| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
098868
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
There is abundant literature in the United States on the images that the Americans hold of China, particularly regarding how the China image has evolved over time and the possible impacts of the China image on US-China relations. It will be interesting to figure out the other side of the coin, that is, how the Chinese view the United States and whether the US image plays any part in their foreign-policy preferences toward the United States. Research in this direction needs an interdisciplinary exploration into areas of international relations theory, social psychology, and public opinion analysis.
Various international relations theories give contrasting answers to the question whether national image really matters in foreign-policy decision-making. There is no place for national image in structural realism. Systemic constructivism as expounded by Wendt focuses on the static concept of identity rather than the dynamic one of national image. On the other hand, when scholars dig into the microscopic world of foreign-policy decision-making, images of other countries, among other things, are an important explanatory factor.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
100796
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
101108
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
099596
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
101114
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
096806
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
099690
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The election of an opposition party candidate into the White House usually leads to friction between China and the United States. This paper argues that Barack Obama's election will serve as an exception. Instead of taking a harsher line on China, President Obama would inherit many of Bush's pragmatic policies on China. This has already been proven by the stable development of relations between the two countries during the better part of Obama's first year in office. However, by the end of the year, relations between China and the United States appeared to be heading into some troubled waters. This paper begins with some thoughts on the election of an opposition candidate in general and that of Obama in particular in terms of its impact on China-U.S. relations. Then, it discusses the opportunities and challenges the election of Obama posed to China-U.S. relations. Afterward, it comes up with some speculations on the prospects for China-U.S. relations. And finally, it makes a preliminary assessment of the impact of Obama's election on China-U.S. relations during the first year of the Obama administration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
098474
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
103652
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
There is broad scholarly consensus that the relative power of the United States is declining and that this decline will have negative consequences for international politics. This pessimism is justified by the belief that great powers have few options to deal with acute relative decline. Retrenchment is seen as a hazardous policy that demoralizes allies and encourages external predation. Faced with shrinking means, great powers are thought to have few options to stave off decline short of preventive war. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, however, retrenchment is not a relatively rare and ineffective policy instrument. A comparison of eighteen cases of acute relative decline since 1870 demonstrates that great powers frequently engage in retrenchment and that retrenchment is often effective. In addition, we find that prevailing explanations overstate the importance of democracies, bureaucracies, and interest groups in inhibiting retrenchment. In fact, the rate of decline can account for both the extent and form of retrenchment, even over short periods. These arguments have important implications for power transition theories and the rise of China.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
106467
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
098866
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
China and the United States signed a joint statement during US President Barack Obama's four-day state visit to China in November 2009 in which President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao, 'reached agreement to advance China-US relations in the new era'.1 These relations, however, soured after successive fallings-out over US trade sanctions on Chinese seamless steel tubes, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton's criticism of China's internet freedom, US arms sales to Taiwan, and Obama's meeting with the Dalai Lama in the White House-that began only one month after Obama's visit and carried on through to February 2010.2 Just as political commentators began to understand the reasons for this 180-degree shift over such a short period they were taken back afresh on April 2 when the relationship made a rapid recovery, evident in the hour-long telephone conversation that day between President Hu and President Obama on cooperation.3 Few appeared to have noticed that sudden deteriorations followed by rapid recoveries have been the norm in China-US relations since the 1990s. This article explains the enduring phenomenon using a theory of superficial friendship-namely the policy of pretending to be friends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
106268
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
US relations with China are critically important for the future of world politics. They are also a useful case in which to test the individual-level implications of the liberal commercial peace argument. A plausible case can be made on both sides of the claim that China poses a security threat to the United States. China's economy is growing far faster than the United States' economy, while the country remains a communist autocracy. At the same time, trade between the United States and China has expanded dramatically in the last three decades. Its dual role as a major trading partner and a growing international rival generates substantial uncertainty about China's future status as friend or foe. Using data from a recent survey by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, we find that economic interests help explain individual Americans' assessment of China as a threat and their views concerning hostile policies toward that country. Those who stand to benefit from trade with China hold more positive views of the country and oppose conflictual foreign policies with respect to it. Those whose incomes are likely to decline because of trade with China tend to take the opposite position on these questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
099684
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Korean issues in recent history and current affairs have been a remarkable and varied factor with respect to global and regional security and in relations between the United States and China-arguably the most important bilateral relationship in today's world. The extraordinary events and remarkable developments that compose this saga merit review, including many forgotten, unknown, or ignored developments and details. This examination is based on the author's experiences in various capacities, official and independent, over two decades. Much of it derives from his extensive contacts, conversations, and candid exchanges with People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of Korea (ROK) government officials, military officers (active and retired), think-tankers, and other scholars and specialists. It describes the ups and downs of relations between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and encompasses ROK-PRC and ROK-U.S. issues. The article concludes with a comprehensive analysis of the current debate in the United States and China on how to deal with North Korea and how to advise the Obama administration. The author lived the history, researched the intriguing details and startling twists and turns, and is now a constant close observer and sometimes active participant in the ongoing debate about how best to handle North Korea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
099677
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Drawing support from international institution theory, this article analyzes China's new thinking about Asian diplomacy after the Cold War. Institutionalism was flexibly utilized by China in its peripheral regions-Central Asia, Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia and South Asia, which have adopted institutional models-dominant participation, deep participation, active participation, and moderate participation models. China tries to handle the presence of U.S. interests well and has responded reasonably to U.S. pragmatic institutional engagement. To realize the aim of compatibility and coexistence between China and the United States in Asia, the two countries should establish interconnecting institutions in both economic and political fields. With regard to the future interactive trends of China and the United States in Asia, the author, from the dimension of international institutionalism, works out an institutional interplay-nested and overlapping institutions-for China and the United States to achieve accommodation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
091353
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
097985
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Routledge, 2010.
|
| Description |
xv, 350p.
|
| Standard Number |
9780415777810, hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:2/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 055146 | 355.03305/GAN 055146 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 055495 | 355.03305/GAN 055495 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
099593
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
103740
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
099595
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
096088
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Sino-US strategic relations have undergone profound transformations over the past thirty years. It is increasingly urgent to change and transcend Sino-US strategic relations. However, rapid adjustments and change in world pattern prevent China and the US from drawing a clear picture of each other's strategy. Vagueness in strategy awareness leads to difficult strategic adjustment, impacting virtuous interaction and stable development of Sino - US strategic relations. The US as relatively more important part in bilateral relations, needs to take an initiative in substantial moves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|