Examining The International Relations Theory Of The Asia Pacific
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33822/mjihi.v3i2.2152Kata Kunci:
Asia Pacific, International Relations Theories, Realism, Liberalism, ConstructivismAbstrak
The question whether the IR theories used to analyse and study the Asian region particularly Asia Pacific is relevant or not remains heatedly debated within the field itself. Prominent scholars such as David C. Kang, Barry Buzan, and Peter Katszeinstein, and Amitav Acharya have argued through their works that the study of Asian region is often analysed by IR theories that is dominated by the Western knowledge and experiences. This essay hence would like to examine which theories are the most relevant and useful to depict and explain the dynamic of international relations in Asia, particularly the Asia Pacific. It argues that IR theories that cover the dynamics of international, historical and social relations of the Asian countries would likely the most useful and relevant to analysing the IR of the Asia-Pacific.
Referensi
Acharya, A 1997, ‘Beyond anarchy: Third world instability and international order after the Cold War", in Stephanie Neumann, ed., ‘International Relations Theory and the Third World’, New York: St Martin's Press.
Acharya, A 2003, ‘Will Asia’s past be its future?”, International Security, vol. 28, no.3 (Winter 2003-04).
Acharya, A 2004, ‘How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism”, International Organization, vol. 58, no.2, pp. 239-275.
Acharya, A 2005, ‘Why is there no NATO in Asia? The normative origins of Asian multilateralism,” Working Paper No. 05-05, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
Acharya, A and Tan, SS 2005, ‘Betwixt balance and community: America, ASEAN, and the security of Southeast Asia,’ International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, Vol. 5, No. 2
Acharya, A 2005, ‘Do norms and identity matter? Community and power in Southeast Asia’s regional order,” Pacific Review, vol.18, no.1, pp.95-118;
Acharya , A and Buzan, B 2007, ‘Why is there no non-Western IR theory: An introduction,’ in Amitav Acharya and Barry Buzan, ‘Conclusion: On the possibility of a Non-Western IR theory in Asia, International Relations of the Asia-Pacific.
Acharya, A and Stubbs, R 2007, ‘Theorising Southeast Asian Relations: An introduction,” in Acharya and Stubbs, eds., “Theorising Southeast Asian Relations: Emerging Debates, 2007.
Alagappa, M 2003, ‘Introduction,’ in Alagappa, ed., Asian Security Order: Normative and Instrumental Features, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Hemmer, C and Katzenstein, PJ 2002, ‘Why is there no NATO in Asia: Collective identity, regionalism, and the origins of multilateralism,’ International Organization, Vol. 56, No.3, pp. 575-607.
Ikenberry, J& Mastanduno, M 2003, ‘International Relations theory and the Asia-Pacific, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 421-2.
Kang, DC 2003, ‘Getting Asia wrong: The need for new analytical frameworks’, International Security 27, no. 4, pp. 57-85.
Kang, DC 2010, ‘East Asia before the West: Five centuries of trade and tribute’, New York: Columbia University Press.
Katzenstein, PJ 1997, ‘Introduction: Asian regionalism in comparative perspective,’ in Peter J. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi, eds., ‘Network Power: Japan and Asia’, Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, pp. 5.
Katzenstein, PJ 2007, ‘Introduction: Asian regionalism in comparative perspective’, in Amitav Acharya and Alastair Iain Johnston, eds., Crafting Cooperation: Regional International Institutions in Comparative Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Khoo, N & Smith, ML 2001, ‘Concert of Asia?’, Policy Review: Aug/Sept 2001, pp. 73
Mearsheimer, JJ 1990, ‘Back to the future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War", International Security, vol. 15, no.1, pp. 5-55.
Mearsheimer, JJ 2001, ‘The Tragedy of Great Power Politics’,New York: W.W. Norton & Company, pp. 41.
Vasquez, J 2002, ‘Realism and the study of peace and war’, in Michael Breecher and Frank P. Harvey, eds., Realism and Institutionalism in International Studies, An Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Walt, SM 1998, ‘International Relations: One world, many theories’, Foreign Policy (Spring 1998), pp.29-46.
Waltz, KN1964, ‘The stability of the bipolar World", Daedalus, Vol. 93 (Summer 1964), p. 907
Wan, M 2007, ‘Economic interdependence and economic cooperation,” in Alagappa, ed., Asian Security Order; Benjamin E. Goldsmith, “A Liberal Peace in Asia? “Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 5-27
White, H 2008, ‘ Why war in Asia remains thinkable’, Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 50:6, pp.85-104.
