The pacific pact

Sissons, D. C. S.

doi:10.1080/10357715208443802

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…46 On the one hand, writers grappled with how to compensate for the fact that "a 'great and powerful' ally, having his centre of power far afield, is unlikely to be vitally and emotionally interested in our future except during unusual times, and subject to his own strategic plans". 47 On the other, particularly as opposition grew to the war in Vietnam, a strand of critique was developed that suggested that the ANZUS alliance decreased Australia's security by dragging it into conflicts in which it had no interest, 48 or making it the target of powerful antagonists of the United States. 49 As international institutions proliferated during the twentieth century, they provided the Australian scholar-diplomats who saw their operations at close hand with a possible solution to the problems of a dependent small power.…”

Section: Power and Possibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rich Tradition of Australian Realism

Wesley

2009

Aus J of Politics History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australian International Relations (IR) developed as a discipline at the same time as its emergence in the rest of the Anglophone world. A deep reading of Australian writing on international relations since the 1920s reveals a distinctive tradition of IR scholarship, shaped very much by this country's international circumstances and the pragmatic culture of political inquiry that pervaded its universities and diplomatic institutions. Three characteristics frame the Australian Realist outlook. The first is experiential, a preoccupation with the particularities of Australia's international position -size, isolation, wealth, population, culture -and how these factors can help understand the ways in which Australia relates to the world beyond its shores. The second is systemic pessimism, a tendency to be apprehensive about broader global stability. The third is pragmatism, a predilection for understanding the essential attributes of the situation itself, rather than using the situation to inquire into the general nature of the international system. These characteristics have fostered sustained attention to three sets of issues: geography, demographics and race, and power differentials in Australian Realist scholarship.

show abstract

Section: Power and Possibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Rich Tradition of Australian Realism

Wesley

2009

Aus J of Politics History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the US did not sell its Pacific Pact proposal in the broader Asia-Pacific region, its changing attitude toward multilateral defense arrangements coincided with Australia's and New Zealand's initial idea of a regional pact. For Australia and New Zealand, although they shared US frustrations about widespread communism in the region, they were more concerned about Japan's rearmament (Sissions, 1952). Therefore, they embraced the US idea of multilateral defense arrangements but did not want to include Japan.…”

Section: European Journal Of International Relations 18mentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Why is there no NATO in Asia?’ revisited: Prospect theory, balance of threat, and US alliance strategies

Feng

2011

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why did the US prefer multilateral alliances in Europe, but bilateral alliances in Asia after World War II? Rationalists and constructivists debate the impact of power, institutions, and identities in explaining this highly contested question. We introduce a new argument embedded in prospect theory from political psychology -a prospect-threat alliance model -to account for the variation in US alliance strategy toward Europe and Asia after World War II. Through setting the threat level as a reference point for leaders' prospects of gains or losses, we suggest: (1) high threats frame decision-makers in a domain of losses, and multilateral alliances become a favorable alliance choice because states are more likely to take the risk of constraining their freedom of action in return for more help from multiple allies as well as for avoiding further strategic losses; (2) low threats position leaders in a domain of gains, and bilateral alliances win out because states are risk-averse in terms of maintaining their freedom of action in seeking security through alliances with fewer allies. US alliance policy toward Asia after World War II is a within-case analysis that tests the validity of the prospect-threat alliance model.

show abstract

To Be or Not to Be in Asia?

Patience

2017

Australian Foreign Policy in Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pacific pact

Cited by 6 publications

References 1 publication

The Rich Tradition of Australian Realism

The Rich Tradition of Australian Realism

‘Why is there no NATO in Asia?’ revisited: Prospect theory, balance of threat, and US alliance strategies

To Be or Not to Be in Asia?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About