State Formation And Economic Development

The late nineteenth century culminated centuries of progress for the prominent Asian societies of Qing China and Tokugawa Japan, defining their economic strength and influence in foreign affairs. Each society encountered taxing struggles from internal rebellions to external pressures from outside nations. The Qing dynasty in China survived the crises of the 1850s-1860s, while the Tokugawa shogunate in Japan did not (i.e., collapsed) because of a number of important historical differences. Distinct political, social, and foreign policy differences caused seemingly parallel societies to spiral off in opposite directions. With the aid of a highly centralized government, a stable social and political order, and an amicable nature towards foreign policy, the strength of the Chinese government prevailed against both internal and external challenges. Tokugawa Japan ran a course completely opposite of Qing China and ultimately collapsed in the 1860s. Three significant factors leading to this failure resided in its decentralized government, static and hereditary social order, and hostile nature towards foreign affairs. Reviewed first are the factors

In the wake of World War Two, the power of Asian nationalism was irrepressible. Many new nations emerged all throughout this massive continent. Even though these various nations are different in many ways the way in which they came together hold true. Everywhere Asian nationalists rallied their people against colonialism and imperialism brought on by the various countries

The necessity for an East Asian Community has never been greater. Globalization of the world economy and trends towards regional trading blocs brings new challenges. Global standards need to be defined and regulations harmonized. Regional cooperation and coordination are required to advance the region’s common interests. The region is endowed with an abundance of skilled labor, entrepreneurs, natural resources, capital and advanced technology. These common challenges and complementary resources call for mutually beneficial cooperation and exchanges, not only in the economic realm, but also in the political, security, environmental, social, cultural and educational arenas. The rapid rise of China and its increasing influence in the region has been a source of friction and concern for its neighbors but has also raised the possibility of imagining an Asia that is less centered on the U.S. China’s growing economy could entail a rebalancing of the economic center for Asia. Unquestionably, China’s role and attitude will be crucial to the success or failure of an East Asian

These two states have vast similarities in how their governments later formed. With the United States, governmental design was self-conscious and planned, while Japan underwent many governmental evolutions to become the state it is today. Furthermore, these two studies dive into what truly makes a strong, weak, and failing state as Japan’s economy is the weakest indicator on the Failed State Index, yet it still reigns as an exceptionally strong

The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast the government and economies of four countries in Asia: China, India, Japan, and Korea. Topics that will be discussed are their governments, economies, resources, and citizens.

Kang quotes scholars saying “…there appeared to be one race, and the West had strung the tape at the finish line for others to break…” and “… many of our international-relations theories … see East Asians as identical to Westerners in goals, attitudes, and beliefs.” However, Kang argues that East Asia had a different system, even the opposite, of the European “balance of powers”. Europe’s system created unavoidable war as the states fought to stay equal.

Although neither region experienced tremendous stability, the early states of China and modern-day India consistently followed their own styles of state-building practices. These powerful states in East and South Asia, respectively, used quite different methods of state-building, with their techniques greatly mirroring their different levels of desired interaction with outsiders. While the Chinese focused on state-building from within, the empires of modern-day India were more open to outsiders and their potential contributions to Indian society.

19th century in the history of East Asia has brought radical changes in the existing system of social, cultural and political relations. Moreover, these changes have marked the beginning of a new and fundamentally different stage in the development of countries in the region. Since the beginning of the intensive interference of European colonial powers of the West, the progressive evolutionary development of the major factors of regional relations between China and Japan has been interrupted. Moreover, the future path of transformation of their political and economic system was fundamentally altered because of the intervention of the capitalist model, which combined traditional oriental style of conducting an aggressive foreign policy and the preservation of feudal remnants,

Multiple factors played a role in dictating the economic and political futures of Japan and China, one of the most important being geography. To accurately compare and contrast the historical trajectory of each county, criteria of land mass and population must be explored. China holds a super presence on the map detailing Asia. It’s extremely large, with a very scattered yet extensive population. Japan on the other end is a nation of minute size, taking up an island and multiple archipelagos. The Japanese population, due to its size, is a fraction of China’s.

Despite its status as a major economic power, the United States exhibits several features that create cause for concern. Whereas the U.S. economy largely depends on adjustments in capital structures over time, individual firms and industries play critical roles in determining an economic future. Firm and industry leverage further depend on a reconciliation of debt and equity flows. More broadly, economic policies rooted in the philosophy of neoliberalism influence the macroeconomic factors of gross domestic product (GDP) and foreign direct investment (FDI) while excess returns on investment (ROIs) promote instability in market functions by affecting performance across firms and industries. Based on these observations, the economic future of the U.S. depends on the shaping of fiscal and monetary policies that create space for uncertainty as they would also guarantee more stable employment over time.

In the mid 1900s the world experienced a major change, no more was there a war between two major nations, rather the threat of war between the Soviet Union and the United States, a conflict that always threatened to boil over. Within this tug of war of power, nations broke free from their imperialistic ties, and became individual entities. Southeastern Asia was very much influenced by imperialism, with the Dutch controlling Indonesia, the French controlling Cambodia, and the British presence in Thailand. The cold war was a dissolving factor of imperialism and once these countries gained freedom, without the support of the countries controlling them, they inevitably fell into poverty. The first challenge critical to any country’s success would

Japanese imperialism had taken flight and hoped to expand its influence and control over various parts of Southeast Asia. Unfortunately, over the course of a decade, Japan only taunted the world with their idea of self-sustainment and colonial expansion. The underlying principle to their failure was the theory of Imperial overstretch, as Hook explains, “a pattern in which great powers have consistently expanded their foreign commitments beyond their ability to remain economically solvent and militarily secure” (Hook 2014, 12). Throughout my analysis of the U.S.’s responses to Japanese actions prior to the U.S.’s involvement in World War two, we see Japan try to expand their empire in Southeast Asia, but sequentially results in failure. There are various theories that help explain the U.S. actions taken in response to Japan. These theories help explain the factors that lead Japan to imperial overstretch.

The Asian Tigers, consisting of Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan, were the second group of countries to develop after World War II, with the first being Japan. The Asian Tigers were able to develop due to a combination of comparative advantages, including partially existing developed levels of infrastructure, good geographical locations with open access to the sea allowing easy exportation, cheap labour and strong government support.

The Republicans dominated Congress to take over the government passing a series of acts that limited the power of the President and Supreme Court. Many former slaves were able to buy land and do more. Farmers found it hard because they didn’t get the hard working labor force any more.

In this essay we look in-depth on how government strategies and economic policy play a crucial role in the success of High Performance Asian Economies (HPAEs) during 1960 to 1990 (World Bank 1993).There are eight countries within HPAEs: South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Japan. Its economic development has significantly rise that it was name ‘East Asia Miracle’ (World Bank, 1993).