United States in Asia, the two countries should establish interconnecting institutions in both economic and political fields. With regard to the future interactive trends of China and the United States in Asia, the author, from the dimension of international institutionalism, works out an institutional interplay—nested and overlapping institutions—for China and the United States to achie...
期刊介绍:
Since its first publication in 1989, The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis has been covering a broad range of topics related to foreign policy, defense and international affairs in the Asia-Pacific region. As the oldest SSCI registered English journal of political science in Asia, The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis has promoted efforts to provide an arena for sharing initiatives and new perspectives on military and security issues of the Asia-Pacific region. To offer better support to this idea of active intercommunication amongst scholars and defense experts around the globe, The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis made a decision to publish quarterly, starting from 2005.