David Kang, “Hierarchy and Stability in Asian International Relations” (pp. 163-189)
[Constructivist]
THE PUZZLE
> Realists see “wide disparities in economic and military power among nations in the region, the
broad range of political systems that range from democracy to totalitarian, and the lack of
international institutions” and predict intense rivalry and instability (163).
> Constructivists see Asian nations “reverting to a pattern of hierarchy, [resulting in] increased
stability”
Also, “the absence of hierarchy leads to conflict”
3 Sections of Kang’s essay:
The logic of a hierarchic international or regional system,
Showing only a slight modification of Realism
Examining six centuries of Asian international relations,
Showing that this system has successfully functioned in the past
A hierarchic perspective explains three puzzles from the current era that realism has difficulty
explaining
I. ANARCHY AND HIERARCHY IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
> Constructivism begins with the same neorealist assumptions:
Nation-states are the unit of analysis
Anarchic system
Power & Geography determine Preferences & Position
Relative position matters in hierarchy
High mistrust in international system
Primary concern is survival, secondary concern is economics
> Realism assumes EITHER anarchy OR hierarchy
Constructivists recognize that nation-states are not equal on the international stage
Equality and hierarchy can exist under anarchy
> IF nations understand that the central state had no territorial or overweening ambitions, and
