| ID | 147908 |
| Title Proper | Whither the balancers? the case for a methodological reset |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Liff, Adam P |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Post-Cold War, balancing theory has fallen on “hard times.” A question of crucial importance for 21st-century peace and stability concerns how Asia–Pacific secondary states are responding militarily to China's rise. China's rapid growth, military modernization, and controversial policies vis-à-vis contested space and territories on its periphery make it a prime candidate for counterbalancing behavior. Yet several recent studies claim that secondary states are accommodating, even bandwagoning with, Beijing. This study challenges these claims, attributing them largely to problematic research designs not uncommon in the wider balancing literature. It proposes a methodological corrective, arguing for widespread employment of an alternative analytical framework relying on clearer definitions and explicitly delineated sets of 21st-century-relevant metrics reflecting the myriad ways contemporary militaries enhance their capabilities in response to perceived threats. Applied systematically to original analysis of the contemporary Asia–Pacific, this framework uncovers what existing studies miss—evidence of practically significant and accelerating balancing against China. |
| `In' analytical Note | Security Studies Vol. 25, No.3; Jul-Sep 2016: p.420-459 |
| Journal Source | Security Studies Vol: 25 No 3 |
| Key Words | Barack Obama ; Asia–Pacific ; Methodological Reset ; Balancing Theory |