|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
120149
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article employs the idea of the tributary system-most often associated with China's international relations from antiquity-to interpret how America relates to the rest of the world. I argue that the United States has instituted the most successful tributary system the world has ever seen. As the hub or epicenter of the most extensive network of formal and informal alliances ever built, the United States offers its allies and partners-or tributaries-military protection as well as economic access to its markets. In return for all its exertions, the tribute America seeks is straightforward: first, that it be recognized as the power or hegemon, and second, that others emulate its political forms and ideas. With both tributes in hand, the United States finds equanimity; it and the world are safe, at least from the United States' point of view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
106044
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
During the course of China's continuing rise, Chinese scholars have developed different schools of thought on China and even greater interest in ancient Chinese philosophy and diplomacy. 1 Under this backdrop, research into China's tributary system has become a main academic focus.
Much controversy surrounds both the tributary system and the broader concept of a tributary relationship. The term 'tributary' itself is often misunderstood to mean unilateral behaviour towards China among states in China's periphery, or even to imply that the tributaries direct the relationship. 2 Some scholars are predisposed towards using concepts and terms other than that of 'tributary', for example, the 'Order of Rule by Rites', 3 the 'lord and vassal', 4 and 'grant and tribute' relationships; 5 and the 'Clan and Vassal Institution', the 'Suzerain - Vassal' and 'Clan and Vassal Systems', and the 'Huayi Order'. 6 Zhang Feng argues in observing the wide range of terms and concepts used in the literature that there is strong need for a systematic rethinking of the concept of the tribute system. 7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
087735
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Historical controversies continue to plague northeast Asian politics today, with Chinese and Koreans protesting Japanese history textbooks and Japanese politicians' visits to Yasukuni Shrine, and Koreans protesting Chinese claims that the ancient Kingdom of Goguryo was Chinese, not Korean. Yet, there is little empirical research exploring what, if any, impact historical beliefs have on threat perception and foreign policy preferences in northeast Asia today. On the basis of surveys of Chinese, Japanese, and South Korean university students, this paper explores the relationships among beliefs about the past, perceived threat in the present, and foreign policy preferences for the future. Results and their implications for northeast Asian security are discussed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
151435
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Two analytical perspectives – conventional wisdom derived from warlordism and European colonialism, and soft-power concepts drawn from post-Cold-War American international relations – are prevalent lenses for analysing China's global rise. However, neither considers the role of the past in shaping China's contemporary diplomacy. This paper fills the gap of this under-researched area by providing an alternative perspective featuring analytic categories rooted in China's tributary tradition. It proposes a neo-tributary framework for systematically interpreting historical Chinese mentalities and strategies embedded in China's contemporary power strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
141451
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Recently, some writers on Chinese foreign relations have argued that the tributary system is a useful concept for describing imperial China's relations with its neighbors, and that it can even serve as a model for the future of international relations in East Asia. An examination of China's historical practice of foreign relations shows that there was no systematic tributary system, but instead multiple relationships of trade, military force, diplomacy and ritual. Furthermore, China's neighbors did not accept the imperial center's definition of hierarchy and subordination, but interpreted ritual relationships in their own way. Even in the 1930s, when scholars invoked Chinese history to advocate peaceful relations, they recognized the importance of military force, colonial settlement and domination in East Asian state relationships. The current myth of the tributary system ignores historical reality and misleads us about China's true position in East Asia and the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
165259
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
What does international hierarchy look like? The emerging literatures on hierarchy and international orders remain overwhelmingly focused on the contemporary era and on the great powers that comprise the top of the hierarchy. This article addresses that gap by examining diplomacy, war, and domestic politics in the premodern Vietnam–China relationship under the hierarchic tributary system. Specifically, we construct a unique data set of over 1,200 entries, which measures wars and other violence in the region from 1365 to 1789. The data revealed the stable and legitimate nature of tributary relations between formally unequal political units. The Vietnamese court explicitly recognized its unequal status in its relations with China through a number of institutions and norms. Vietnamese rulers also displayed very little military attention to their relations with China. Rather, Vietnamese leaders were clearly more concerned with quelling chronic domestic instability and managing relations with kingdoms to their south and west.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|