U.s. Relations Between The International System Essay

From 1789 through 1800, the United States was greatly involved in foreign affairs. The nation had just been established, and the early United States was greatly influenced by foreign affairs as a result. International affairs even pushed the young nation to the brink of war. The young United States would attempt to become neutral, however international countries would be influencing in the nation issues, including politics.

     The main focus of this paper is to analyze the Sino-American relationship and the factors both past and present that make it a complicated and very important issue, as well as future expectations for the development of continued relations. American contact with China in the past has been less than positive and China is a country that values respect and honesty in its value system. China and the USA do not share the same view of the world. There has been much misunderstanding and even underhanded policy when it came to the USA, especially with the changing of our presidents. Clinton was a strong supporter of having Asia involved in the future of America. He urged that China become a part of the World

Following the War of 1812, the United States established itself as a world power and proved its capability to protect needy nations. After the French Revolution, nations realized the importance of balancing power and recognized the dangerousness of one nation holding excessive power. (Stanley Chodorow, MacGregor Knox, Conrad Schirokauer, Joseph Strayer, Hans Gatzke 1969) For years, America held the policy of isolationism and only intervened in other countries’ affairs if necessary. Despite strained relations in the past, diplomatic relations with China began in 1979. (Andrew J. Nathan, Columbia University 2009) Last year, an American battleship entered the South China Sea, inspecting Chinese activities. As an ally and nation known to keep the

Realism is one of the most dominant international relations theories in the academic world. But within Realism, Realists are split on a number of issues. A perfect example of which being the rise of China. Over the past 30 years China has increased not only in population and power, but has also achieved one of the strongest economies in the world. The rise of China is seen as problematic by many realists. Since the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has enjoyed a position of hegemony in the unipolar power structure of the world. Many fear that the rise of China could upset the current balance of power. One such individual is a prominent realist scholar, John Mearsheimer. He believes that war with China is inevitable and “calls for the US to do whatever it can to slow China’s rise.” Another political theorist Jonathan Kirshner wrote this paper to counter many of Mearsheimer’s claims, stating that Mearsheimer’s offensive realism “is wrong, and dangerous”. Kirshner suggests that instead of using offensive realism we should look instead to the theories roots in classical realism to analyse the rise of China.

America believed that it was isolated from the rest of the world, and its foreign policy reflected these ideas and beliefs. The United States was on its way to becoming a world power and advancing its own interest in the world, especially in the North and South America. Isolationism caused the United States to avoid being involved in other countries politics and for the U.S. to remain neutral in foreign policy

The recent interactions of emerging and established states suggest that the existing standards of the current global economy are shifting. According to Stewart Patrick in his article “Irresponsible Stakeholders? The Difficulty of Integrating Rising Powers,” the United States must accommodate for emerging states within the global economy and refrain from enforcing their values of an open and liberal international economy in order to achieve effective cooperation. Similarly, Andrew Nathan and Andrew Scobell argue in their article “How China Sees America: The Sum of Beijingʻs Fears” that as China gains more influence within the global economy, the United States will have to respond appropriately to maintain its economic values. Both articles ultimately assert that

Well, according to constructionists, how a state acts is dependent upon its ideas, beliefs, and values. Based off of this it is safe to assume that the US and China will not both respond the same to the current political climate. With a good example of this cultural split being Roger Cohen's "Dog Days of China", which shows how even with the continuing homogenizing of the world there are still significant differences in cultures; especially between the East and West. So based off of this, if the US were to pursue cooperation, it wouldn't be illogical for China to pursue competition or vice versa. As well, going off the topic of the culture determining how a state acts, it's important to note one important part of China's culture; the century of humiliation. This century of humiliation, stirred by the two Opium Wars, in which has China suffered at the hands of the west, has been a defining motif for China's recent rise to power. Which is why they leave the ruins of Yuanmingyuan, the old imperial palaces destroyed by the West in the Second Opium War, as a constant reminder. Thus possibly being an indicator how China may see their rise at the cost of the US' fall as just retribution for past transgressions. As well, in constructionist thought international relations is also determined by the structure of interactions. And the current structure is that of a single polarity world brought about by the demise of another super power after a long period of staunch tension. So China's rise could be a precursor to this structure reproducing itself. With China becoming powerful enough to rival the US, resulting in a new Cold War type period starting, then after a time leaving only a single superpower left standing. Because of this and the fact that constructionist view states that actors are irrational, it may seem that even for a constructivist, China's rise cannot be seen as

It is no longer appropriate to say, “China is quickly emerging as a global superpower.” The fact is China is just that. Realizing this the United States of America has attempted to once again turn its focus eastward. Continuing problems at home and in the Middle East however have made doing so difficult. Additionally more and more frequently attempts at influencing the ongoing narrative in the Asia- Pacific region have been rebuffed. Even allies have found strength in the emergence of a system that fails to conform to previously prescribed methods and ideals. This leads to a fundamental question America must answer quickly. Has the growing hypocrisy of idealistic political rhetoric versus actual foreign policy finally undermined American credibility with developing nations, or for the purposes of this paper more specifically China? The answer is yes.

It could, therefore, be argued that these increased political tensions may cause the US to lose key allies and in turn help China become the more favoured country. However, in recent times, China has proven to be arrogant, aggressive and rude when it comes to executing its foreign policy. Many countries, including Japan and India, claim to find it increasingly challenging to cooperate with China and this has done nothing but push said countries towards the US and cemented the US’s global power. Therefore, it is clear that even in terms of soft power, the US scores much higher than China and as a result there will be no shift in power which re-emphasizes the fact that the world order is not changing.

The events that have taken place over the past couple of centuries, and more so the past decade, have monumentally impacted the relationship between the United States and China for better and for worse. Today, China and the U.S. have evolved into two of the most elite superpowers in the world, and they classify as some of the most prominent leaders in economics, military, technology, and universal innovation. Currently, the United States is just weeks away from electing their next president, cyber-attacks are being investigated exponentially, and the South China Sea Debate continues to be disputed. The outcomes of all these events will undoubtedly affect the relationship between China and the United States for the next 10 years.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more integrated and willing to cooperate within the global political and economic systems than ever in its history. However, there is growing apprehension in the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. in regards to the consequences of rising in economic and military power in China. Descriptions about Chinese diplomacy in the policy and scholarly are less positive lately concerning China’s obedience to regional and international rules. There was little debate in the U.S. and elsewhere in regards to whether China was or was not part “the international community.” Scholars and experts in the early 1990s have contended

The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power

Realism assumes that under a balance of power, the overriding aim of all states is to maximize power and become the only hegemony in the system. States only help themselves in the anarchic international system. Therefore, China’s rise is regarded as a disconcerting threat to the U.S.’s primacy of power in the present international stage. The power shift in East Asia is creating security dilemmas; the U.S. thus demands more security to its Asian allies including Philippines, Japan and South Korea. The rapidly-rising Chinese power would inevitably challenge the current international balance of power and appear aggressively in the eyes of weaker power such as the Philippines. Therefore it seeks help to its ally, the U.S., to counterbalance the power of China. China intends to gain more resources and to transform current international order to its favor according to its national interests. The 2010 Chinese White Paper on National Defence states that: “Contradictions continue to surface between developed and developing countries and between traditional

Theories are used in many fields of science, but in no field are they more prevalent than Political Science. These theories are often used and researched upon to try and attempt to discern how states interact with one another. Offensive Realism, a new branch of realist political theory, is brought forth in John Mearsheimer’s book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. This theory focuses on the key aspects of realism, while adding a twist as to why war is an option. In his book, Mearsheimer explains the history of great powers, and predicts that China, the world’s current rising great power, will not gain hegemony in Asia peacefully. With the rise of China, he asserts the US will form coalitions with multiple states throughout Asia, to contain their growing power. This rise in power, and subsequent reactions by the US, are based on his theory Offensive Realism, which is used to predict China’s future actions. The rise of powers, and the reactions of other powers, is historically analyzed, beginning in the late 18th century, all the way to modern times. These analyzes each attempt to support his overall claim that China will rise through non-peaceful means, and shows significant support with historical examples. While the theory often meets an exception when the usual non-European power, Japan, is mentioned, Mearsheimer’s theory introduces a solid new aspect to the realm of Political Science, and presents enough evidence and information to be considered integral to

In the current anarchic world, The United States acts as the global hegemon. However, China’s recent rise to power has lead international relations experts, Ikenberry, Mearsheimer, Subramanian, and Friedberg, to predict an upcoming power shift in the international system. China’s increasing control over the Asia-Pacific region has threatened U.S. power. According to Waltz, the realism paradigm interprets the anarchic structure of the international community, as a constant power struggle. Although each country may be different, to survive, they must all strive for power. Under the liberalism paradigm, the system is still anarchical but cooperation may be achieved by shared norms, and aligned political and economical interests.