| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
058084
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
183511
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The study and practice of Australian International Relations requires a geopolitical economy agenda so that some of the key political and strategic challenges we face can be adequately understood and theorised. This includes an understanding of new forms of geopolitical contests that are reconstituting the boundaries between economic and security domains. The understanding of these security and political challenges in Australian International Relations is tethered to a terminology such as containment borrowed from the cold war conceptual arsenal. It has driven the government research agenda to security and strategic issues. Such government agendas have a deeply problematic influence—not the least of which are through research funding policies on academic research in International Relations. A comprehensive understanding of these new modes of geopolitical contestation requires an examination of the interactive relationship between geopolitical and capitalist transformations. In order to understand transformations in the global capitalist economy and the emergence of new modes of geopolitics, we require a geopolitical economy research agenda. This paper proposes a framework of uneven and combined development (UCD) as one useful framework to understand the nature of geopolitical contests in the early twentyfirst century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
087560
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The possibility of viable alternatives to the historical combination of liberal democracy and capitalist development is now widely acknowledged in the analysis of late industrializing countries. For example, within the transitions literature notions of hybrid regimes and closer scrutiny of institutional functioning are being employed to capture complex variations in authoritarianism. Less acknowledged is the significance of capitalist dynamics and related geopolitics for the character and performance of political institutions. We argue that late industrialization in Asia has especially militated against middle-class/labor alliances and produced a general fragmentation of social forces restricting the scope for democratic coalitions. But as well as helping to explain the consolidation and refashioning of existing authoritarian regimes, analysis of these social foundations of political institutions also helps account for strands of authoritarianism within so-called post-authoritarian polities. The Pacific Review has long fostered debate about the durability or otherwise of authoritarian regimes and alternative models to Western capitalism in Asia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
050612
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Hampshire, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
|
| Description |
viii, 192p.
|
| Standard Number |
1403932603
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 047720 | 327.5/JAY 047720 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
136954
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the participation of China's Yunnan Province in the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) in order to understand the dynamics behind the regionalisation and internationalisation strategies adopted by a Chinese subnational state. It argues that the Yunnan case demonstrates the outflow of state capital—both national and provincially based—to have been instrumental in harnessing Beijing's and Kunming's political support for programs of subregional economic cooperation. This political support has led to a state capital alliance underpinning the economic expansion of provincial state capital into the GMS. It also argues that subregional governance arrangements, such as those featuring in the GMS, embed the competitive advantage of state capital through new forms of extra-territorial governance that ostensibly de-emphasises the political dimensions of state capital. The internationalisation of Yunnan subnational state is reflected in its political strategy of subregional governance. These changes point to complex rescaling of not just national state but also subnational states in Asia that find expression in variegated regional and subregional political projects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
023393
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2002.
|
| Description |
475-496
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
065059
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Routledge, 2005.
|
| Description |
xiv, 166p.
|
| Series |
Routledge Advances in International Relations and Global Politics
|
| Standard Number |
0415367468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 049981 | 327.101/JAY 049981 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
151994
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this short article, the authors analyse the implications of the election of Donald Trump for the future of the liberal rules-based order, with specific emphasis on its implications for the Asian region. Departing from the institutional fetishism that figures prominently in the literature, the authors argue that this liberal order needs to be conceptualised in terms of its social foundations. Particularly important to consider, in terms of understanding these social foundations, is the nature of social relations in the USA. The election of Trump reflects the deep crisis of the US state and the rise of a new ‘authoritarian populism’. The authors trace the roots of this authoritarian populism to patterns of global capitalist transformation, the crisis of the US state and the modes of crisis management that this has generated. They then explore the implications of Trump’s authoritarian populism for the region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|