WEBSTER UNIVERSITY VIENNA 2000 Level Course Literature Review TOPIC: Is China a hegemon?
The Rise of China Literature Review Comment [SS1]: Good UG LitRev for a 2000 level course, but you can do better in certain areas, See my comments and fix if you want a higher mark. At circa 800 words, you have some room. 18/20 One of the greatest phenomena of the present era is the rise of new countries on the international scene. In the literature, a great attention has been paid to the rise of China in particular with regard to the question whether it is a hegemon and if yes/no what are the implications for its present state. There are several approaches to deal with this issue: to define China`s role in the region and detect whether there is any hierarchy with other Asian states in terms of it being a regional hegemon; to compare its relative capability to the only existing Comment [SS2]: This implies new countries that did not exits or were not legally recognized as states previously. Is that what you mean? Or rather the rise in relative power as challenger to the status quo of the balance of power. Comment [SS3]: For this to be true and valid, several author date citations are required. Who says that China is a hegemon and who not? superpower at the moment (the US) and outline the potential areas of cooperation and/or conflict, especially if China can challenge the US predominant position; to provide a general overview of China`s economic and military capabilities in relation to the rest of the world to make a judgment if China has any hegemonic aspirations at all. The rise of China is a key issue in the international relations nowadays since it can cause dramatic changes in the present balance of power meaning today`s world order being dominated by the only superpower the USA. In terms of Sino-US relations the greatest majority of scholars believe that China cannot pose any significant challenge to the US. One of the main reasons outlined is the fact that while China is going under some major demographic, political, Comment [SS4]: Good that you list 4 tests. But from where did the idea of each test come from? If they are from a theoretical or multiple theoretical models, you should cite them. Comment [SS5]: Meaningless phrase Comment [SS6]: (Names, dates) You list one author below., just one. and environmental transformations the US does not face similar problems. In other words, China comes far from behind in its development and would take more time to catch up with the US (Kurlantzick, 2011). 2 P age
A realist explanation of the Sino-American relationship places further emphasis on a security dilemma that on the one hand results in China aiming to maximize its power with the ultimate goal of becoming a hegemon and on the other hand should be dealt with greater attention from Washington how not to provoke the seemingly peaceful China (Khoo, 2005; Schambaugh, 2011). Therefore, there are some areas in which China has an outstanding performance and may in the future be a source to challenge the US, namely, fascinating economic development, historical experience being in power and the potential capacity of China Comment [SS7]: good Comment [SS8]: word choice. to shift the balance in the region by relying on the great availability of massive and cheap labour (Kurlantzick, 2011). Another potential area of conflict is the Chinese nationalism being the driving power behind an emergent Sino-American naval competition (Ross, 2009). Indeed, it also some authors (names, dates) believe exists the opinion that China can actually challenge US while concurrently seeking to decrease American influence in world matters and push for multilateralism (Pumphery 2003; Grieco, 2003). Including looking at Chinese nuclear capabilities, a rational China, however, would be more practical and, thus, would not risk any direct conflict, instead choosing to and takes advantage of the stability that the US provides to the region (Godlstein, 1997; Christensen, 1999; Christensen, 2006; Ikenberry, 2008; Nye, 2008). If it is agreed that China rather cannot challenge US, the liberal institutionalism explanation applies and calls for efforts from American side to engage China further in global stability Comment [SS9]: Why? insurance by encouraging participation and integration into existing and new institutions; furthermore, on a bilateral level cooperation development is expressed in terms of great economic benefits for both parties that does not necessarily include one dominating the other one 3 P age
(Ross, 1997; Acharya, 2003; Friedberg, 2005; Khoo, 2005; Hale & Hale, 2008; Larson, 2010; Kissinger, 2012). China`s rise in terms of aspirations to be a regional hegemon in Asia is the next major Comment [SS10]: That is a long list of authors saying that china can rise peacefully. Realists for that matter as well. Interesting. issue in the literature. Except for its immediate rivals (Taiwan, India, and Japan) and despite its nuclear weapons, China is generally perceived as non-aggressive, not-threatening regional actor. (Pumphrey, 2003). Although Chinese long-term traditions are a great mean for the use of soft power in Asia and since willingness to work for greater international cooperation has been expressed, China may need to give greater attention to its political and economic culture rather than its culture of values meaning achieving even greater liberalization, differentiation from Comment [SS11]: And this despite recent attempts to muscle their way into resource rich areas and islands? Comment [SS12]: So Wang thinks China has soft power in Asia? Who wants to be like the Chinese? Even Burma is moving westward. worst autocratic regimes, and not feeling threatened by Western value system (Wang, 2004; Ahlbrandt & Small, 2008). However, while In fact tthere is may be a chance for cooperation and multilateral dialogue, however, a Sinocentric Asian cannot be observed at this point (Fu, 2003; Schambaugh, 2004). In general, it is hard to make a value judgment whether China aspires to be a (regional) hegemon at the moment. The roots of the problem are limited information, complex culture; Comment [SS13]: This is not a value judgment (good/bad), but a factual judgment ((true or not true); It is better to merely say judgment. furthermore, the common understanding that it aims at maintain the status quo is undermined to a certain extent by having nuclear weapons and being a threat to anti-proliferation regime as well as the security dilemma they pose to the rest of the world (Johnston, 1995; Whyte, 200; Pumphery, 2003). In any case international support for China would facilitate its development and a closer look at it would only be useful to achieve a better understanding of its hegemon aspirations, if any (Jisi, 2011). 4 P age
BibliographyCited References Acharya, A. (2003/04, Winter). Will Asia s Past Be Its Future? International Security, 28(3), pp. 149-164. Christensen, T. (1999, Spring). China, the U.S.-Japan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia. International Security, 23(4), pp. 49-80. Christensen, T. (2006, Summer). Fostering Stability or Creating a Monster? The Rise of China and US Policy toward East Asia. International Security, 31(1), pp. 81-126. Friedberg, A. (2005, Fall). The Future of U.S.-China Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable? International Security, 30(2), pp. 7-45. Fu, Y. (2003, September). China and Asia in a New Era. China: An International Journal, 1(1). Goldstein, A. (1997/98, Winter). Great Expectations: Interpreting China's Arrival. International Security, 22(3), pp. 36-73. 5 P age
Hale, D. D., & Hale, L. H. (2008, January/February). Reconsidering Revaluation The Wrong Approach to the U.S.-Chinese Trade Imbalance. Foreign Affairs. Ikenberry, G. J. (2008, January/February). The Rise of China and the Future of the West Can the Liberal System Survive? Foreign Affairs. Jisi, W. (2011). China`s Search for a Grand Strategy. Foreign Affairs, 90(2). Johnston, A. I. (1995/96, Winter). China's New "Old Thinking": The Concept of Limited Deterrence. International Security, 20(3), 5-42. Khoo, N. (2005, Summer). China Engages Asia? Caveat Lector. International Security, 30(1), pp. 196-211. Kissinger, H. A. (2012, March/April). The Future of U.S.-Chinese Relations. Foreign Affaris. Kurlantzick, J. (2006, September). China s Charm Offensive in Southeast Asia. Current History, 270-275. Larson, D. (2010, Spring). Status Seekers: Chinese and Russian Responses to U.S. Primacy. International Security, 4, pp. 63-95. Nye, J. S. (1997). China's re emergence and the future of the Asia-Pacific. Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 39(4), 65-79. Ross, R. S. (2009, Fall). China s Naval Nationalism. International Security, 34(2), 46-81. Schambaugh, D. (2004/05, Winter). China Engages Asia: Reshaping the Regional Order. International Security, 29(3), pp. 64-99. 6 P age
Wang, G. (2004, September). The Fourth Rise of China: Cultural Implications. China: An International Journal, 2(2), pp. 311-322. Whyte, M. K. (2000). Chinese Social Trends: Stabilty or Chaos. In D. Schambaugh (Ed.), Is China Unstable? Assesing the Factors (pp. 143-163). 7 P age