A US-China Dual Leadership in East Asia?

Zhao, Quansheng

doi:10.1057/9781137364180_9

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nur-Sultan is, thereby, manifesting its balancing act between the two Eurasian powers (Morozov, 2015). This instance is yet another case amid the developing “dual-order thesis” in IR ontology and discourse—a pattern in Sino-Russian relations, which has not yet been sufficiently covered in academic literature (Ikenberry, 2016; Liu & Liu, 2019; Q. Zhao, 2014).…”

Section: Kazakhstan and The Sino-russian Entente: Redefining The Bargmentioning

confidence: 98%

China’s engagement with Kazakhstan and Russia’s Zugzwang: Why is Nur-Sultan incurring regional power hedging?

Ohle

Cook

Han

2020

Journal of Eurasian Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grappling with the contemporary topos of a Sino-Russian Entente, Kazakhstan is caught between a delicate long-term peer-competition and potentially a structural rivalry involving the two Eurasian Leviathans, China and Russia. Acknowledging this perspective, Nur-Sultan is inducing hedging dynamics, fishing for a better range of net benefits, while playing a significant fulcrum role central to the regional geopolitical and geo-economic matrix. Although Russia is retaining the prevailing role in the security domain, China is catching up with Russia in various economic indices, notably generated by the Belt and Road Initiative. Utilizing the conceptualization of hierarchy in international relations adapted from the work of David A. Lake, this paper outlines how Nur-Sultan’s interests and preferences are acknowledged by the respective dominants, as a basis for social contracting processes to generate a dual hierarchical order in Central Asia.

show abstract

Section: Kazakhstan and The Sino-russian Entente: Redefining The Bargmentioning

confidence: 98%

China’s engagement with Kazakhstan and Russia’s Zugzwang: Why is Nur-Sultan incurring regional power hedging?

Ohle

Cook

Han

2020

Journal of Eurasian Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also paralyzed attempts at cooperation between the G7 countries in 2020. Former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo remained keen on calling COVID‐19 the “Wuhan Virus” (Zhao 2020). Subsequently, the G20 meeting also failed to reach a consensus on a way to fight the pandemic collectively, thereby worsening the crisis globally (Zhao 2020).…”

Section: Conceptual Underpinningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo remained keen on calling COVID‐19 the “Wuhan Virus” (Zhao 2020). Subsequently, the G20 meeting also failed to reach a consensus on a way to fight the pandemic collectively, thereby worsening the crisis globally (Zhao 2020). This issue underlines the neoliberal view that cooperation is difficult to achieve due to tensions among countries, even if such cooperation is beneficial for the different stakeholders involved (Keohane 2021).…”

Section: Conceptual Underpinningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Neorealism and Neoliberalism Behind International Relations During Covid‐19

Alhammadi

2021

World Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature contains much discussion on the contemporary differences between neorealism and neoliberalism, especially in the context of international relations. However there have, as yet, been limited attempts to investigate how these international relations theories fare in explaining state responses to the COVID-19 outbreak. This study reviews the conceptual frameworks underpinning neorealism and neoliberalism and applies them to key state behaviors during the COVID-19 outbreak. Some examples of neorealism attached to the current pandemic include: criticism of the role of the World Health Organization, the closure of international borders, international competition to collect pharmaceutical products, bans on exports, richer states protecting their national interests, the international misuse of power during emergency orders, restrictions placed on the international media, and the deployment of military forces. By contrast, neoliberalism's focus on international cooperation is noted in U.S., Chinese, and other countries’ attempts to distribute knowledge and aid internationally, as well as in the efforts of key international organizations like the World Health Organization and the global Covax initiative. I offer an evidence-based conceptual framework using neorealism and neoliberalism to show how both have informed international behavior during the COVID-19 outbreak—although continued emphasis on the former shows few signs of abating as the pandemic approaches its third year.

show abstract

“…Pertemuan tersebut mengindikasikan pesan penting, dua kekuatan ekonomi terbesar di dunia akan mengelola hubungan mereka dibawah prinsip 'Agreement to Disagreement'. Kesepakatan ini merupakan tekad bersama kedua negara untuk menyelesaikan perbedaan di bidang defisit perdagangan dan manipulasi mata uang (Zhao 2017). Pada titik ini, sebagian besar dialog masih memang masih berada pada tahap "pengujian kondisi".…”

Section: Paradoks Kebijakan Dan Upaya Harmonisasiunclassified

“…Sebagai contoh, kekuatan ekonomi Cina yang meningkat sangat membantu dalam menjaga stabilitas ekonomi di Asia Pasifik ketika krisis keuangan global 2008. Ketika pertumbuhan ekonomi Cina mencatat rekor tinggi dapat mengimbangi pertumbuhan negatif AS, dengan demikian Cina mampu memainkan peran ekonomi yang stabil dan menguntungkan bagi negara-negara lain (Zhao 2017).…”

Section: Paradoks Kebijakan Dan Upaya Harmonisasiunclassified

China Versus Amerika Serikat: Interpretasi Rivalitas Keamanan Negara Adidaya Di Kawasan Asia Pasifik

Syahrin¹

2018

JGS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tulisan ini berupaya menggali makna isu rivalitas keamanan yang saat ini berlangsung antara negara adidaya Amerika Serikat dengan China di kawasan Asia Pasifik. Dengan kebangkitan China, hubungan Sino-AS telah menjadi semakin penting bagi stabilitas keamanan Asia Pasifik. Rivalitas keamanan yang terjadi antara kedua negara tersebut semacam ‘ritual lama’ yang kini diulang oleh ‘jamaah baru’. Kontestasi politik dan keamanan yang sudah usai dengan berakhirnya Perang Dingin, secara langsung belum mampu menjadikan Amerika Serikat sebagai negara adidaya tunggal dan secara sepihak mampu terus menerus melakukan kontrol dinamika politik dunia. Hadirnya China memberikan alternatif dalam interaksi keamanan regional Asia Pasifik. Inisiasi strategi China dan respon aktif Amerika Serikat akan menentukan lanskap keamanan Asia Pasifik dalam beberapa dekade mendatang. Didorong oleh kebangkitan China tersebut, identitas China kini telah bergeser menjadi kekuatan besar yang intimidatif. Disatu sisi ia menjadi ancaman bagi kepentingan keamanan kawasan AS, disisi lain China juga hadir sebagai kompetitor dalam kepentingan ekonomi AS.Kata-kata kunci: Rivalitas keamanan, negara adidaya, Amerika Serikat dan China. kawasan Asia Pasifik.

show abstract

A US-China Dual Leadership in East Asia?

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

China’s engagement with Kazakhstan and Russia’s Zugzwang: Why is Nur-Sultan incurring regional power hedging?

China’s engagement with Kazakhstan and Russia’s Zugzwang: Why is Nur-Sultan incurring regional power hedging?

The Neorealism and Neoliberalism Behind International Relations During Covid‐19

China Versus Amerika Serikat: Interpretasi Rivalitas Keamanan Negara Adidaya Di Kawasan Asia Pasifik

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About