Security expertise and international hierarchy: the case of ‘The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community’

Abstract

Many states partially relinquish sovereignty in return for physical protection from a more powerful state. Mainstream theory on international hierarchies holds that such decisions are based on rational assessments of the relative qualities of the political order being offered. Such assessments, however, are bound to be contingent, and as such a reflection of the power to shape understandings of reality. Through a study of the remarkably persistent US-led security hierarchy in East Asia, this article puts forward the concept of the 'epistemic community' as a general explanation of how such understandings are shaped and, hence, why states accept subordinate positions in international hierarchies. The article conceptualises a transnational and multidisciplinary network of experts on international security -'The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community' -and demonstrates how it operates to convince East Asian policymakers that the current US-led social order is the best choice for maintaining regional 'stability'.

The Significance of Foreign Military Bases as Instruments of Spheres of Influence

“…A hegemon not only coerces subordinates but alters their agenda of policy options by his/her own presence and size (Destradi 2010;Ikenberry and Nexon 2019;Lanoszka 2013;Nexon and Neumann 2018;Prys 2010;Saull 2012). Some scholars add that shared beliefs on hegemony pose an important intervening variable (Jerdén 2017). In general, analytical approaches differ in explanations by using various material/ideational factors and causation/ constitution (Jackson 2020).…”

Globalization and the rise of integrated world society: deterritorialization, structural power, and the endogenization of international society

“…In East Asia, by contrast, the military/security epistemic community operates in the absence of robust intergovernmental treaty organizations. Jerden (2017) argues that the ideological biases of members of the Asia-Pacific community of military and security experts strongly shape state behavior in favor of alliance with the United States. More broadly, even non-Western and anti-Western groupings like the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization frame their activities in terms of ‘fighting terrorism’ and upholding human rights, albeit their own idiosyncratic interpretations of what and whose human rights.…”

‘Soft power is such a benign animal’: narrative power and the reification of concepts in Japan

“…Critical constructivist and poststructuralist studies have for instance advanced our understanding of the effects of concepts as a form of discourse that exercises productive power, suggesting that, 'by giving meaning to "things", concepts don't just make these things intelligible, they actually make things' (Berenskoetter 2016, 14; see also Guzzini 2016). Similarly, scholars interested in the role of expert knowledge in policymaking have underscored the importance of concept entrepreneurs, networks and skilful framing for concepts to become utilized in politics (Haas 1992;Eriksson and Norman 2011;Jerd en 2017).…”