china

Does Mearsheimer think other countries in Asia will align with China or balance against China?

  • balance against because china is a threat

What are the two necessary conditions for war, according to power transition theory?

  • power parity and dissatisfaction with status quo

according to mearsheimer, is war more likely between us and china in 21st century than it was between us and soviet union

  • more likely btween us and china

which of the following best captures mearsheimers preferred strategy on how to deal with china?

  • containment

which of the following is apolicy recommendation in the tammen and kugler article (written in 2006)?

  • a strong western alliance that attracts russia

how do power transition theorists measure power?

  • gdp

according to mearsheimer, it is basically impossible for any country to become a global hegemon?

  • true

which of the following concepts is central to mearsheimer’s thinking?

  • security dilemma

what intl conflict theoretical “image” best describes both arguments?

  • 3rd image

which of the following best captures mearsheimers view abt the possibility of conflict between the us and china?

  • chinas rise in power is unlikely to be tranquil

Meisheimer Notes

  • usa now only great power (great power politics key phrase)

  • after sov union collapse, usa did not have to worry abt major powers and could attack small powers without any retribution

  • china economy growing —> become great power —> usa has to worry abt great power politics again

  • key phrase: offensive realism

    • china continues to grow, it will attempt to dominate asia the way the usa will dominate hemisphere

    • usa will go to great lengths to prevent this

  • china rn constrained by the balance of power

“offensive realism”

  • the most powerful states seek to have hegenomy in their reigion while ensuring no rival great power dominates another area

  • assumptions

    • states key actors/anarchic system

    • offensive military capabilities

    • states never sure abt intentions of other states

    • states rank survival as most important goal

    • states are rational actors

  • because of all this, the more powerful a state is to regional hegemony, less likely survival is at risk. balance of power shift is important

regional pursuit of hegenomy

  • only the usa is a regional hegemon because it did work to make sure no other great power obtained it

  • if china continues economic growth, it will act in logic of offensive realism because it is best way to survive under intl anarchy

    • china will also have secuirity interests around the globe

      • territory in western hemisphere (to prevent usa from stopping it becoming regional hegemon) and persian gulf(oil) to limit americas ability to go across the globe

problem?

  • usa and china neighbors have incentive to contain chinas rise

    • will monitor its growth

    • will move to check it sooner rather than later thru containment

  • usa will have to assume most of this containment burden

  • alternatives to containment

    • preventive war (worst option bc china has nukes)

    • thrawrt chinese economic growth (also not viable bc cant slow down chinas economy without slowing down us economy)

    • rollback (toppling china friendly regimes, but historically doesnt rlly do anything )

what would security competition look like?

  • crises, arms races, proxy wars

is war likely

  • asia more conducive to war than soviet union bc of its geography, korea most likely place for a conventional land war

  • multiplolarity rather than bi polarity (usa controlled western euro while russia controlled eastern)

  • hypernationalism

Tammen and Kugler: Power Transition and China US Conflicts

What are the two necessary conditions for war, according to power transition theory?

  • power parity and dissatisfaction with status quo

Theoretical framework thru policy lense

  • ngos and soft power states (corporations, interest groups) important for world heiarchy

  • usa is failing at bringing key nations and stakeholders into coalition of states satisfied with the status quo bc too focused on short term

    • if they are not satisfied then ppl are gonna want that balance of power to change if they become powerful enough

  • historically

    • the usa was able to bring in these coalitions through effective use of force that changed the political and economic systems to align with the usa

    • democratic peace emerged bc usa imposed cpmmon set of democratic institutions on europe

power parity argument

  • key contenders in intl system challenge on another for dominance when they anticpate prospects of overtaking regime leader are credible

  • power parity basically means balance of power is pretty much equal

implications in asia

  • power parity allows to determine which interactions have potential to escalate into serious confrontation and major war

  • not deterministically conflictural and can be resolved peacefully

  • paritt met when challenger has 80% if capabilites od dominant nation

  • ussr never approached parity with the united states

  • china could surpass the usa with gdp and also achieve mutually assured destruction levels with the usa

  • whether ot not china is satisfied with the status quo after this is important

    • is there territorial dispute? taiwan

    • is there an arms race? not rn and usa can add china into satisfied camp

    • is china dissatisfied with intl rules of the road?

      • growing influence of china regionally and globally, but china is not interfering in domestic affairs of other countries

    • are there strong ideological disputes btween usa and china? not seriously

    • are there binding patterns of trade and cooperation between the united states and china?

      • yes

how should usa approach this?

  • strong western alliance that attracts russia into nato