The Paradoxes of Paramountcy: Regional Rivalries and the Dynamics of American Hegemony in East Asia

Beeson, Mark; Berger, Mark T.

doi:10.1080/0951274032000044504

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Quite a few studies have demonstrated that the predominance of the United States and its bilateral links with regional states (the so-called hub-and-spokes system) were the major reasons why the development of regional institutions among East Asian states and political will to sustain such a development have been weak and fragmented (Grieco 1999;Beeson and Berger 2003;Beeson and Higgott 2005;Katzenstein 2005;Sutter 2008). In this respect, Katzenstein's research needs particular attention.…”

Section: Reviewing Research On Regionalism In East Asiamentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing Institution-Building in East Asia

Yoshimatsu

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Reviewing Research On Regionalism In East Asiamentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing Institution-Building in East Asia

Yoshimatsu

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Even the most potentially powerful countries of the region -Japan and China -are constrained by the US in ways that makes them regional influences at best, and relatively subordinate ones at that. 81 Yet the subordinate position of both China and Japan notwithstanding, and despite their competing claims to regional leadership, American foreign policy may actually be inadvertently encouraging the development of a greater sense of East Asian, rather than Asia-Pacific, regional identity. 82 In some ways this is unsurprising: the inherent artificiality of the 'Asia-Pacific' has always meant that its status and ideational purchase was contested and uncertain.…”

Section: The Direct and Indirect Impact Of Hegemonymentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Hegemony Still Matter? Revisiting Regime Formation in the Asia-Pacific

2019

Rivalry and Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Pacific political economy is in the midst of significant structural and institutional change. Over the past four decades the distribution of political and economic capabilities has shifted from a pattern that reflected American hegemonic presence toward a more complex balance of power. Economic and security issues have become more separate, reducing the nesting of these two issue-areas. Furthermore, an institutional basis for handling the regional political economy on a multilateral basis is rapidly being developed, with the result that the prior predominance of bilateral negotiations is eroding. Collectively, these changes constitute a substantial reorganization of the Pacific political economy. 2 59 Ravenhill, ibid, p 309. 60 Dent, Christopher M. (2003) 'Networking the region? The emergence and impact of Asia-Pacific bilateral free trade agreement projects',

show abstract

“…'Hegemony' used to be a term primarily associated with scholars working within a broadly Marxist or radical tradition. These days, it's used across a broad political and scholarly spectrum to describe the unparalleled dominance of the US (see Beeson and Berger 2003). Although there continuing grounds for concern about the health of both the American and global economies (see Brenner 2001), there is no doubt that the US economy experienced something of a renaissance in the second half of the 1990s; a recovery that not only seemed to refute some of the more pessimistic claims about American decline that were widespread a decade earlier, 1 but which effectively underpinned America's growing military dominance.…”

Section: American Hegemonymentioning

confidence: 99%

Asian Regional Governance

Jayasuriya¹

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United States has been the most powerful country in the world since the Second World War. In the wake of September 11, at a time when the US has an unrivalled ability to project power in any part of the globe, this may seem like a remarkably anodyne observation. Yet it is important to remember that for much of the postwar period the Soviet Union was a formidable adversary that constrained American influence and provided an alternative vision of the way the world might be ordered. We now know, of course, that the Soviet system was incapable of supporting either its military pretensions or the aspirations of much of its citizenry, but this should not blind us to the fact that for many years ideological rivalry and superpower confrontation were the seemingly immutable realities of the postwar order. In the wake of the Soviet Union's disintegration, and despite periodic concerns about the performance of the US's own economy, America has emerged as the sole-superpower and the cornerstone of what is routinely depicted as a unipolar interstate system (Wohlforth 1999). Over the last 50 years or so, therefore, American power has waxed, waned and waxed again. This is interesting enough in itself, but from the perspective of Southeast Asia it is especially important because the changing nature of America's global ambitions and its capacity to achieve them has coincided with a critical phase of nation-building and economic development across Southeast Asia. The intention of this chapter is to examine the impact that the US has had on Southeast Asia's historical development, both during the Cold War period when the emergent states of the region attempted to consolidate and assert their independence, and more recently, when the combined effects of economic fragility and the emergence of new strategic challenges have provided a painful reminder of just how susceptible the region remains to powerful external forces over which it has limited influence (Beeson 2002).

show abstract

The Paradoxes of Paramountcy: Regional Rivalries and the Dynamics of American Hegemony in East Asia

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

Comparing Institution-Building in East Asia

Comparing Institution-Building in East Asia

Does Hegemony Still Matter? Revisiting Regime Formation in the Asia-Pacific

Asian Regional Governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About