Perils of East Asia, or Perils of Realism?

It has been discussed whether the rise of China causes peace or conflict in East Asia. Some argue that despite the realist prediction that the rising power disturbs the systemic order, East Asian countries enjoy the Chinese peaceful rising. Accordingly, they maintain that realist analysis does not fit in the East Asian case, and that the failure leads to the perils of realism. Others purport that realism can explain the current situation in East Asia. They argue that the relationship between China and East Asian countries are limited and that America plays a main role to balance Chinese military capability. Realists would assert that if East Asian countries fail to balance against the rise of China, they have to face the perils that China will bring about in the region. Which one is true, the perils of East Asia or the perils of Realism? This paper argues that neither East Asia nor Realism face the perils. Realist analysis does not seem to fit in the East Asian model, since non-structural factors, such as identity and history, seem to be more influential than structural factors. However, it does not mean that realism always fails to explain the East Asian region. This paper asserts that realism still provides valuable analysis tool to understand the current East Asian region. Different from pessimistic realists, this paper maintains that defensive realism can explain the current peace in the East Asian region which faces the rise of power. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]