Book Reviews

Book reviews International Relations theory International Relations theory and the Asia-Pacific. Edited by G. John Ikenberry and Michael Mastanduno. New York: Columbia University Press. 2003. 450pp. Index. $64.50. 0 231 12590 9. Pb.: $24.50. 0 23112 591 7. This edited volume is the first of several similarly conceived collections to emerge in recent years that aim at bringing International Relations (IR) theory to bear more closely on Asian area studies. Two incoming volumes are International Relations of Northeast Asia (Rowman & Littlefield, forthcoming 2003), edited by Samuel Kim, and Rethinking security in East Asia (Stanford Uni- versity Press, forthcoming 2004), edited by Allen Carlson, Peter Katzenstein and J. J. Suh. The appearance of these works is indicative of a growing interest in integrating area and disciplinary concerns within the IR field in the United States, a trend represents yet another phase in the perennial process of boundary-shifting between area studies and social science disciplines that has been ongoing over the past three or four decades. A parallel development can also be observed in British and Australian scholarship, though it is by any account much less pronounced. The reason behind this difference may be because, unlike the United States where IR is a sub-field of the larger discipline of political science, in those two countries it enjoys a much more autonomous status as a discipline in its own right, thus exempting to a certain extent IR scholars (and area specialists who focus on foreign relations) from social ‘scientific’ demands, which in the United States have largely taken the form of a preoccupation with constructing applied positivist- predictive IR theories. The essays, twelve in all and written by US-based IR scholars and area specialists, are grouped into two sections. The first section focuses mainly on security issues. In the lead article, Thomas Christensen discusses the security dilemma that plagues US–Japan–China relations, noting that the historical legacy of the Pacific War makes it particularly intractable. Next, Avery Goldstein examines China’s emerging grand strategy whose primary aim has been to temper its neighbours’ apprehension about its growing power. Alastair Iain Johnston develops a notion of international socialization and tests it out on the evolution of Chinese approaches to multilateral security dialogue. David Kang surveys six centuries of Asian International Relations and suggests that a hierarchical order existed historically in Asia and that it may be emerging again. Masaru Tama- moto navigates nimbly, as only an insider can, the intricate terrain of Japan’s ambiguous identity and long struggle with the question of modernity. Henry Nau argues that an integrated model that borrows from both realist and constructivist theories captures the essence of contemporary Asian International Relations better than either alone. Finally, John Duffield accounts for the differences between regional security institutions in Asia and Europe by looking at regional structures, state characteristics and institutional factors. The second section is shorter and addresses a more diverse range of topics. Jonathan Kirshner articulates the criteria for testing realist theories of political economy in the context of the Pacific Rim. Robert Gilpin delves into the contrasting political cultures of the United States and Japan and the different roles the state plays in their respective economies for sources of economic INTA79_5_11_Reviews 1071 10/15/03, 9:40 Book reviews conflict. Dale Copeland explains how relative power, economic interdependence and trade expectations interact to shape the likelihood of a Sino-American war. William Grimes expounds on how the institutionalization of inertia has prevented Japan from pursuing an effective foreign policy. Rounding off the section, Thomas Berger develops a constructivist framework within which he explores how identities influence regional international relations. In the introduction, the editors state that bridging the gap between IR theory and area studies ‘can only illuminate and enrich both realms’ (p. 2). Do the essays deliver on that claim? Very few of them do, but many are excellent works of scholarship by other standards. Generally speaking, the volume contains three types of essay: the ones that focus on factual analysis, the theory- oriented pieces and those that combine theory and empirical studies. The best representatives of the first species are the essays by Christensen and Goldstein. Although Christensen’s article is framed as an application of the security dilemma theory to the US–China–Japan security triangle, its real strength lies in his subtle and sensitive treatment of the Chinese perception of threat from Japan and its alliance with the United States. In Goldstein’s case, his article is a highly nuanced account of China’s diplomatic and economic efforts since the mid-1990s to reassure its neighbours and to avert containment by those who might feel threatened by China’s ascendancy. The authors’ mastery of their subjects is beyond doubt—both draw on legions of Chinese materials and an impressive amount of information derived from research trips to China and multiple interviews with Chinese officials. Although the role of IR theory in these articles is either redundant or minimal, these works are nonetheless richly informative and impart perceptive insights into Asian international relations. IR theories feature much more prominently in the second category of essays, which individ- ually do one or more of the following: testing theories, using Asia as a case study; refining theories and adapting them to the region; and deriving future regional scenarios with the aid of theories. Although theoretically sophisticated, some of these articles regrettably are not above resorting to some degree of manipulative use of history to buttress their theoretical cases, resulting sometimes in far-fetched interpretations of regional phenomena. Kang, who argues that Asia has historically embodied a hierarchical order under which Chinese dominance is acknowledged and accepted by other regional states, explains that post war Japan has not rearmed to a level commensurate with its economic power because it has had ‘no need to’ and, since it occupies a lower rung of the regional hierarchy, has accepted China’s ‘central position in Asian politics’ (p. 177). While it is true that no imminent threat has as yet galvanized Japan into serious rearmament, few Japan scholars would agree with Kang that Japan has not done so because it has acquiesced in playing a role in the region secondary to China’s. Indeed, contrary to Kang’s claims of Japanese passive acquiescence in Chinese dominance, the growth of Chinese military and economic power in the past decade has alarmed Japan and elicited increasingly vocal calls from within the country for boosting its military and political role in the region and beyond. Ingrained pacifism and snail-pace institutional changes, however, have so far prevented Japan from rearming seriously or assuming a more active role on the world stage. If a ‘natural’ pecking order with China at the top really exists and is accepted by countries in the region, as Kang claims, then one wonders why the region abounds with talk of ‘China threat’ and why China is so anxious to temper this kind of fear. Generally speaking, although theoretically elaborate, these essays are weak on the empirical side. Two essays, by Johnston and Berger respectively, stand out in their ability to combine theoretical rigour and quality empirical research in a mutually enriching manner. Theoretical discussion is extensive in both studies, but, unlike in some of the theory-oriented essays, the authors are not chiefly interested in showing whether one or another theory fits snugly with the ‘data’. Rather, theories are used here to derive interesting questions that call for in-depth empirical research. They are the starting points of empirical accounts, rather than the strictures to which the latter must be made to conform. Johnston begins developing a definition of socialization in institutional environments and a set of criteria for identifying its effects. He then proceeds to examine meticulously, according to the said criteria, the actual behaviour of Chinese officials who have participated in the Association of South East Asian Nations Regional Forum to INTA79_5_11_Reviews 1072 10/15/03, 9:40 International Relations theory ascertain whether the experience has had any transformational impact on their attitudes towards regional security multilateralism. Berger starts off by giving a succinct introduction to the constructivist approach, pointing out that the approach is not necessarily at odds with neoliberalism and neorealism, and that it emphasizes the socially constructed nature of interstate behaviour, which is shaped by the cultural-ideational character of the actors within the international system. The rest of the article is devoted to exploring the specific cultural-ideational factors that are prominent in Asia, especially in the countries of China, Japan and Korea: the developmental state identity, nationalism and the historical memories of the Pacific War. Space does not allow detailed evaluation of all the articles, but it should be emphasized that the majority of them are of high quality, even though very few manage to meet the challenge of marrying area studies and IR theory in a genuinely fruitful manner which is more than merely

Load more