International Relations Theory Part Two – Expansion Pack Chapter 16 Asian Perspectives (Pichamon Yeophantong)

117 International Relations Theory 16 Asian Perspectives With the emergence of the Asian Century , which sees rising powers like China and India assume a more prominent role in shaping world affairs , Asia has become an important region of study . These global trends have been matched by new directions in scholarship , whereupon Asia has come a conceptual anchor for the development of approaches to the study of world politics . It is , therefore , within the Asian IR context that some of the most exciting theoretical challenges to , and innovations in , IR scholarship are being mounted and produced . Given the vast and political diversity found across the continent , Asian IR is made up of an array of different perspectives . Some originate in countries in the Global South while others , such as Japanese perspectives , do not . Asian IR therefore feeds into Global South IR perspectives , but remains distinct from them , just as it speaks to mainstream IR theories but is founded on unique political traditions and practices . The basics of Asian perspectives IR theory is primarily based on assumptions derived from Western modes of thinking and viewing the world . This , in turn , renders it too narrow in its sources and too dominant in its influence ( and 2010 , The result of this is that perspectives and theoretical insights have been systematically neglected or ignored altogether by the discipline . For many scholars , this silence of IR voices constitutes a profound cause of concern , and one that casts a doubtful light on the utility of mainstream theories as a lens to make sense of a complex and culturally diverse world . Consider the English school of IR . The key concepts pinning the English school and its conception of international society for example , the principles of national sovereignty and sovereign equality are founded upon the historical European experience . China , for one , only learnt these concepts through its encounter with the European powers ,

Asian Perspectives 118 as was also the case for other Asian countries . The Chinese empire had , until then , conducted its dealings with other nations on the basis of a worldview , where it acted as the political and cultural centre of the world , with the Chinese emperor seen to rule over or ( basically , the rest of the world ) Sovereign equality never existed as a concept to the Chinese mind until the nineteenth century . Given the distinctive histories , cultures and interstate dynamics seen in Asia , we clearly can not take for granted the universality of the assumptions and concepts prevalent in IR scholarship . Asian perspectives on interstate politics exist and have existed for millennia . Ancient Indian and Chinese political theorists like ( circa 300 ) and ( have provided some salient observations on foreign policy . It would only be in the , when efforts began to make IR scholarship more representative , that the contributions of these thinkers started to be taken seriously by the discipline . In the years since , we are seeing language barriers being broken down along with growing theoretical innovation challenging old thinking in IR . Discussions have converged on the feasibility of constructing various schools and theories of Chinese , Japanese , Korean and Southeast Asian IR among other . As such , though still mired in debate and a degree of uncertainty , the ultimate outcome of these discussions will prove central to the future of IR as a global discipline . At present , there is no single , unifying , school or theory of International Relations . Various reasons can be given for why this is the case . For example , the hidden nature of IR theories , referring to the difficulty of recognising perspectives even when we see them ( and 2010 , 18 ) or the failure to challenge the theoretical imports and acknowledge the value of ( 1997 , 132 Chun 2010 , 83 ) There is , of course , nothing inherently about IR theorising . But whether we can rightly speak about an Asian IR theory depends in large part on how we define theory and understand Asian . In this light , Asian IR should not be viewed as a , monolithic discourse , nor as an intellectual enterprise aimed purely at the production of grand theories . Although having garnered plenty of attention in IR scholarship , the Chinese and Japanese schools of IR represent but two strands of Asian thought among several others . Rather than theory in the sense of advancing testable observations about how the international system operates , it may be better to describe the bulk of Asian IR approaches as perspectives for making sense of the world . This , in turn , raises the important

119 International Relations Theory question of whether a unified Asian IR theory is in fact desirable . Siddharth ( 2014 ) for one , is less interested in putting forward monolithic theories , being more curious about how the world is viewed from this particular location . 2010 , 92 ) likewise rejects the notion of creating an Indian school of IR out of concern that such an undertaking would result in a binary that simply pits Indian IR ( self ) against Western IR ( other ) This speaks to a broader concern that the construction of unified schools of thought risks creating grossly simplified and categories that end up supplanting one dominant body of knowledge with another . Similar sentiments also pervade debates on the Chinese school , with some scholars remaining sceptical about the feasibility of a single school representing the diversity of Chinese perspectives . Conceptual pluralism better serves the original intention of IR theorists that is , to bring diversity back into the study of world politics . Following from this , it is also important that we do overstate the differences between Western and Asian IR approaches . Indeed , a common attribute of Asian and Western approaches lies with their normative qualities that is , their interest in how the world ought to be . for example , noted the necessity of waging a just war ( for example , for a king not to take the land of an ally ) whereas Confucian scholars were concerned with how to sustain harmony ( peace and stability ) in the world through able statecraft . Much like Western IR theories , Asian perspectives have deep roots in political thought . In many cases , it is a matter of transposing theories of statecraft , society and human nature to the global realm . Just as philosophers like Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were central to the development of IR theory , ancient and modern philosophers from and Sun Tzu ( to ( and ( are important sources of inspiration for Asian scholars . According to Kumar Sarkar ( 1919 ) early Hindu political theorists already had an indigenous conception of sovereignty that recognised the importance of and national independence to the exercise of state authority . The Indian statesman and philosopher , who is often lauded as one of the world earliest realists , is a critical figure in this regard . In setting out the principles of conduct central to the task of , his mandala ( spheres of influence ) theory advanced ideas as to how a king should manage alliances and relations of enmity with surrounding countries . It acknowledged , for instance , the utility of as a means for building confidence between kings and avoiding unnecessary foreign entanglements , having also proposed an early of strength as a tool for attaining happiness ( 2014 , 80 )

Asian Perspectives 120 Similarly , elements of Confucian thinking on power , order and statecraft can be distilled from how China conducts its foreign policy today . The importance of maintaining harmony to safeguarding the global order is a Confucian concept that remains a popular refrain in China . Similarly , the notion that to wield power a state must shoulder commensurate domestic and international responsibilities is one that defines China contemporary identity as a responsible stakeholder . It has also served as the basis for the corresponding responsibility thesis , which advances the notion that China has certain unavoidable duties and obligations as a rising power , particularly with respect to managing and securing global order and stability ( 2013 ) In seeking to identify its own unique contributions to the field , Japanese IR has also drawn extensively upon the works of celebrated philosophers , including , who was the pioneer of the Kyoto School . Often labelled as a due to the prominence he gave to cultural factors and identity construction , advanced a philosophy of identity for addressing a fundamental Japanese conundrum of whether Japan belongs to the East or the West . Here , he adopted a dialectic approach , arguing that Japanese identity exists within a coexistence of opposites , Eastern and Western , which consequently allows it to cultivate a universal appeal ( 2007 , 379 ) In other words , Japan is accorded a special role in the world , as it is positioned to encourage both Eastern and global awareness . This argument fits with broader vision of a multicultural world , where a true world culture was to be achieved through the recognition of cultural difference and the union of these differences ( 2015 , 218 ) Despite criticism against their hegemonic position in the discipline , it warrants note how mainstream IR theories have helped to provide fertile ground for new ideas and approaches to germinate among Asian IR scholars . South Korean IR scholars , for example , have been heavily influenced by stream IR specifically , its theories that are focused on addressing issues . The rationale behind efforts to build a Chinese IR School also stems from the desire to better represent Chinese ideas and interests within an discipline . It is possible , however , to divide Chinese IR scholars working in the period and during the into two camps ( Lu 2014 ) those who sought to learn from and emulate Western theories and those who used Western IR as the basis for critique and the development of alternative perspectives . It is interesting to recall how Samuel Huntington 1993 Clash of Civilizations article , which argued that culturally driven conflicts will invariably define the War world , had sparked heated discussion within China during the due to its controversial speculation of a coming conflict between

121 International Relations Theory the West and states . Not only did this lead to a deepening of Chinese dissatisfaction with Western theories and their of Eastern cultures , it also gave Chinese scholars renewed impetus to lish a Chinese school of IR . You are probably wondering , if there is no Asian IR theory , then can Asian perspectives really provide a ( more ) compelling account of interstate dynamics than mainstream IR theories ?

Certainly , we can view the lack of a unifying set of core theoretical assumptions as a sizeable limitation of current Asian IR approaches . While we can easily identify the major tenets of realism or constructivism , Asian perspectives tend to exhibit a greater degree of conceptual fluidity and . In practical terms , however , there are instances where Asian IR has made noteworthy contributions to theorising ( the formulation of theories to explain a specific ) and soft IR theory , which refers to the theories informed by the thinking and foreign policy approaches of Asian leaders ( and 2010 , 11 ) These are normally relied upon to generate policy prescriptions , as well as insights into the factors that motivate the behaviour of Asian states . An influential theory is Akamatsu flying geese model of regional development . Not only has the theory been used to justify Japan economic leadership within Asia ( 1994 ) but it also serves as the rationale behind the country economic assistance to developing countries . posited the theory in the to explain how a developing country can catch up with industrialised countries through their interactions . With Japan rapid industrialisation from the late nineteenth century onwards and the remarkable economic development of East Asian countries in the Second World War period , Japan came to be depicted within this theory as the lead goose in a formation comprised of emerging Asian economies . Here , Japan helped to stimulate regional industrialisation and economic growth by passing down its older technology and ( through economic assistance programmes , for instance ) to other developing countries . An example of a soft theoretical contribution is the concept of ( not taking sides ) Developed by India against the backdrop of divisive Cold War politics , became an influential policy framework adopted by Asian and African countries that had sought to occupy the middle ground between the rival powers during the and .

Asian Perspectives 122 Asian perspectives on developing a Chinese school of IR In China , the construction of a Chinese school of IR theory has become a national preoccupation that resonates strongly with China global . At a time when the Chinese government is emphasising the rich cultural namely , Confucian heritage in official rhetoric , Chinese IR scholars are increasingly turning to ancient Chinese political thought for insights that transcend both time and geography . Although having been in development since the late , early attempts to build a Chinese school can be traced back to the late , when the focus of academic debates began to earnestly shift from learning from the West to rejecting Western IR and developing a distinct Chinese IR approach . This shift crystallised with the rift in relations during the 19605 , and 19805 , whereupon the Soviet Union approach to IR was officially denounced within China . The late 19805 saw a clearer division emerge between Chinese scholars who favoured Western IR approaches and those who pushed for IR theory with Chinese characteristics . scholars like Liang argued for the rejection of Western theories and the development of a Chinese model instead . Subsequent debates in the early 20005 largely centred on the hegemonic status of Western IR . Here , the notion of establishing a Chinese school replaced the more ideologically driven objective of theorising with Chinese characteristics . The Chinese school project thus came to be defined not only in opposition to a prejudiced ' IR discipline , but also in light of the challenges faced by China as a rising power within an , world ( Wang and Han 2016 , 54 ) It is in this way that Chinese IR perspectives draw upon Western IR theories , while being equally coloured by ideas , ancient Chinese political thought and China own experiences in navigating the international terrain . According to Qin ( 2016 ) a theory of relationality postulates that states as social actors base their actions on the nature of the relations they have with others . The logic of relationality thus dictates that an actor tends to make decisions according to the degrees of intimacy importance of her relationships to specific others ( Qin 2016 , 37 ) This logic is founded upon ancient Chinese philosophy that emphasises the importance of respecting , and behaving in line with , the hierarchy of relationships ( between the emperor and heaven , king and subject , father and son ) to social and even cosmological stability . But of particular significance here is the relationship between the two opposite forces , yin and yang , which is seen to govern all other relationships . The existence of yin is seen as dependent on yang , which

123 International Relations Theory effectively makes them two complementary halves of a whole . This notion of that each of a pair is inclusive of the other ( Qin 2016 , 40 ) is central to the concept of ( the Middle Course ) which suggests how opposites give rise to positive interactions , rendering harmony , not conflict , as the state of nature . The theory of relationality is one that seeks to explain how contradictions can coexist and also how their coexistence is necessary to functioning relationships . Considering how world politics operates on the basis of ambivalent relationships , where a state can be perceived as an ally one moment and a threat the next , relationality becomes a useful theory . Take , for example , the relationship between China and the Philippines . Political ties between these two countries , while longstanding , have been frayed due to their competing territorial claims over a chain of islands and atolls in the South China Sea , which are believed to hold valuable gas deposits and strategic importance . As both countries have become ever bolder in their attempts to assert ownership over the islands , tensions have flared . In 2016 , the Philippines won an arbitration case that concluded that China has no legal basis to claim historic rights to the South China Sea . The Chinese government strongly rejected the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling . Speculations soon emerged of a coming military conflict between the two countries . Yet , no military conflict occurred . Despite animosity on both sides over this issue , economic relations between China and the Philippines continue to grow . From the perspective of relationality , both political tension and economic cooperation constitute the relationship . Applying the concept , one can assume that conflict is not unavoidable within this relationship . If anything , military conflict would constitute an aberration to the status quo something that is costly to both sides . Such a prospect could thus serve to compel China and the Philippines to seek out new avenues for conflict resolution and cooperation as a means to restore balance between the oppositional forces within the relationship . Shortly after the arbitration ruling , Philippine president Rodrigo articulated his desire to negotiate directly with China on the South China Sea issue , even proposing joint resource development in the contested waters and urging the Chinese government to assist the Philippines with infrastructure development . A Chinese white paper ( 2017 ) published after the ruling , while reaffirming China claims in the South China Sea , reiterated Beijing commitment to settling the dispute via negotiation and consultation . Via a relationality perspective , we can expect that harmonious contradictions will continue to characterise the relationship , as cooperation

Asian Perspectives 124 between the two countries persists despite tensions . This is an important demonstration of the value of the Chinese school as it runs contrary to what mainstream IR theorists , who ground their analyses of interstate interactions in a state of international anarchy , would lead us to expect . Conclusion As International Relations is an increasingly popular subject , particularly in Asia where IR courses have become a staple at many universities , there is a need for it to become a truly global discipline that appreciates political and cultural difference but also reflects a shared history and humanity . In light of the uncertainties and anxieties accompanying the rise of powers like China and India , IR scholarship must act not only as a lens for analysing phenomena but also as a useful and practical guide for how we should act within a changing global environment . That said , Asia is as much a social construct as the West and one that could potentially become as monolithic and hegemonic . As such , we need to be wary of creating simplistic categories that give rise to an unhelpful ' binary . For the sake of initiating meaningful dialogue , it is vital that scholars continue to work towards an inclusive outlook that reconciles East and West , capturing both the diversity and unity of insights to be gained from mainstream as well as Asian IR perspectives .