This afterword speaks to how the arguments in these papers for networking hegemony in East Asia relate to two aspects of Buzan’s work: the English School’s use of primary institutions as a way of understanding the structure of international society at both global and regional levels, and regional security complexes.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Even by the hypocritical standards of international relations, there is an unusually wide gap between China’s foreign policy rhetoric of peaceful rise/development, win–win, harmonious relations, common destiny, etc., and its foreign policy practice of unilateralism, bullying, coercion and divide-and-rule tactics, often accompanied by prickly and thin-skinned rhetorical responses to supposed ‘insults to the Chinese people’. China tries to suggest that it would be a more benign great power than the USA, and other Western powers before that, but its practices suggest that it would be at least as ruthless, self-centred, and demanding of submission, as any other great power, and this is what frightens its neighbours.
Brewster, D. 2011. Indian Strategic Thinking About East Asia. Journal of Strategic Studies 34(6): 825–852.
Bull, H. 1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Macmillan.
Buzan, B. 1983, 1991. People, States and Fear. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Buzan, B. 2004. From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buzan, B. 2007. People, States, and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Buzan, B. 2012. The South Asian Security Complex in a Decentering World Order: Reconsidering Regions and Powers Ten Years on. International Studies 48(1): 1–19.
Buzan, B. 2014. An Introduction to the English School of International Relations. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Buzan, B. 2018a. Revisiting World Society. International Politics 55(1): 125–140.
Buzan, B. 2018b. China’s Rise in English School Perspective. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 18(3): 449–476.
Buzan, B., and L. Schouenborg. 2018. Global International Society: A New Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buzan, B., and O. Wæver. 2003. Regions and Powers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buzan, B., and Y. Zhang (eds.). 2014. Contesting International Society in East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Knudsen, T.B., and C. Navari (eds.). 2019. International Organization in the Anarchical Society: The Institutional Structure of World Order. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Navari, C. 2016. Primary and Secondary Institutions: Quo Vadit? Cooperation and Conflict 51(1): 121–127.
Williams, J. 2011. Structure, Norms and Normative Theory in a Re-defined English School: Accepting Buzan’s Challenge. Review of International Studies 37(3): 1235–1253.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Buzan, B. Afterword to: ‘Networking hegemony—alliance dynamics in East Asia’. Int Polit 57, 285–289 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-019-00184-w
- East Asia
- International society
- Regional security complexes
- Primary institutions