This edited collection explores how East Asia’s painful history continues to haunt the relationships between its countries and peoples. Through a largely social-psychological and constructivist lens, the authors examine the ways in which historical memory and unmet identity needs generates mutual suspicion, xenophobic nationalism and tensions in the bilateral and trilateral relationships within the region. This text not only addresses some of the domestic drivers of Japanese, Chinese and South Korean foreign policy - and the implications of increasingly autocratic rule in all three countries – but also analyses the way in which new security mechanisms and processes advancing trust, confidence and reconciliation can replace those generating mistrust, antagonism and insecurity.
Contemporary East Asian societies are still struggling with complex legacies of colonialism, war and domination. Years of Japanese imperial occupation followed by the Cold War have entrenched competing historical understandings of responsibility for past crimes in Korea, China, Japan and elsewhere in the region. In this context, even the impressive economic and cultural networks that have developed over the past sixty years have failed to secure peaceful coexistence and overcome lingering attitudes of distrust and misunderstanding in the region. This book examines the challenges of historical reconciliation in East Asia, and, in doing so, calls for a reimagining of how we understand both historical identity and responsibility. It suggests that by adopting a ‘forward-looking’ approach that eschews obsession with the past, in favour of a reflective and deliberative engagement with history, real progress can be made towards peaceful coexistence in East Asia. With chapters that focus on select experiences from East Asia, while simultaneously situating them within a wider comparative perspective, the contributors to this volume focus on the close relationship between reconciliation and ‘inherited responsibility’ and reveal the contested nature of both concepts. Finally, this volume suggests that historical reconciliation is essential for strengthening mutual trust between the states and people of East Asia, and suggests ways in which such divisive legacies of conflict can be overcome. Providing both an overview of the theoretical arguments surrounding reconciliation and inherited responsibility, alongside examples of these concepts from across East Asia, this book will be valuable to students and scholars interested in Asian politics, Asian history and international relations more broadly.
This book assesses the role of identity and Chinese face culture in Chinese foreign policy by analyzing China’s political and economic retaliation against South Korea’s deployment of the THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) system on its soil. By examining the history and military action of China, Japan, and North and South Korea, the book argues that China’s divergent responses were caused by different expectations according to whether states had a perceived identity as a friend or a rival. The author demonstrates that Chinese face culture shapes China’s reaction to others through three dynamics of seeking, saving, and losing face. This book shows how identity and culture have worked in the relationship between China and neighboring countries through three case studies exploring North Korea’s Taepodong-2 missile launch and first nuclear test in 2006, South Korea’s decision to allow the United States to deploy the THAAD around 2016, and Japan’s decision to deploy two U.S. X-band radars in 2005 and 2014. A timely analysis of the importance of identity and culture in international relations, the book will be of interest to scholars of Chinese foreign policy, Sino-South Korean relations, Sino-North Korean relations, Sino-Japanese relations, Korean Politics, Asian Politics, and International Relations.
How the ideas that animate nationalism influence whether it causes—or calms—conflict With nationalism on the rise around the world, many worry that nationalistic attitudes could lead to a surge in deadly conflict. To combat this trend, federations like the European Union have tried to build inclusive regional identities to overcome nationalist distrust and inspire international cooperation. Yet not all nationalisms are alike. Nationalisms in International Politics draws on insights from psychology to explore when nationalist commitments promote conflict—and when they foster cooperation. Challenging the received wisdom about nationalism and military aggression, Kathleen Powers differentiates nationalisms built on unity from those built on equality, and explains how each of these norms give rise to distinct foreign policy attitudes. Combining innovative US experiments with fresh analyses of European mass and elite survey data, she argues that unity encourages support for external conflict and undermines regional trust and cooperation, whereas equality mitigates militarism and facilitates support for security cooperation. Nationalisms in International Politics provides a rigorous and compelling look at how different forms of nationalism shape foreign policy attitudes, and raises important questions about whether transnational identities increase support for cooperation or undermine it.
This edited volume examines the group dynamics of social reconciliation in conflict-affected societies by adopting ideas developed in social psychology and the everyday peace discourse in peace and conflict studies. The book revisits the intra- and inter-group dynamics of social reconciliation in conflict-affected societies, which have been largely marginalised in mainstream peacebuilding debates. By applying social psychological perspectives and the discourse of everyday peace, the chapters explore the everyday experience of community actors engaged in social and political reconciliation. The first part of the volume introduces conceptual and theoretical studies that focus on the pros and cons of state-level reconciliation and their outcomes, while presenting theoretical insights into dialogical processes upon which reconciliation studies can develop further. The second part presents a series of empirical case studies from around the world, which examine the process of social reconciliation at community levels through the lens of social psychology and discourse analysis. This book will be of much interest to students of peacebuilding, conflict resolution, social psychology, discourse analysis and international relations in general.
In the growing literature on middle powers, this book contributes by expanding case study analysis and extending international relations theory in its application to foreign policy decisions. Thus, this book builds on prominent middle power literature and aims to advance our theoretical understanding for why crucial foreign policies were made by the “pivotal middle” powers this book examines—Poland, South Korea, and Bolivia. For this book’s three case studies and their first-term leadership’s critical junctures—from first term post-communist Poland, post-authoritarian/post-ruling party South Korea, and post-colonial Bolivia—we have the antecedents for contemporary middle powers essential for realizing the regional evolution for cooperative change with greater powers systemically; we may then grasp today why those historical foreign policies, albeit not so long ago, give us crucial antecedents for adapting and trying, yet again, to resolve seemingly perennial power dilemmas regionally, peacefully. Here are why middle power impact matters, not only regionally for stronger, dominant greater power neighbours, but also for transformative middle power leaderships which proved pivotal geopolitically for their region’s challenges and changes.
Through a discourse analysis of Japanese parliamentary debates, this book explores how different understandings of Japan’s history have led to sharply divergent security policies in the postwar period, whilst providing an explanation for the much-debated security policy changes under Abe Shinzō. Analyzing the ways identities can be constructed through ‘temporal othering,’ as well as ‘spatial othering,’ this book examines the rise of a new form of identity in Japan since the end of the Cold War, one that is differentiated not from prewar and wartime Japan, but from postwar Japan. The champions of this identity, it argues, see the postwar past as a shameful period, characterized by self-imposed military restrictions, and thus the relentless chipping away of these limitations in recent years is indicative of how dominant this identity has become. Exploring how these military restrictions have shifted from being a symbol of pride to a symbol of shame, this book demonstrates the concrete ways in which the past can both enable and constrain policy. Temporal Identities and Security Policy in Postwar Japan will be invaluable to students and scholars of Japanese politics and foreign policy, as well as international relations more generally.
This book provides a comprehensive analysis of Japan’s Asian diplomacy under Prime Minister Shinzō Abe. Under the Kantei-centred policymaking system, Shinzō Abe has implemented assertive foreign policies with a slogan of ‘diplomacy taking a panoramic perspective of the world’. The analyses in the book cover the traditional and emerging fields of national security and international political economy. While its empirical examination is based on field-specific research, it also incorporates the analysis of Japan’s bilateral relations with China, the US, India, and others. In addition, the book provides a solid, theory-driven analysis of Japan’s external policy and relations. In an independent chapter, this work sets up integrative theoretical frameworks for empirical analyses by relying on key concepts drawn from the three international relations theories of realism, liberalism and constructivism. Going forward, research in this book also explores the development of key regional affairs. Maritime security and space security are two of major security-related affairs, in which the states in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific have to engage, including the development of the TPP (TPP-11) and RCEP, as well as infrastructure development and development cooperation, which are crucial in relation to China’s initiatives in the BRI and AIIB. Lastly, the book provides valuable references to regionalism in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific by analyzing regional integration/cooperation through free trade agreements and the development of regional connectivity. This includes the evolution of cooperation and conflict within key regional frameworks such as the East Asia Summit and APEC, as well as key regional visions such as the Free and Open Indo-Pacific. It also takes into account the possible influence of ideational factors such as norms, principles, and rules on the development of regional cooperation.
This book explores the struggle between China and the United States to expand their influence in Asia through economic assistance and defensive alliances. It brings together the diverse viewpoints of scholars from various countries on how Asian countries will exploit this geo-strategic competition to pursue their national interests, while also balancing their relations with the two great powers. The book offers a valuable asset for all those who have an interest in great power politics and international relations, especially academics, policymakers and security experts.
This book explores hybrid peacebuilding in Asia, focusing on local intermediaries bridging the gaps between incumbent governments and insurgents, national leadership and the grassroots constituency, and local stakeholders and international intervenors. The contributors shed light on the functions of rebel gatekeepers in Bangsamoro, the Philippines, and Buddhist Peace monks in Cambodia to illustrate the mechanism of dialogue platforms through which gaps are filled and the nature of hybrid peace is negotiated. The book also discusses the dangers of hybrid peacebuilding by examining the cases of India and Indonesia where national level illiberal peace was achieved at the expense of welfare of minority groups. They suggest a possible role of outsiders in hybrid peacebuilding and mutually beneficial partnership between them and local intermediaries.
