China's rise, institutional balancing, and (possible) peaceful order transition in the Asia pacific/ Kai He

By: Material type: TextTextPublication details: 2022Subject(s): Online resources: In: The Pacific Review Vol. 35, No 6, November 2022, pp. 1105-1134 (103)Summary: Challenging a popular view that China's rise will lead the United States and China to fall into the 'Thucydides trap'-a possible hegemonic war between the two-this paper proposes an 'institutional peace' argument, suggesting that the ongoing international order transition will be different from previous order transitions in history. Instead of using military means to change the international order, China and the United States have relied on various institutional balancing strategies to compete with one another for an advantageous position in the future international order. The discussion on the institutional competition between China and the US around the AIIB and the ARF-related multilateral security architecture supports the 'institutional peace' argument: institutional competition in the form of institutional balancing strengthens the dynamics and utility of international institutions, encourages states to offer new public goods, and could lead to a more peaceful order transition in the international system. However, this institutional peace argument is constrained by two caveats: the continued validity of the MAD nuclear deterrence and a limited degree of ideological antagonism between the US and China.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article Mindef Library & Info Centre Journals CHINA (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Not for loan 69086.1001

Challenging a popular view that China's rise will lead the United States and China to fall into the 'Thucydides trap'-a possible hegemonic war between the two-this paper proposes an 'institutional peace' argument, suggesting that the ongoing international order transition will be different from previous order transitions in history. Instead of using military means to change the international order, China and the United States have relied on various institutional balancing strategies to compete with one another for an advantageous position in the future international order. The discussion on the institutional competition between China and the US around the AIIB and the ARF-related multilateral security architecture supports the 'institutional peace' argument: institutional competition in the form of institutional balancing strengthens the dynamics and utility of international institutions, encourages states to offer new public goods, and could lead to a more peaceful order transition in the international system. However, this institutional peace argument is constrained by two caveats: the continued validity of the MAD nuclear deterrence and a limited degree of ideological antagonism between the US and China.

CHINA

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.