Advertisement

A Rational Approach to the Study of International Relations in Asia

  • Motoshi SuzukiEmail author
Chapter
  • 380 Downloads
Part of the The Political Economy of the Asia Pacific book series (PEAP)

Abstract

The rationalist research program has increasingly been applied to the study of international relations in Asia, where the interpretive research program is still dominant. The rationalist program is founded upon objective ontology, contingent agent-structure epistemology, and the logic of consequence. In this chapter, I argue that rationality is an integral part of the Asian political tradition, constituting ancient military thought and medieval institutional cooperation in the realms of security, trade, and currency. Thus, the rationalist program has considerable utility in explaining institutional arrangements and their effects insofar as it is well informed of structural constraints and agents’ interests that affect their behavioral choices and their use of values and ideas to promote their preferences. This insight motivates the game-theoretical analyses of this edited volume’s subsequent ten chapters investigating the problems and prospects of institutional cooperation in contemporary Asia.

Keywords

Rationality International relations theory International institutions Asia Game theory 

References

  1. Acharya, A. (2009). Whose ideas matter? Agency and structure in Asian regionalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (Eds.). (2010). Non-western international relations theory perspectives on and beyond Asia. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Acharya, A., & Johnston, A. I. (Eds.). (2007). Crafting cooperation: Regional international institutions in comparative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Aggarwal, V., & Koo, M. G. (Eds.). (2008). Asia’s new institutional architecture: Evolving structures for managing trade, financial, and security relations. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Andornino, G. (2006). The nature and linkages of China’s tributary system under the Ming and Qing dynasties (Working Papers of the Global Economic History Network (GEHN) No. 21/06.). London: London School of Economics.Google Scholar
  6. Berger, T. (2003). Power and purpose in Pacific East Asia: A constructivist interpretation. In G. J. Ikenberry & M. Mastanduno (Eds.), International relations theory and the Asia-Pacific (pp. 387–419). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Christensen, T. J., & Snyder, J. (1990). Chain gangs and passed bucks: Predicting alliance patterns in multipolarity. International Organization, 44(2), 137–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark, D. N. (1998). Sino-Korean tributary relations under the Ming. In D. Twitchett & F. W. Mote (Eds.), The Cambridge history of China, volume 8: The Ming Dynasty, 1368-1644, Part II (pp. 272–300). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Duffield, J. S. (2001). Why is there no APTO? Asia Pacific Security Institutions in comparative perspective. Contemporary Security Policy, 22(2), 69–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fairbank, J. K. (Ed.). (1968). The Chinese world order: Traditional China’s foreign relations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fairbank, J. K., & Goldman, M. (1998). China: A new history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fairbank, J. K., & Teng, S. Y. (1941). On the Ch’ing tributary system. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 6(2), 135–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fearon, J., & Wendt, A. (2002). Rationalism v. constructivism: A skeptical view. In W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, & B. Simmons (Eds.), Handbook of international relations (pp. 52–72). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feng, H. (2007). Chinese strategic culture and foreign policy decision-making: Confucianism, leadership and war. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ferejohn, J. (1991). Rationality and interpretation. In K. Monroe (Ed.), The economic approach to politics (pp. 279–305). New York: Harper-Collins.Google Scholar
  16. Flynn, D. O., & Lee, M. A. (2013). East Asian trade before/after 1590s occupation of Korea: Modeling imports and exports in global context. Asian Review of World Histories, 1(1), 117–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of culture. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  18. Gintis, H. (2009). Game theory evolving: A problem-centered introduction to modeling strategic interaction (2nd ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Giplin, R. (1983). War and change in world politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goh, E. (2013). The struggle for order: Hegemony, hierarchy, and transition in Post-Cold War East Asia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goldstein, J. L., Kahler, M., Keohane, R. O., & Slaughter, A.-M. (Eds.). (2001). Legalization and world politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Greif, A. (2006). Institutions and the path to modern economy: Lessons from Medieval trade. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grimes, W. (2009). Currency and contest in East Asia: The great power politics of financial regionalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Guzman, A. (2008). How international law works. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haftendorn, H., Keohane, R. O., & Wallander, C. A. (Eds.). (1999). Imperfect unions: Security institutions over time and space. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hamashita, T. (1990). Kindai chugoku no kokusaiteki keiki: Chokō boeki shisutemu to kindai Ajia [International transformation of Modern China: The tributary system and Modern Asia]. Tokyo: Daigaku shuppankai.Google Scholar
  27. Hamashita, T. (2003). Tribute and treaties: Maritime Asia and Treaty port networks in the era of negotiation, 1800–1900. In G. Arrighi, T. Hamashita, & M. Selden (Eds.), The resurgence of East Asia (pp. 17–50). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Hemmer, C., & Katzenstein, P. J. (2002). Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective identity, regionalism, and the origins of multilateralism. International Organization, 56(3), 575–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hsu, C.-Y. (1991). Applying Confucian ethics to international relations. Ethics and International Affairs, 5(1), 15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jervis, R. (1978). Cooperation under the Security Dilemma. World Politics, 30(2), 167–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Johnson, C., & Keehn, E. B. (1994). A disaster in the making: Rational choice and Asian studies. National Interest, 36(1), 14–22.Google Scholar
  32. Johnston, A. (1995). Cultural realism: Strategic culture and grand strategy in Chinese history. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Kang, D. C. (2010). East Asia before the West: Five centuries of trade and tribute. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Katzenstein, P. (1997). Introduction: Asian regionalism in comparative perspective. In P. J. Katzenstein & T. Shiraishi (Eds.), Network power: Japan and Asia (pp. 1–46). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Katzenstein, P. J. (Ed.). (1998). The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Keller, W., Li, B., & Shiue, C. H. (2011). China’s foreign trade: Perspectives from the past 150 years. World Economy, 34(6), 853–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kindleberger, C. (1981). Dominance and leadership in the international economy. International Studies Quarterly, 25(2), 242–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Krasner, S. (1976). State power and the structure of international trade. World Politics, 28(3), 317–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lake, D., & Powell, R. (Eds.). (1999). Strategic choice and international relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Lee, Hun-Chang (2007) The political economy of pre-industrial trade in Northeast Asia. Discussion Paper No. 219, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.Google Scholar
  42. Li, Z. (2002). Traditional Chinese world order. Chinese Journal of International Law, 1(1), 20–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Little, D. (1991). Rational choice models and Asian studies. Journal of Asian Studies, 50(1), 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization, 51(4), 513–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action: Public goods and theory of groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Popkin, S. L. (1976). The Rational Peasant: The political economy of rural society in Vietnam. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  48. Ramseyer, M., & Rosenbluth, F. (1997). Japan’s political market place. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Ravenhill, J. (2001). APEC and the construction of Pacific-Rim regionalism. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Ruggie, J. G. (1998). Constructing the world polity: Essays on international institutionalization. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  52. Sen, A. (1983). Choice, welfare, and measurement. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  53. Skyrms, B. (1996). Evolution of the social contract. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stuart-Fox, M. (2003). A short history of China and Southeast Asia: Tribute, trade and influence. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  55. Taylor, M. (1975). Anarchy and cooperation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  56. Tsiang, T.F. (1971) China and European expansion. In Immanuel C.Y. Hsu, (Ed.), Readings in modern Chinese history (pp. 129–140). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. von Glahn, R. (1996). Fountain of fortune: Money and monetary policy in China, 1000-1700. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  58. Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  59. Wang, G. (1998). Ming foreign relations: Southeast Asia. In D. Twitchett & F. Mote (Eds.), The Cambridge history of China, The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2 (Vol. Vol. 8, pp. 301–332). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Wang, Yun-kang (2011) Harmony and war: Confucian culture and Chinese power politics. NewYork: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Webel, C. P. (2013). The politics of rationality: Reason through occidental history. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  63. Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zhang, F. (2009). Rethinking the ‘Tribute System’: Broadening the conceptual horizon of historical East Asian politics. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 2(4), 545–574.Google Scholar
  65. Zhang, Y., & Buzan, B. (2012). The tributary system as international society in theory and practice. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 5(1), 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zhou, F. (2011). Equilibrium analysis of the tributary system. Chinese Journal of International Politics, 4(2), 147–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of LawKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations