Institutional Balancing In The Asia Pacific

This book examines the strategic interactions among China, the United States, Japan, and Southeast Asian States in the context of China’s rise and globalization after the cold war. Engaging the mainstream theoretical debates in international relations, the author introduces a new theoretical framework—institutional realism—to explain the institutionalization of world politics in the Asia-Pacific after the cold war. Institutional realism suggests that deepening economic interdependence creates a condition under which states are more likely to conduct a new balancing strategy—institutional balancing, i.e., countering pressures or threats through initiating, utilizing, and dominating multilateral institutions—to pursue security under anarchy. To test the validity of institutional realism, Kai He examines the foreign policies of the U.S., Japan, the ASEAN states, and China toward four major multilateral institutions, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum (ARF), ASEAN Plus Three (APT), and East Asian Summit (EAS). Challenging the popular pessimistic view regarding China’s rise, the book concludes that economic interdependence and structural constraints may well soften the "dragon’s teeth." China’s rise does not mean a dark future for the region. Institutional Balancing in the Asia Pacificwill be of great interest to policy makers and scholars of Asian security, international relations, Chinese foreign policy, and U.S. foreign policy.

Can regional and interregional mechanisms better institutionalize the - creasing complexity of economic and security ties among states in Nor- east, Southeast, and South Asia? As the international state system und- goes dramatic changes in both security and trade relations in the wake of the Cold War’s end, the Asian financial crisis, and the attacks of Sept- ber 11, 2001, this question is now of critical importance to both academics and policymakers. Still, little research has been done to integrate the ana- sis of both regional security and economic dynamics within a broader c- text that will give us theoretically informed policy insights. Indeed, when we began our background research on the origin and e- lution of Asia’s institutional architecture in trade and security, we found that many scholars had focused on individual subregions, whether Nor- east, Southeast or South Asia. In some cases, scholars examined links - tween Northeast and Southeast Asia, and the literature often refers to these two subregions collectively as “Asia”, artificially bracketing South Asia. Of course, we are aware that as products of culture, economics, history, and politics, the boundaries of geographic regions change over time. Yet the rapid rise of India and its increasing links to East Asia (especially those formed in the early 1990s) suggest that it would be fruitful to examine both developments within each subregion as well as links across subregions.

Investigating the dynamics of balancing patterns in the Asia-Pacific, this book focuses particularly on the contribution of great powers and middle powers to regional stability. Taking the US and China as great powers, and using ASEAN, Russia, Australia and South Korea as example of middle powers, the author addresses the following questions: Do middle powers influence balancing patterns in the Asia-Pacific? Are the United States and China balancing each other in the Asia-Pacific, and if so, by which means? What is the contribution of the English school to understanding balance of power dynamics? The Balance of Power in Asia-Pacific Security makes a persuasive contribution to the debate on the US-China relationship. Interviews with policy practitioners and academics in the region offer a systematic analysis of the complexities of Asia-Pacific security. Providing conceptual insights, this book gives a fresh understanding of the mechanisms necessary to maintain regional stability and explains the implications of US-China power balancing for global security. It will be an important resource for scholars and students of Asia-Pacific politics and security.

In the 1990s there was a wave of multilateralism in the Asia Pacific, led primarily by ASEAN. Since the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, however, many non-ASEAN states have attempted to seize the initiative, including the USA, Japan, China, South Korea, and Australia. Kai He and his contributors debate the reasons for this contested multilateralism and the impacts it will have on the region’s security and political challenges. Will the "Indo-Pacific turn" be a blessing or a curse for regional stability and prosperity? Using a diverse range of theoretical and empirical perspectives, these leading scholars contribute views on this question and on the diverse strategies of the great and middle powers in the region. This collection will be of great interest to scholars and students of international relations in the Asia Pacific and of great value to policy makers in the region and beyond.

Can regional and interregional mechanisms better institutionalize the - creasing complexity of economic and security ties among states in Nor- east, Southeast, and South Asia? As the international state system und- goes dramatic changes in both security and trade relations in the wake of the Cold War’s end, the Asian financial crisis, and the attacks of Sept- ber 11, 2001, this question is now of critical importance to both academics and policymakers. Still, little research has been done to integrate the ana- sis of both regional security and economic dynamics within a broader c- text that will give us theoretically informed policy insights. Indeed, when we began our background research on the origin and e- lution of Asia’s institutional architecture in trade and security, we found that many scholars had focused on individual subregions, whether Nor- east, Southeast or South Asia. In some cases, scholars examined links - tween Northeast and Southeast Asia, and the literature often refers to these two subregions collectively as “Asia”, artificially bracketing South Asia. Of course, we are aware that as products of culture, economics, history, and politics, the boundaries of geographic regions change over time. Yet the rapid rise of India and its increasing links to East Asia (especially those formed in the early 1990s) suggest that it would be fruitful to examine both developments within each subregion as well as links across subregions.

Since the sudden disappearance of the Soviet Union, many scholars have argued that the balance of power theory is losing its relevance. This text examines this viewpoint, as well as looking at systematic factors that may hinder or favour the return of balance of power politics.

What tools will international relations theorists need to understand the complex relationship among China, Japan, and the United States as the three powers shape the economic and political future of this crucial region? Some of the best and most innovative scholars in international relations and Asian area studies gather here with the working premise that stability in the broader Asia-Pacific region is in large part a function of the behavior of, and relationships among, these three major powers.

Looking at approaches to understanding the interactions among three critical players, China, Japan and the United States, the authors of this text show that understanding the effects of cultural divides between Asian and American policymakers is crucial to building effective policies in the future.