20 June 2024, Volume 0 Issue 3

    

• Select all
  |

• Select
  Geopolitical Shift:International Institutions in the Era of Sino-U.S.Competition

  Wang Mingguo

  Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies. 2024, 0(3): 4-29.

  Abstract ( ) Download PDF ( )   Knowledge map   Save

  International institutions can shape geopolitical identities and transform geopolitical spaces.In recent years,geopolitical dynamics have shifted vis-à-vis international institutions,and they have become a key arena in which major powers assert their geopolitical ambitions.On one hand,traditional geopolitics has not only failed to disappear in the era of multilateralism,rather its influence continues to grow;on the other hand,the geographical features of the logic of major power competition have changed,and international institutions are increasingly constructed around models rooted in geopolitical realities.While so,this geopolitical logic has long been overlooked.The reality is that there is a clear geopolitical logic to international institutions which links member politics,geographical politics and power politics through what we describe as the “member-geography-power” framework.By combining geopolitics with international institutions,we can analyze the operational logic of geopolitics at the level of international institutions.Generally speaking,states compete in terms of political power through competition over membership criteria and geo-environment competition within the context of international institutions.Major powers can establish geopolitical advantage through the creation of international institutions which shape new power structures.Against the backdrop of US-China competition,major powers engage in fierce competition over key members and critical regions of international institutions to gain geopolitical advantages.For China,strengthening cooperation within international institutions can alleviate the pressures caused by geopolitical tensions and is an effective way to deal with geopolitical games.
• Select
  Pressure Response,Interest Conflicts and the “Attention-Grabbing” Logic of International Institutional Creation

  Zhu Guowen, Luo Tianyu

  Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies. 2024, 0(3): 30-57.

  Abstract ( ) Download PDF ( )   Knowledge map   Save

  Why do states create weak international institutions that are insufficient to achieve their intended goals?As existing theories of institutional creation cannot explain this phenomenon,this paper proposes the “attention-grabbing” logic of institutional creation to fill this gap.When faced with normative pressure that conflicts with the interests of major domestic interest groups,states can create weak institutions to divert the attention of international and domestic audiences,making them believe that their demands are being addressed.This allows the state to alleviate short-term normative pressure without compromising its own interests and at a relatively low cost.This article validates this theory through two cases:Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP) led by the U.S.in 2005,and the Kyoto Protocol led by the EU.The study finds that in comparison with the EU’s relationship with the Kyoto Protocol,the US created the Asia-Pacific Partnership not to advance global climate governance but to mitigate increasing domestic normative pressure.This logic not only enriches existing theories of institutional creation but also provides a reflection on the deep-seated reasons behind the inefficiency and death of current international institutions.
• Select
  Intensity of Great-Power Competition,American Commitments to Vietnam and the Evolution of Vietnam’s Bandwagoning with the U.S.

  Fang Xiao, Zhou Fangyin

  Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies. 2024, 0(3): 58-82.

  Abstract ( ) Download PDF ( )   Knowledge map   Save

  The United States has proactively cultivated ties with Vietnam as part of its strategic competition with China.While so,Vietnam’s responses to U.S.strategic competition with China have varied over time.Following the U.S.introduction of the Asia Pacific Rebalancing strategy,Vietnam exhibited a high level of enthusiasm and proactively sought cooperation;when Trump introduced his version of the Indo-Pacific Strategy,Vietnam signaled a more cautious attitude;finally,when Biden introduced his version of the Indo-Pacific,Vietnam once again expressed enthusiasm and a desire for limited cooperation.Vietnam’s attitude towards U.S.strategies vis-à-vis China depends primarily on the intensity of Sino-U.S.competition and on the level and credibility of U.S.commitments to Vietnam.The intensity of Sino-U.S.competition determines the risks that Vietnam faces,while the level and credibility of U.S.commitments determine the extent of the benefits Vietnam stands to gain.The Obama administration’s low-intensity competition with China and high,credible commitments to Vietnam allowed it to reap significant benefits with relatively low risk,leading to active cooperation with the Asia-Pacific Rebalancing strategy.The Trump administration’s high-intensity competition with China but low-credibility commitments to Vietnam resulted in limited benefits for Vietnam despite high risks,causing Vietnam to be cautious in its cooperation with Trump’s “Indo-Pacific” strategy.The Biden administration has continued high-intensity competition with China,but has increased the credibility of its commitments,resulting in higher benefits for Vietnam amid high risks,leading to limited cooperation with the Biden administration’s “Indo-Pacific” strategy.As great power competition continues over the long term,Vietnam is expected to maintain a cautious “bamboo diplomacy.” Its policy actions will vary with fluctuations in Sino-U.S.relations and in U.S.policy towards Vietnam.In this regard,China should promote the construction of a “China-Vietnam Community with a Shared Future” and remain vigilant about political and security cooperation between Vietnam and the U.S.
• Select
  Governing Openness?Openness Adjustment Mechanism and “Middle-Income Trap” in East Asia

  Luo Yifu

  Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies. 2024, 0(3): 83-107.

  Abstract ( ) Download PDF ( )   Knowledge map   Save

  The “middle-income trap” results when a middle-income country experiencesfailure of industrial structure upgrading and continuous expansion of income gap,which ultimately leads to sluggish growth in Gross National Income (GNI) per capita.Maintaining an open economy is a necessary condition for economic takeoff in East Asia,but for East Asian economies that have achieved middle income status,an open economy brings with it significant pressure in industrial upgrading and with respect to social welfare.As such,whether East Asian economies can overcome the “middle-income trap” largely depends on whether they establish an effective openness adjustment mechanism once they achieve middle-income status.Openness adjustment mechanism refers to the policy measures that East Asian economies use to adjust the structure of production factors under conditions of economic openness,usually taking the form of industrial development policies and social welfare policies.These in turn are divided into two types:a Progressive Mechanism that focuses on addressing and transforming disadvantageous factors within the economy and a Conservative Mechanism that aims at strengthening and better exploiting comparative advantages. Economies that establish the former one are more likely to overcome the “middle-income trap,”while those that develop the latter one are more likely to fall into the trap.The article systematically tests this analytical framework considering the two East Asian cases of South Korea and Thailand.
• Select
  Willingness to Reform,Bargaining Power and Path Selection in Evolving International Investment Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

  Han Yonghui, Tan Shuting

  Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies. 2024, 0(3): 108-134.

  Abstract ( ) Download PDF ( )   Knowledge map   Save

  National economic security,surpassing mere trade or economic interests,has driven new waves of rule-making competition among states.International investment dispute settlement mechanisms are shifting from favoring investor protection back to favoring the regulatory rights of host countries.While so,the choices that states (regions)may take vis-à-vis participation in institutional reforms remain to be determined.Adopting a global governance perspective,this article proposes a temporal explanatory framework centered on “willingness to reform-bargaining power-institutional reform,” and finds that the key variables influencing a party’s choice of reform path for international investment dispute settlement mechanisms include:(1)willingness to reform based on interactions among major domestic actors;and (2)bargaining power based on the balance of power among countries.The article categorizes path choices into three types based on the degree of reform:incremental reform,radical reform and disruptive reform.It then selects the US-led “United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement,” the EU-led “Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement,” and the Brazil-led “Cooperation and Facilitation Investment Agreement” as case studies to examine and validate the mechanisms through which member states’ strategic choices impact the reform and evolution of international systems.Given the new developmental environment,China should proactively align with high-standard international trade and economic rules,actively promote innovation in mechanisms that protect overseas interests,and provide institutional guarantees that balance national policy autonomy with enhanced investor confidence,thereby advancing good and effective governance in global investments.
• Select
  The International Expansion of the US-Style Digital Commerce Regulations:The Driving Force of Transnational Companies

  Li Yuan, Tu Gule

  Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies. 2024, 0(3): 135-161.

  Abstract ( ) Download PDF ( )   Knowledge map   Save

  In recent years,the US-style digital commercial regulations have been widely incorporated into free trade agreements around the globe.The international diffusion of these rules has become a significant economic phenomenon,the drivers of which are important to explore. Existing research and case studies suggest that enterprises are crucial actors influencing the negotiations of free trade agreements between countries.This article argues that the US multinational corporations are pushing the international diffusion of the US-style digital commercial regulations.Using a dataset with a global sample spanning 2000 to 2021,this article conducts an empirical examination of the impact of the number of digital cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As) by the US companies on the acceptance of the US-style digital commercial regulations in those countries.It finds that as the number of digital M&As by the US companies increase,the acceptance of the US-style digital commercial regulations by host countries also rises significantly.This effect is particularly pronounced in Asia-Pacific and Europe,in high-income and upper-middle-income countries,and has been evident primarily since 2007.