| ID | 138098 |
| Title Proper | Power, trust, and network complexity |
| Other Title Information | three logics of hedging in Asian security |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Jackson, Van |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Why do hedging strategies appear so pervasive in Asia? This article argues that hedging – not balancing or bandwagoning – is the central tendency in Asian international relations, offering three different lenses for making sense of this phenomenon, focusing in particular on the third: power transition theory, mistrust under multipolarity, and complex networks. Each perspective highlights different factors that explain the incentives for Asian states to hedge, what hedging looks like, and how long hedging is likely to endure. Power transition theory tells us that hedging is the result of uncertainty about a possible power transition between the United States and China. Multipolarity points us to uncertainty about the intentions of a growing number of states. And the logic of complex networks explains hedging as a response to the topology of Asia’s complex network structure – consisting of sensitivity, fluidity, and heterarchy – which makes it difficult for Asian-foreign policy elites to assess the future consequences of present day commitments. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Relations of the Asia-Pacific Vol. 14, No.3; Sep 2014: p.331-356 |
| Journal Source | International Relations of the Asia-Pacific Vol: 14 No 3 |
| Key Words | ASEAN ; Power ; China ; Trust ; Asia - Pacific Security ; Power Transition Theory ; Network Complexity ; Asian International Relations |