GLOCOM Platform
debates Media Reviews Tech Reviews Special Topics Books and Journals
Summary Page
Search with Google
Home > Books & Journals > Journal Abstracts Last Updated: 14:23 03/09/2007
Journal Abstracts #136: April 27, 2004

International Relations of the Asia-Pacific

Journal Name: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific:
August 2003, Vol. 3, No. 2

Print ISSN: 1470-482X, Online ISSN: 1470-4838


The impact of 9-11 on Sino-US relations: a preliminary assessment (pp159-177)
Jia Qingguo (School of International Studies, Peking University, China)
Relations between the United States and the rest of the world have changed as a result of 9-11. In what ways has this event changed Sino-US relations? How should one explain the changes and continuities of the relationship? What does all this mean for the future development of this relationship? This paper represents a modest attempt to address these questions.

Australia's dilemma between geography and history: how consolidated is engagement with Asia? (pp179-196)
Paulo Gorjão (International Relations Department, Lusíada University, Portugal and Australian Defense Studies Center, Australia.)
Australia's relations with Asia have been variously envisioned as integration, enmeshment or engagement, and this relationship described as comprehensive, close, cooperative, positive and multifaceted. Among its components, economic, political, socio-cultural, and military or strategic spheres have been distinguished. The use of several designations, and the emphasis of distinctive characteristics and components, has led to the appearance of different meanings and implications. In order to overcome this problem, this article aims to provide a conceptual framework in terms of which the process of Australia's engagement with Asia can be described, explained and predicted. Thus, a conceptual framework is developed, and tested empirically for the period 1991–2001. This article argues that Australia is still far from achieving behavioral, attitudinal and institutional consolidation in its engagement with Asia.

Asian security and China's energy needs (pp197-219)
Roland Dannreuther (School of Social and Political Studies, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK)
With China's increasing dependence on imports of oil and gas, the Chinese government has been engaged in defining and implementing an energy security policy. This paper examines the implications of this policy for the security interests of its regional neighbours. It is certainly plausible to construct alarming and realist-driven scenarios whereby China's quest for energy security leads to competition and regional confrontation. However, this paper argues that the prospect for energy interdependence promoting co-operation and an improved regional environment is an equally probable outcome. China's neighbours, and the West more generally, should promote policies that support this more benign outcome.

'Mirror, mirror, on the wall': misplaced polarities in the study of Southeast Asian security (pp221-240)
N. Ganesan (Department of Political Science, National University of Singapore)
Recent interpretative literature on Southeast Asian security has led to a polarized debate between realists and constructivists. This article argues that the differences between the two seemingly irreconciliable approaches can be reconciled if the methodologies underlying the approaches are subjected to greater scrutiny. Generally, both approaches are sensitive to environmental conditions, both in terms of time and place. Additionally, realism is better suited to explain turbulence in Southeast Asian international relations, while constructivism is better suited during times of peace and prosperity.

Evaluating recent trends in peacebuilding research (pp241-264)
W. Andy Knight (University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada)
Peacebuilding is a complex and multidimensional exercise that encompasses tasks ranging from the disarming of warring factions to the rebuilding of political, economic, judicial and civil society institutions. It utilizes a variety of actors, ideally, in the construction of a culture of peace to replace a structure of violence. Ever since Johan Galtung coined the term 'peacebuilding' back in the 1970s, there have been very few attempts to flesh out the essence of this concept. It is only recently, beginning with Boutros Boutros-Ghali's use of the term in his An Agenda for Peace and continuing with the efforts by the UN and regional bodies to develop sustainable approaches to reconstructing war-torn societies that greater attention has been given to this idea. This article critically analyzes broad trends that can be discerned from the literature, in rethinking peacebuilding and in bridging the chasm between the concept and practices undertaken in its name.

Finding peace in a world of hegemony and terrorism (pp265-282)
John R. Oneal (Department of Political Science, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA) and Bruce Russett (Department of Political Science, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA)
Although acknowledging the importance of power, Immanuel Kant suggested that republican constitutions, economic interdependence, and international law and organizations can form the basis for a dramatically more peaceful world. Statistical analyses of the behavior of pairs of states, 1885–1992, confirm this liberal vision. Using methods common to medical epidemiology, we find that the Kantian elements substantially reduce the likelihood that states will become involved in a fatal militarized dispute. Indeed, two democracies linked by extensive trade and a dense network of international organizations are 95% less likely to fight than states that do not share these characteristics. Our analyses have important implications for the United States and China, two countries destined to shape the twenty-first century. Engaging China in trade and integrating it into the major international organizations over the last three decades has, with some liberalization of its government, substantially reduced the risk of military conflict.

International Relations of the Asia-Pacific (2003)
Copyright ©2003 Oxford University Press and the Japan Association of International Relations

(This journal is available online at:
Posted with permission from the publisher.

Copyright © Japanese Institute of Global Communications