THE ROLE OF STATUS IN ASIA-PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS by Richard Salmons A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of The Australian National University Department of International Relations Coral Bell School of Asia-Pacific Affairs Australian National University 15 June 2018 © Copyright by Richard Louis Salmons 2018 All Rights Reserved I declare that this thesis has been composed solely by myself and that it has not been submitted, in whole or in part, in any previous application for a degree. Except where stated otherwise by reference or acknowledgment, the work presented is entirely my own. This research is supported by an Australian Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship. 15 June 2018 Acknowledgements I would like to first thank my supervising panel in the Department of International Relations at ANU – Dr Benjamin Zala, Professor Ian Hall (now at Griffith University) and Dr Feng Zhang, plus Dr Andrew B. Kennedy of the Crawford School of Public Policy. This provided an outstanding cross-section of expertise on the themes of the thesis, ranging from country specialties on India and China, to interpretive approaches, arms control and power transitions and order-building. Ben Zala came into the Department mid-project, but his role as Chair of Panel was indispensable. His feedback was both friendly and abundant, especially in the final stages of assembling this thesis. I would also like to thank the other faculty of the IR Department, including Dr Matt Davies and Dr David Envall who respectively provided overall research degree guidance and useful advice on fieldwork in Japan, while Professor Bill Tow lent his wealth of experience and provided excellent support. Early in the thesis I received great ideas on Japan research from Dr Amy Catalinac (now NYU). I would also like to thank everyone in the faculty who attended and provided feedback during my Thesis Proposal Review presentation and my final seminar. Among professional staff, Mary-Louise Hickey ordered countless books at my suggestion ostensibly for the Departmental library. Also at ANU, I am grateful for the help and guidance of many members of the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre during my candidature. Dr Amy King, Professor Brendan Taylor, Dr Helen Taylor and Dr Nina Silove all expressed great confidence by employing me as a teaching assistant. I did not miss the opportunity to question them about aspects of my project, and their advice was incorporated throughout the thesis. A special thanks goes to Dr Shunichi Ikeda of the School of Culture, History and Language, for his help arranging Japanese language studies. Appreciation and high regards go to my fellow doctoral candidates within ANU’s Hedley Bull Building: Carly Gordyn, Ruji Auethavornpipat, Jennifer Canfield, Natalie Sambhi, Teresa Kobelkova, Sophie Saydan and Kerri Ng to name a few. I congratulate Dr Iain Henry and Dr Gail Ma on the recent award of their PhDs, and likewise Ben Day whose doctorate is soon to be conferred. The ultimate goes to family: To my parents John and Leonie Salmons, who supported me unstintingly and proof-read the manuscript in forensic detail, while not missing the chance to question me on completion plans; and to my wife Kate Stevenson, whose love and belief in me proves the truth of Berlin’s saying, “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.” Abstract International Relations widely assumes that states pursue status, which may provide both emotional and strategic benefits. However, IR’s existing status literature frequently renders the desire for status as a constant that cannot explain varying policy outcomes, and in many cases is overly focused on the connection between status concerns and war. The importance of status as a causal factor in IR may be better understood by considering that if states normally aspire to valued status roles, then threats to those roles can cause states to change policy settings to protect them. States with aspirations to the most prized status roles, notably major power status, should be especially prone to this. This thesis considers three case studies involving major power aspirants, where key foreign policy decisions have been widely attributed to status concerns. As the epicentre of today’s power transition, the Asia-Pacific region is the focus of the empirical analysis. The cases all take place during the immediate post-Cold War period, where the realignment of international polarity threw into question many established status roles. These were: Japan’s 1992-93 bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council; China’s 1996 signing of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty; and India’s 1998 Pokhran II nuclear tests. The project involved interviews with experts with close knowledge of the cases in each of the three countries, with a view to assessing leadership self-perceptions regarding national status at the moments in question. The thesis outlines a three-phase approach to understanding status concerns and advances the central argument that the middle “status crisis” phase acts as the causal driver of policy change. There is generally a phase of normal status-seeking, during which a state accumulates prestige to win recognition for valued status roles; unexpected events may cause a status crisis, forcing a revaluation of the state’s status position; and the state embarks on a phase of enhanced prestige-building, narrowing and intensifying its status ambitions. In short, changed status perceptions due to a status crisis can cause change to status-seeking policies, which become more provocative or risky than before. The case studies highlight examples of status-seeking involving material power, legitimacy, and institutional roles. The thesis makes two contributions to the literature. First, the argument extends existing theories of status by better operationalising the concept. It adds to social identity theory by explaining the circumstances when states may adopt specific strategies to win status recognition, and it reinforces arguments that efforts to gain status recognition need not be conflictual or disruptive to the status quo. Second, the research enriches our understanding of the historical cases, some of which are mired in long-running debates about causal factors, and it offers ways for IR scholarship to account for the role of status in these episodes. With ongoing power shifts in the Asia-Pacific and beyond, status will continue to be a key concept in IR and this thesis provides us with new ways of understanding the relationship between status concerns and policy change. Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 Setting the Scene ........................................................................................................... 1 Overview of the thesis .................................................................................................. 5 Quick definitions ....................................................................................................... 5 Opening up the status agenda in IR .......................................................................... 7 Gaps in the scholarship – unresolved puzzles ........................................................ 11 Aim of the project ....................................................................................................... 15 Central Argument ........................................................................................................ 17 Research design .......................................................................................................... 20 Approach to the research ........................................................................................ 21 Use of case studies .................................................................................................. 26 Case study selection ................................................................................................ 28 Case analysis methods and methodology ............................................................... 31 Outline of the thesis .................................................................................................... 34 2. SITUATING THE THESIS IN THE LITERATURE ........................................... 37 Definitions ................................................................................................................... 38 Prestige .................................................................................................................... 39 Status ....................................................................................................................... 40 Attractions of status ................................................................................................ 42 Prestige and reputation ............................................................................................ 45 Discussion ............................................................................................................... 46 Canonical and realist perspectives on prestige ........................................................... 47 Prestige in canonical writing ................................................................................... 48 Prestige in classical realism .................................................................................... 50 Status and hierarchy in IR ..........................................................................................