Search

The US presence in East Asia is not simply a result of the victory over Japan in WW2, but a legacy of the US takeover of the Spanish overseas empire in 1898. Today, the threat of war between China and the US has little to do with Allison's Thucydides trap, which is based on a misreading of Thucydides' work: It originates from what in China is seen as a US imperial presence that mirrors Western interference in Chinese affairs during the so-called "century of humiliation." China is an authoritarian state with regional hegemonic ambitions, yet the West has been endorsing other authoritarian states, even absolute monarchies, that fit its geopolitical interests. Notwithstanding the purported US support of "freedom" and "democracy," the US in East Asia has been carrying out a foreign policy that, as an extension of misinterpretations of the Monroe Doctrine, is a legacy of empire. This legacy is too often overlooked, while overseas interests are justified on the basis of security concerns. Thucydides is relevant, but to compare the American and Athenian empires and their demise, not to drag China into US geopolitical discourse, when focus should have long been on Russia. Anti-colonial theory shows how interstate relations, in particular in the East Asian context, are not defined by Thucydides trap, but Thrasymachus paradox. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is an exploratory research that seeks to investigate how ideology predicts Taiwanese perceptions of cross-strait relations, including attitudes toward Taiwan independence, perceptions of mainland China and Chinese people, Chinese invasion of Taiwan, and Chinese democracy. We took an inductive approach to left-right differences in Taiwan to offer a more systematic empirical understanding of ideology beyond the West. To do so, we conducted a nationally representative survey among adult Taiwan citizens (N = 1,350). Findings revealed that those who identified with the Left (vs. Right) tended to demonstrate more negative perceptions of cross-strait relations. Specifically, the political left is more negative about the outlook of Chinese democracy while favoring Taiwan independence, than the political right. Furthermore, the political left perceives both mainland China and the Chinese people more negatively than the political right. These findings underscore the role of ideology for a full comprehension of cross-strait relations, as they indicated a fundamental difference between the political left vs. right in terms of perceptions of cross-strait relations. The present research extends existing political psychology literature on ideology and international relations, particularly in the East Asian context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies of public support for war among non-Western and non-major powers (NWNM) states are distinctive from United States foreign military operations. First, these wars often intrude on subjects' direct livelihood. Second, great powers' intervention can drastically alter the outcome of these wars. These factors have not been examined extensively in the war support literature. We fill this gap by spearheading several hypotheses of war support unique to NWNM countries. Through an original and representative survey experiment on a hypothetical military conflict between China and Taiwan, our analysis yields that the information about the United States coming to Taiwan's defense in an armed conflict with China drives up war support by around 7% among the citizenry, although such information does not make the Taiwanese population more tolerant of combat casualties. In addition, perception of military training increases public support for war significantly. The findings suggest that the study of NWNM states could contribute to the war support literature from different perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regional integration theory can explain past and present processes of cross-strait integration and disintegration. Historical institutionalism can analyse how the path dependence of the 'One China policy' shapes cross-strait relations until today and how fundamental changes can occur through critical junctures. Neofunctionalism can well explain the dynamics of economic integration through spillovers and spillbacks driven by transnational actors since the 1980s. Liberal intergovernmentalism can shed light on the bargaining processes and their outcomes during the negotiation of various cross-strait agreements under the Ma Ying-jeou administration. Postfunctionalism offers the best explanation for the central role that identity has played in cross-strait relations, in particular since 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]