Political Science 31
The International Politics of East Asia
Spring 2011
Jonathan T. Chow
Class Time: Mondays and Wednesdays, 12:30 PM – 1:50 PM
Class Location: 131 Merrill Science Center
E-mail: jchow@amherst.edu
Home Page: http://www.jonathanchow.com
Course Website:
https://www.amherst.edu/academiclife/departments/courses/1011S/POSC/POSC-31-1011S
Office Hours: Wednesdays 3:30-5:30 PM at 203 Keefe Health Center and by appointment.
Virtual Office Hours: Add jchowoffice@gmail.com to your Google Talk chat list (you can access
Google Talk by getting a free Gmail account at http://www.gmail.com). Alternatively, if you use
AOL Instant Messenger, you can add jchowoffice to your buddy list (AIM can be downloaded
for free at http://www.aim.com). I will be online Wednesdays from 8:00 PM to 9:00 PM.
COURSE DESCRIPTION
China, Japan, the two Koreas, and the ten ASEAN states make up what is conventionally
referred to as East Asia. As a region, East Asia looms large in international politics. Four of the
world’s fifteen most populous countries (China, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam) occupy
the region, as do three of the world’s fifteen richest countries by nominal GDP (China, Japan,
and South Korea). At the same time, international politics in East Asia is complex and at times
volatile. The long-running diplomatic crisis over Taiwan remains a persistent flashpoint.
Concerns about China’s growing economic and military power have prompted much handwringing as well as speculation about the opportunities for tapping “1.3 billion potential
customers”. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula over North Korea’s nuclear program have the
entire region on edge.
If the twenty-first century really will be “The Asian Century”, as many have predicted, then it is
more important than ever to understand the factors shaping regional politics. In this course, we
will broadly survey contemporary East Asian politics, paying particular attention to regional
security and economic development. We will also utilize some international relations theory to
frame our analyses. We will begin with an examination of how bipolarity during the Cold War
helped to lay the groundwork for present-day political dynamics. We will then study the origins
of the “Asian miracle” of rapid development and the collapse in the 1997 Asian financial crisis.
Other topics will include the emergence of the U.S.-based hub-and-spoke alliance system, the
rise of China, the North Korea and Taiwan imbroglios, the growing institutionalization of
regional politics through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and nontraditional security problems such as terrorism and human rights violations.
1
REQUIREMENTS
1.) Full attendance at all classes. You cannot have a good discussion if people miss entire
classes or parts of classes on a regular basis. I allow two free absences during the
semester to account for sleeping in, etc. Beyond that, I will dock your grade by 5% for
every absence, though I will excuse you for documented emergencies.
2.) Active participation in discussion (10% of your final grade). This means not only talking
but also actively listening to your colleagues, taking intellectual risks, asking questions
and contributing to the collective task of understanding the course material.
愚者不問，問者不愚
“A fool does not ask questions, but one who asks questions is no fool.”
--Chinese proverb
3.) Quarter-term map quiz (10% of your final grade). This will be a short (10 minutes) inclass map quiz (locate major Asian cities, countries and landmarks on a map) to be held
on Wednesday 2/16 at the end of class.
4.) Midterm examination (35% of your final grade). This will be a 75-minute in-class
examination that will cover the Cold War period in East Asia, some concepts from
international relations theory, and the early post-Cold War period.
5.) Final examination (45% of your final grade). This will be a take-home final examination
that will cover the breadth of the course with a heavier emphasis on the post-Cold War
period. The exam will be due during finals week.
PREREQUISITES
A previous course in international relations or comparative politics is recommended but not
required.
REQUIRED TEXTS (books can be purchased at Amherst Books and are on reserve at Frost)
1.) Course reader (purchase from the Political Science Department)
2.) David Shambaugh and Michael Yahuda (eds.) International Relations of Asia (Lanham:
Rowman and Littlefield, 2008).
3.) Mark Beeson. Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC and Beyond (London and
New York: Routledge, 2009).
4.) Other readings, marked with the computer symbol
reserves section of the course website.
can be found on the e-
POLICY ON ACADEMIC HONESTY
I am committed to upholding the College Honor Code, including the Statement on Academic
Responsibility. Plagiarism and cheating are theft, plain and simple. It is one thing to build upon
the ideas of other people, but quite another to present those same ideas as one’s own. Doing
2
so is unethical, unfair to the people who worked hard to come up with those ideas, and
beneath the dignity of an Amherst College student.
I have zero tolerance for plagiarism and other forms of dishonesty and will report students
who engage in such activities to the Dean for Student Conduct. Students who are found to
have violated the Honor Code can expect to fail the class.
Examples of plagiarism and dishonesty include (but are by no means limited to): neglecting to
enclose direct quotes in quotation marks or use footnotes, near-verbatim “paraphrasing”
without citation, getting someone else to write your paper under your name (this includes socalled “term paper mills”), using another student’s argument in your paper and attempting to
pass it off as your own, copying from someone else’s exam or paper or knowingly allowing
someone to copy from yours, bringing notes into a closed-notes exam, illicitly obtaining paper
topics or exam questions before they have been distributed, etc. Know the standards for
citation and use them. Carelessness and ignorance are NOT valid excuses for plagiarism! Ask
if you have any questions. For standards of citation, visit https://www.amherst.edu/
library/research/citation.
A bad grade lessens in importance over time. Even the best students do poorly on an exam or a
paper every now and again. You can recover from a bad grade, but being marked as a cheater
can haunt you for the rest of your career. If you are encountering difficulty in the class, do not
despair! Come talk to me and I will be more than happy to help you out. There is ALWAYS a
better alternative to cheating!
POLICY ON MAKE-UP EXAMS
Make-up exams will only be administered upon the written instruction of your Class Dean.
3
CLASS SCHEDULE
Readings marked with the computer symbol
the course website.
can be found on the e-reserves section of
Readings marked with *** can be found in the course reader. All other readings are from the
books.
PART I: Getting Our Bearings
Mon 1/24: Introductions
We will begin this week with introductions, laying out the overall structure of the course,
logistics and set-up.
Wed 1/26: East Asia – A Bird’s-Eye View (72 pages)
What forces have shaped East Asia as a region? To what extent do domestic politics impinge
upon international politics and vice-versa?
David Shambaugh. “International Relations in Asia: The Two-Level Game”, in
Shambaugh and Yahuda, 3-31. (29 pages)
Samuel S. Kim. “The Evolving Asian System: Three Transformations”, in Shambaugh and
Yahuda, 35-56. (22 pages)
***Suisheng Zhao. “Failed Multilateralism in the Age of Imperialism”, in Power
Competition in East Asia: From the Old Chinese World Order to Post-Cold War Regional
Multipolarity (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998), 61-81. (21 pages)
PART II: An Age of Fear – East Asia in the Cold War
Historians and political scientists have devoted entire careers to studying the Cold War. We are
going to whiz through the entire Cold War in East Asia in the space of four 80-minute classes.
Clearly, what we will study here is only the tip of the iceberg, but the point is to give you an
overview of how the strategic situation in Asia got to be where it is today. Power relations will
figure prominently in our discussions, but be sure to think about other factors that shape the
strategic environment as well.
Mon 1/31: Bipolarity in Cold War East Asia (67 pages)
With the end of World War II, East Asia lay smoldering in ruins, but the region had little
reprieve as the Soviet Union and the United States laid the foundation for a new worldwide
conflict. Today, we will also discuss Neorealism as a theoretical lens through which to analyze
regional politics. How might Neorealists explain the strategic situation in East Asia?
4
Amitav Acharya. “Theoretical Perspectives on International Relations in Asia”, in
Shambaugh and Yahuda, 57-82. (26 pages)
Kenneth N. Waltz. “The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory”, Journal of
Interdisciplinary History 18:4 (Spring 1988), 615-28. (14 pages)
***Suisheng Zhao. “The Origins of the Bipolar Cold War Competition” in Power
Competition in East Asia: From the Old Chinese World Order to Post-Cold War Regional
Multipolarity (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998), 83-109. (27 pages)
Wed 2/2: Hubs and Spokes – The Alliance System in Cold War East Asia (97 pages)
The beginning of the Cold War and especially the victory of the Communist Party in China
turned East Asia into a major theater for the U.S.-Soviet rivalry. As a result, the United States
established a series of bilateral alliances in the region, centered on Japan but also including
South Korea, the Philippines and Taiwan.
***W.G. Beasley. The Rise of Modern Japan: Political, Economic and Social Change Since
1850 (Revised Edition), (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000), 213-261 (49 pages)
Kevin Cooney. “The Legacy of the Occupation: An ‘Abnormal’ Foreign Policy”,
Japan’s Foreign Policy Since 1945 (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 2005), 23-37. (15 pages)
Christopher Hemmer and Peter J. Katzenstein. “Why Is There No NATO in Asia?
Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism”, International
Organization 56:3 (Summer 2002), 575-607. (33 pages)
Mon 2/7: 38th Parallel Politics (64 pages)
The Korean War was significant for several reasons. It marked the first and only time that
United Nations troops (under American command) entered into direct combat against a
sovereign state (as opposed to a peacekeeping mission). It also marked the beginning of one of
the longest unfinished wars in modern history—today, North and South Korea are technically
still under a ceasefire rather than a peace treaty. The Korean War also marked China’s military
ascendancy and ratcheted up the United States’ commitment to Taiwan.
***Bruce Cumings. “Collision, 1948-1953” in Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History
(New York: W.W. Norton, 1998), 237-300. (64 pages)
Suggested:
***Mineo Nakajima. “Foreign Relations: from the Korean War to the Bandung Line” in
Roderick MacFarquhar and John K. Fairbank, The People’s Republic, Part 1: The
Emergence of Revolutionary China 1949-1965 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1987), 259-89.
5
Wed 2/9: Strange Bedfellows – The Strategic Triangle in Cold War East Asia (93 pages)
As the Cold War progressed, China proved to be a significant fulcrum for power relations in East
Asia, particularly after it obtained nuclear weapons. This resulted in a complex set of
interactions among the United States, China and the Soviet Union as the two poles competed
for influence over the region. A schism between the Soviet Union and China created an opening
for Washington to thaw relations with Beijing, but doing so raised concerns for the United
States’ longtime allies in Taiwan.
***“The Deterioration of the Bipolar System” and “The Dynamics of the Strategic
Triangle” in Suisheng Zhao. Power Competition in East Asia: From the Old Chinese World
Order to Post-Cold War Regional Multipolarity (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998) 111160. (50 pages)
***James Mann. “Tacit Allies” and “Carter and Recognition”, in About Face: A History of
America’s Curious Relationship with China, from Nixon to Clinton (New York: Vintage,
2000), 53-95. (43 pages)
Mon 2/14: Southeast Asia in the Cold War – Seeds of Regionalism (54 pages)
Smaller and much weaker than their neighbors to the north and the dueling superpowers, the
states of Southeast Asia were also buffeted by the tumultuousness of nationalist movements
that sprang from the ashes of European colonization after World War II. Out of a sense of
shared interest these diverse states established regional institutions in an effort to manage
security relations, the most important of which was the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN).
***Donald E. Weatherbee. “The Cold War in Southeast Asia”, in International Relations
in Southeast Asia: The Struggle for Autonomy, 2nd ed. (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield,
2009), 63-90. (28 pages)
***Amitav Acharya. Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and
the Problem of Regional Order (London and New York: Routledge, 2001), 47-72. (26
pages)
Suggested:
The ASEAN Declaration (1967) http://www.aseansec.org/1212.htm
The ZOPFAN Declaration (1972) http://www.aseansec.org/1215.htm
The Declaration of ASEAN Concord (1976) http://www.aseansec.org/1216.htm
The Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (1976) http://www.aseansec.org/1217.htm
6
PART III: East Asia Awakens – Finding A Place in the Post-Cold War World
When the Soviet Union collapsed, the bipolar structure upon which East Asian politics rested
was suddenly thrown into uncertainty. Would the United States continue to assert a dominant
role? Would a rapidly growing China step in and claim the mantle of regional hegemon for
itself? Or would East Asia deteriorate into a multipolar fracas? At the same time, Japan’s
phenomenal growth heralded a transformation of the region into an economic powerhouse.
Over the next few weeks, we will examine some of the lasting transformations of East Asian
politics as a result of the Cold War’s end.
Wed 2/16: Competing Visions of East Asian Order in the Post-Cold War Era (85 pages)
QUARTER-TERM MAP QUIZ AT THE END OF CLASS TODAY!
When the Cold War ended, analysts scrambled to predict how regional politics in East Asia
would proceed. The three major theoretical paradigms—realism, neoliberal institutionalism,
and constructivism—all suggested different ways in which regional politics could develop, from
geopolitical competition to economic integration to the development of a regional identity.
Aaron L. Friedberg. “Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia”,
International Security 18:3 (Winter 1993-94), 5-33. (29 pages)
Edward J. Lincoln. “The Asian Regional Economy”, in Shambaugh and Yahuda, 277-299.
(23 pages)
***Thomas U. Berger. “Power and Purpose in Pacific East Asia: A Constructivist
Interpretation”, in G. John Ikenberry and Michael Mastanduno (eds.) International
Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 387419. (33 pages)
Mon 2/21: What Is a Region? (65 pages; please note that these readings are located at the
beginning of the course multilith)
The idea of a region will guide much of our inquiry when discussing the post-Cold War system in
East Asia, but how are we to understand a region? For instance, should we designate a region in
terms of geographical contiguity? Then what do we say to analysts who argue that Australia
and New Zealand are increasingly becoming linked to Asia? Is it a matter of how dense
economic exchanges are? Then should the United States and China be considered part of a
region? What is the significance of regions and the process of regional integration?
***Louise Fawcett. “Regionalism in Historical Perspective”, in Louise Fawcett and
Andrew Hurrell (eds.) Regionalism in World Politics: Regional Organizations and
Institutional Order (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 9-36. (28 pages)
***Andrew Hurrell. “Regionalism in Theoretical Perspective”, in Louise Fawcett and
Andrew Hurrell (eds.) Regionalism in World Politics: Regional Organizations and
Institutional Order (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 37-73. (37 pages)
7
Wed 2/23: The East Asian “Miracle” (69 pages)
During the last quarter of the twentieth century, all eyes were on Asia. Beginning in the 1960s,
Japan’s economy began to take off, growing rapidly to become the world’s second largest
economy by GDP in the 1970s, a distinction it retained until it was displaced by China in 2010.
The “Four Tigers” of South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan followed suit and soon
analysts were hyping the “Asian Miracle” as a model for rapid development.
Ziya Onis. “The Logic of the Developmental State”, Comparative Politics 24:1 (Oct.
1991), 109-26. (17 pages)
Paul Krugman. “The Myth of Asia’s Miracle”, Foreign Affairs 73:6 (Nov.-Dec. 1994),
62-78. (16 pages)
***T.J. Pempel. “Trans-Pacific Torii: Japan and the Emerging Asian Regionalism” in Peter
J. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi (eds.), Network Power: Japan in Asia (Ithaca: Cornell
University Press, 1997), 47-82. (36 pages)
Mon 2/28: IN-CLASS MIDTERM EXAM! BE ON TIME!
8
Wed 3/2: From Miracle to Meltdown – The Asian Financial Crisis (72 pages)
Even faster than it took off, the East Asian “Miracle” came to a screeching halt in 1997. The
Asian Financial Crisis, as it came to be known, wreaked havoc upon businesses and
governments throughout the region, becoming a kind of contagion. After the 1997 crisis, East
Asia would never be quite the same. Japan, once the motor of the Asian economic engine,
remained in stagnation. Foreign investment was jittery and slow to return. Perhaps most
significantly, though, China emerged from the Asian financial crisis intact and poised to assume
an increasingly powerful role in the region and beyond. Today, we will discuss how and why the
Asian Financial Crisis happened and the implications for East Asian regionalism.
***T.J. Pempel. “Regional Ups, Regional Downs”, in T.J. Pempel (ed.), The Politics of the
Asian Economic Crisis (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999), 62-78. (17 pages)
***Andrew McIntyre. “Political Institutions and the Economic Crisis in Thailand and
Indonesia”, in T.J. Pempel (ed.), The Politics of the Asian Economic Crisis (Ithaca: Cornell
University Press, 1999), 143-62. (20 pages)
***Jeffrey A. Winters. "The Determinants of Financial Crisis in Asia" in T.J. Pempel (ed.),
The Politics of the Asian Economic Crisis (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1999): 79-97.
(19 pages)
Donald C. Hellmann. “A Decade after the Asian Financial Crisis: Regionalism and
International Architecture in a Globalized World”, Asian Survey 47:6 (2007), 834-849.
(16 pages)
Mon 3/7 and Wed 3/9: China’s Relationship Status – “It’s Complicated”
The economic and political reforms of the 1980s and 1990s catapulted China from a perennial
basket-case society into the ranks of the Great Powers in less than a generation. As China’s
economy grew by leaps and bounds, it began to seek a greater role in shaping regional and
international politics. International security analysts grew concerned about the potential for a
new Cold War between China and the United States while simultaneously acknowledging
China’s critical role as an engine of the world economy, a role that might lead it to have a more
“status quo” rather than “revisionist” outlook. The question remains today: what are China’s
strategic interests and how will they seek to achieve them?
9
For Mon 3/7 (77 pages):
Phillip C. Saunders. “China’s Role in Asia”, in Shambaugh and Yahuda, 127-149. (23
pages)
David Shambaugh. “China Engages Asia: Reshaping the Regional Order”,
International Security 29:3 (Winter 2005), 64-99. (36 pages)
Nicholas Khoo and Michael L.R. Smith, David Shambaugh. “Correspondence:
China Engages Asia? Caveat Lector”, International Security 30:1 (Summer 2005), 196213 (18 pages)
For Wed 3/9 (67 pages):
***Avery Goldstein. “An Emerging China’s Emerging Grand Strategy: A Neo-Bismarckian
Turn?” in G. John Ikenberry and Michael Mastanduno (eds.) International Relations
Theory and the Asia-Pacific (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 57-87. (31
pages)
Wang Jisi. “China’s Search for a Grand Strategy: A Rising Great Power Finds Its
Way”, Foreign Affairs (Mar./Apr. 2011), 68-77. (10 pages)
Thomas J. Christensen. “The Advantages of an Assertive China: Responding to
Beijing’s Abrasive Diplomacy”, Foreign Affairs (Mar./Apr. 2011), 54-67. (14 pages)
Charles Glaser. “Will China’s Rise Lead to War? Why Realism Does Not Mean
Pessimism”, Foreign Affairs (Mar./Apr. 2011), 80-91. (12 pages)
Mon 3/14 and Wed 3/16 – No class. Have a great spring break!
Mon 3/21 and Wed 3/23: From Defiance to Détente – Taiwan’s Diplomatic Puzzle
Taiwan represents another thorny problem for East Asian security. When the defeated
Nationalist forces fled to the island in 1949 after being routed by Mao’s Communist forces, they
initially intended to regroup and retake the mainland. Over time, this became less and less of a
priority and Taiwan developed an economy, a system of government and a society all separate
from the mainland and premised on close relations with the United States. Yet the question of
whether Taiwan was a “renegade province” of China, an independent state, or something else
has never been resolved. Efforts to clear up the ambiguity inevitably have major and possibly
deadly consequences. This week, we will examine some of the dimensions of this problem and
study how Taiwan’s security situation has developed in recent years.
10
For Mon 3/21 (88 pages):
***Michael S. Chase. “China’s Taiwan Policy and Military Modernization Since 2000”,
“Security Ties”, “Threat Perceptions” and “Domestic Politics” in Taiwan’s Security
Policy: External Threats and Domestic Politics (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2008), 45-79,
139-91. (88 pages)
For Wed 3/23 (53 pages):
Phillip C. Saunders and Scott L. Kastner. “Bridge Over Troubled Water?
Envisioning a China-Taiwan Peace Agreement”, International Security 33:4 (Spring
2009), 87-114. (28 pages)
Hung-Mao Tien and Chen Yuan Tung. “Taiwan in 2010” Asian Survey 51:1
(Jan./Feb. 2011), 76-84 (9 pages)
Richard C. Bush. “Taiwan and East Asian Security”, Orbis 55:2 (2011), 274-89 (16
pages)
Suggested:
Scott L. Kastner. “Does Economic Integration Across the Taiwan Strait Make
Military Conflict Less Likely?” Journal of East Asian Studies 6 (2006), 319-46. (28 pages)
Michael D. Swaine. “Chinese Decision-Making Regarding Taiwan, 1979-2000”, in
David M. Lampton (ed.), The Making of Chinese Foreign and Security Policy in the Era of
Reform (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), 289-336.
Dennis V. Hickey. “Continuity or Change: US Policy & Taiwan”, Journal of Chinese
Political Science 12:2 (2007), 105-24.
11
Mon 3/28 and Wed 3/30: The Sword of Damocles – Dealing with North Korea
North Korea represents one of the biggest headaches for diplomats with an East Asia portfolio.
Its long isolation, driven by a doctrine of national self-sufficiency known as juche, combined
with its provocative weapons tests, nuclear arsenal, and fears that it could sell nuclear materials
to terrorists, all make North Korea arguably the most visible threat to regional security today.
For Mon 3/28 (71 pages):
Scott Snyder. “The Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asian Stability”, in Shambaugh and
Yahuda, 258-273. (16 pages)
***Michael Green. “Japan and the Korean Peninsula”, in Japan’s Reluctant Realism
(New York: Palgrave, 2003), 111-30. (20 pages)
Daniel Byman and Jennifer Lind. “Pyongyang’s Survival Strategy”, International
Security 35:1 (Summer 2010), 44-74 (31 pages).
Siegfried S. Hecker. “What I Found in North Korea”, Foreign Affairs (Dec. 9, 2010).
(4 pages).
12
For Wed. 3/30 (69 pages):
Jung-Hoon Lee and Chung-In Moon. “The North Korean Nuclear Crisis Revisited:
The Case for a Negotiated Settlement”, Security Dialogue 34:2 (2003), 135-51 (17
pages).
John S. Park. “Inside Multilateralism: The Six-Party Talks”, The Washington
Quarterly 28:4 (2005), 75-91. (17 pages)
Paul B. Stares and Joel S. Wit. Preparing for Sudden Change in North Korea (New
York: Council on Foreign Relations, 2009), 3-37 (35 pages)
Mon 4/4 and Wed 4/6: ASEAN and the Limits of Non-Interference
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations offers a unique regional model for managing
conflict in East Asia. Unlike traditional alliances, ASEAN works to prevent conflict by socializing
its members into a common regional identity and organizational norms, collectively known as
the “ASEAN Way”. This model has been extended to other countries with interests in the region
through the ASEAN Regional Forum, as well as to an expanding ambit of regional issues such as
trade and environmental problems.
For Mon 4/4 (75 pages):
Mark Beeson. Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC and Beyond (London and
New York: Routledge, 2009), Chs. 2 and 4 (17-36, 56-73) (38 pages).
David Martin Jones and Michael L.R. Smith. “Making Process Not Progress: ASEAN
and the Evolving East Asian Regional Order”, International Security 32:1 (Summer 2007),
148-84. (37 pages)
13
For Wed 4/6 (74 pages):
Mark Beeson. Institutions of the Asia-Pacific: ASEAN, APEC and Beyond (London and
New York: Routledge, 2009), Chs. 5 and 6 (74-101) (28 pages).
ASEAN.
Declaration
of
ASEAN
Concord
http://www.aseansec.org/15159.htm (6 pages)
II
(Oct.
7,
2003).
Jose L. Tongzon. “ASEAN-China Free Trade Area: A Bane or Boon for ASEAN
Countries?” The World Economy 28:2 (Feb. 2005), 191-210. (20 pages)
John Arendshorst. “The Dilemma of Non-Interference: Myanmar, Human Rights,
and the ASEAN Charter”, Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights 8:1 (Fall
2009), 102-21. (20 pages)
Suggested:
Vinod K. Aggarwal and Jonathan T. Chow. “The Perils of Consensus: How ASEAN’s
Meta-Regime Undermines Economic and Environmental Cooperation”, Review of
International Political Economy 17:2 (2010), 262-290.
Tsuyoshi Kawasaki. “Neither Skepticism Nor Romanticism: the ASEAN Regional
Forum as a Solution for the Asia-Pacific Assurance Game”, Pacific Review 19:2 (June
2006), 219-37.
Sheldon W. Simon. “ASEAN and the New Regional Multilateralism: The Long and Bumpy
Road to Community”, in Shambaugh and Yahuda, 195-214.
14
Mon 4/11 and Wed 4/13: Will the Sun Also Rise? Japan’s Quest for “Normal Status”
With the rise of China and North Korea combined with a United States bogged down in
Afghanistan and Iraq, there was more serious talk in Japan about becoming a “normal state”
that was not constrained by a pacifist military doctrine and that could play a much larger role in
shaping regional security dynamics. While Japan has not abolished Article 9 of its constitution,
such talk has raised hackles across the Sea of Japan. This week, we will discuss Japan’s role in
the post-Cold War security system in East Asia.
For Mon 4/11 (70 pages)
Michael Green. “Japan in Asia”, in Shambaugh and Yahuda, 170-189. (20 pages)
William Grimes. “Japan Confronts the Global Economic Crisis”, Asia-Pacific Review
16:2 (2009), 42-51 (10 pages).
Christopher Hughes. “Japan’s Response to China’s Rise: Regional Engagement,
Global Containment, Dangers of Collision”, International Affairs 85:4 (2009), 837-56 (20
pages)
Kevin J. Cooney and Alex Scarbrough. “Japan and South Korea: Can These Two
Nations Work Together?” Asian Affairs: An American Review 35:3 (Fall 2008), 173-92.
(20 pages)
For Wed 4/13 (63 pages)
Jennifer M. Lind. “Pacifism or Passing the Buck? Testing Theories of Japanese
Security Policy”, International Security 29:1 (Summer 2004), 92-121. (30 pages)
Keiko Hirata. “Who Shapes the National Security Debate? Divergent
Interpretations of Japan’s Security Role”, Asian Affairs: An American Review 35:3 (2008),
123-51 (28 pages)
“After the Quake: Implications for Japan’s Political Future: An Interview with Dan
Sneider”, National Bureau of Asian Research, March 18, 2011. (2 pages)
“Japan’s Post-Quake Economic Outlook: Recovery and Reconstruction: An
Interview with William Grimes”, National Bureau of Asian Research, March 22, 2011. (3
pages)
15
Mon 4/18: East Asia’s Wildcard – Russia’s Return (59 pages)
Sidelined for a decade following the political and economic turmoil of the Soviet Union’s
collapse, Russia is once again a major player in East Asian politics. Its vast oil reserves, access to
sophisticated technology, membership in a growing number of international organizations, and
increasingly close relations with China and North Korea have engaged Russia in Asia to a degree
not seen since the Cold War. But what kind of impact will Russian influence have on East Asian
politics, particularly in security?
Gilbert Rozman. “Strategic Thinking about the Russian Far East: A Resurgent Russia
Eyes Its Future in Northeast Asia”, Problems of Post-Communism 55:1 (2008), 36-48. (13
pages)
Younkyoo Kim and Stephen Blank. “Russia and the Six-Party Process in Korea:
Moscow’s Quest for Great Power Status”, Problems of Post-Communism 57:4 (2010), 3750. (14 pages)
James MacHaffie. “China’s Role in Central Asia: Security Implications for Russia
and the United States”, Comparative Strategy 29 (2010), 368-380. (13 pages)
Stephen Blank. Toward a New Chinese Order in Asia: Russia’s Failure, NBR Special
Report 26 (March 2011) (Washington D.C.: National Bureau of Asian Research), 2-20 (19
pages).
Wed 4/20 and Mon 4/25: The United States in East Asia – Still the Indispensable Power?
Throughout the Cold War, the United States was a vital strategic player in East Asia and the
primary guarantor of security for states in the region. With the increasing power of other states
in the region, especially China, and the establishment of new mechanisms to mitigate conflict
and other cross-border transactions, what is the United States’ role? How will that role be
affected given the effects of the 2008 economic crisis?
For Wed 4/20 (77 pages):
T.J. Pempel. “How Bush Bungled Asia”, Pacific Review (Dec. 2008), 547-81. (35
pages)
Yoichi Funabashi. “Keeping Up With Asia: America and the New Balance of
Power”, Foreign Affairs (Sept./Oct. 2008), 110-24. (15 pages)
16
Evan A. Feigenbaum and Robert A. Manning. The United States in the New Asia
(New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 2009), 3-29. (27 pages)
For Mon 4/25 (64 pages):
Francois Godement. ”The United States and Asia in 2010.” Asian Survey 51:1
(Jan./Feb. 2011), 5-17. (13 pages)
Mark Beeson. “Hegemonic Transition in East Asia? The Dynamics of Chinese and
American Pow er”, Review of International Studies 35 (2009), 95-112. (18 pages)
Deborah Welch Larson and Alexei Shevchenko. “Status Seekers: Chinese and
Russian Responses to U.S. Primacy”, International Security 34:4 (Spring 2010), 63-95. (33
pages)
Suggested:
Victor D. Cha. “Winning Asia: Washington’s Untold Success Story”, Foreign Affairs
(Nov./Dec. 2007), 98-113.
Francois Godement. “The United States and Asia in 2009: Public Diplomacy and
Strategic Continuity”, Asian Survey 50:1 (2009), 8-24.
Evan S. Medeiros. “The New Security Drama in East Asia: The Responses of U.S.
Allies and Security Partners to China’s Rise”, Naval War College Review (Autumn 2009),
37-52.
Jason T. Shaplen and James Laney. “Washington’s Eastern Sunset”, Foreign Affairs
(Nov./Dec. 2007), 82-97.
Robert Sutter. “The Obama Administration and US Policy in Asia”, Contemporary
Southeast Asia 31:2 (2009), 189-216. (28 pages)
17
Wed 4/27: “Terrorists, Jihad and Plagues (Oh My!)” Non-Traditional Security Issues in
Southeast Asia (78 pages)
While our studies have focused primarily on threats originating from states, much attention
from political analysts has been devoted to “non-traditional” security issues. Today, we will
discuss two of them: terrorism and pandemic disease. We will examine the forces shaping these
threats and consider the problems involved in trying to address them.
***Gordon P. Means. “Southeast Asia and Global Jihad”, in Political Islam in Southeast
Asia (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2009), 151-88. (38 pages)
Ralf Emmers. “Comprehensive Security and Resilience in Southeast Asia: ASEAN’s
Approach to Terrorism”, Pacific Review 22:2 (2009), 159-77. (19 pages)
Mely Caballero-Anthony. “SARS in Asia: Crisis, Vulnerabilities and Regional
Responses”, Asian Survey 45:3 (2005), 475-95. (21 pages)
Mon 5/2 and Wed 5/4: Putting It All Together – Trend Analysis in the International Politics of
East Asia
Over the past 13 weeks, we have surveyed a variety of political issues in East Asia. In this
concluding week, we will try to put together our collective brainpower to think about how
politics in East Asia might evolve. Go back and review some of the theory from the first week to
refresh your memory.
Mon 5/2 (64 pages)
***Chung-In Moon and Chaesung Chun. “Sovereignty: Dominance of the Westphalian
Concept and Implications for Regional Security”, in Muthiah Alagappa (ed.), Asian
Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features (Stanford: Stanford, University
Press, 2003), 106-37. (32 pages)
Aaron Friedberg. “Will Europe’s Past Be Asia’s Future?”, Survival 42:3 (2000), 14760. (14 pages)
Michael Yahuda. “Looking Ahead: A New Asian Order?”, in Shambaugh and Yahuda, 34158. (18 pages)
18
Wed 5/4 (23 pages)
Amitav Acharya. “Will Asia’s Past Be Its Future?”, International Security 28:3
(Winter 2003/04), 149-64. (16 pages)
Mark Beeson and Julie Gilson. “Still on Track? East Asia at a Time of Crisis”, Pacific
Review 23:3 (2010), 287-93. (7 pages)
TAKE-HOME FINAL EXAM DUE DURING FINALS WEEK. EXACT DATE TBA
19