Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-j5sqr Total loading time: 0.44 Render date: 2022-10-05T18:49:27.781Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": true, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

The Distribution of Identity and the Future of International Order: China's Hegemonic Prospects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2018

Get access

Abstract

Existing theories predict that the rise of China will trigger a hegemonic transition and the current debate centers on whether or not the transition will be violent or peaceful. This debate largely sidesteps two questions that are central to understanding the future of international order: how strong is the current Western hegemonic order and what is the likelihood that China can or will lead a successful counterhegemonic challenge? We argue that the future of international order is shaped not only by material power but also by the distribution of identity across the great powers. We develop a constructivist account of hegemonic transition and stability that theorizes the role of the distribution of identity in international order. In our account, hegemonic orders depend on a legitimating ideology that must be consistent with the distribution of identity at the level of both elites and masses. We map the distribution of identity across nine great powers and assess how this distribution supports the current Western neoliberal democratic hegemony. We conclude that China is unlikely to become the hegemon in the near term.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We thank the editors of International Organization and two anonymous reviewers for comments that improved the paper. The paper benefited from presentations at Columbia University, Dalhousie University, European University in St. Petersburg, Lehigh University, the London School of Economics, Princeton University, Queen's University, Università degli Studi di Trento, and the University of British Columbia. We also thank all of the analysts who worked on the data used in the piece: Liang Ce, Benjamin Chan, Jian Ming, Marina Duque, Nanaho Hanada, Jarrod Hayes, Lim Kai Heng, Ki Hoon Michael Hur, Shivaji Kumar, Rebecca Oh, and Rachel Zeng Rui.

References

Abdelal, Rawi, Yoshiko, Herrera, Johnston, Alastair Iain, and McDermott, Rose, eds. 2009. Measuring Identity: A Guide for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acharya, Amitav. 2014. The End of American World Order. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Acharya, Amitav. 2017. Emerging Powers Can Be Saviours of the Global Liberal Order. Financial Times, 18 January. Available at <https://www.ft.com/content/f175b378-dd79-11e6-86ac-f253db7791c6>. Accessed 26 January 2017..+Accessed+26+January+2017.>Google Scholar
Allan, Bentley B. 2016. Recovering Discourses of National Identity. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 20–44.Google Scholar
Allan, Bentley B. 2018. Scientific Cosmology and International Orders. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, Graham. 2016. Thucydides's Trap Case File. Cambridge: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Available at <http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/25760/thucydides_trap_project.html>. Accessed 22 June 2016..+Accessed+22+June+2016.>Google Scholar
Althusser, Louis. 1971. Lenin and Philosophy. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
Ambrosius, Lloyd E. 1990. Woodrow Wilson and the American Diplomatic Tradition: The Treaty Fight in Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Angenot, Marc. 2004. Social Discourse Analysis: Outlines of a Research Project. Yale Journal of Criticism 17 (2):199215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagger, Hans. 1993. The Role of the Baltic in Russian Foreign Policy, 1721–1773. In Imperial Russian Foreign Policy, edited by Ragsdale, Hugh, 3672. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bartlett, C.J., ed. 1969. Britain Pre-eminent: Studies of British World Influence in the Nineteenth Century. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bially Mattern, Janice. 2005. Ordering International Politics: Identity, Crisis and Representational Force. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowden, Brett. 2009. The Empire of Civilization: The Evolution of an Imperial Idea. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breslin, Shaun. 2013. China and the Global Order: Signaling Threat or Friendship? International Affairs 89 (3):615–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, Hedley. 1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callahan, William. 2008. Chinese Visions of World Order: Post-Hegemonic or a New Hegemony? International Studies Review 10 (4):749–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ce, Liang, and Rui, Rachel Zeng. 2016. “Development” as a Means to an Unknown End: Chinese National Identity in 2010. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 63–82.Google Scholar
Chan, Benjamin, Ming, Jian, and Oh, Rebecca. 2016. Whither La France? French National Identity in 2010. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 83–99.Google Scholar
Christensen, Thomas J. 2006. Fostering Stability or Creating a Monster: The Rise of China and US Policy Toward East Asia. International Security 31 (1):81126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Ian. 2011. Hegemony in International Society. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Robert. 1987. Production, Power, and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Duque, Marina. 2016. The Rascals’ Paradise: Brazilian National Identity in 2010. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 47–63.Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha. 2009. Legitimacy, Hypocrisy, and the Social Structure of Unipolarity: Why Being a Unipole Isn't All It's Cracked Up to Be. World Politics 61 (1):5885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foot, Rosemary. 2006. Chinese Strategies in a US-Hegemonic Global Order: Accommodating and Hedging. International Affairs 82 (1):7794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedberg, Aaron. 2011. A Contest for Supremacy: China, America, and the Struggle for Mastery in Asia. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Gamble, Andrew. 2002. Hegemony and Decline: Britain and the United States. In Two Hegemonies: Britain 1846–1914 and the United States 1941–2001, edited by O'Brien, Patrick Karl and Clesse, Armand, 127–40. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Gilpin, Robert. 1975. US Power and the Multinational Corporation. New York: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilpin, Robert. 1981. War and Change in World Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, Evelyn. 2013. The Struggle for Order: Hegemony, Hierarchy, and the Transition in Post-Cold War East Asia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gramsci, Antonio. 1971 [1929–35]. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Edited and translated by Hoare, Quintin and Smith, Geoffrey Nowell. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Gries, Peter. 2004. China's New Nationalism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hanada, Nanaho. 2016. Conflicted Identities: Japanese National Identity in 2010. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 149–67.Google Scholar
Hayes, Jarrod. 2013. Constructing National Security: US Relations with India and China. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, Jarrod. 2016. Talented Democrats in a Modern State: Indian National Identity in 2010, English Sources. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 114–31.Google Scholar
Heng, Lim Kai. 2016. The Politics of Responsibility: German National Identity in 2010. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 100–13.Google Scholar
Herman, Robert G. 1996. Identity, Norms, and National Security: The Soviet Foreign Policy Revolution and the End of the Cold War. In The Culture of National Security, edited by Katzenstein, Peter J., 271316. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Herrmann, Richard, and Fischerkeller, Michael. 1995. Beyond the Enemy Image and Spiral Model: Cognitive-Strategic Research after the Cold War. International Organization 49 (3):415–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herszenhorn, David M. 2017. G20 Leaders—Except Donald Trump—Declare Paris Climate Deal “Irreversible.” Politico, 8 July. Available at <http://www.politico.eu/article/g20-leaders-except-donald-trump-declare-paris-climate-deal-irreversible/>, Accessed 8 July 2017.,+Accessed+8+July+2017.>Google Scholar
Hopf, Ted. 2002. The Social Construction of International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hopf, Ted. 2013. Common-Sense Constructivism and Hegemony in World Politics. International Organization 67 (2):317–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopf, Ted, and Allan, Bentley B.. 2016. Making Identity Count: Building a National Identity Database. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hur, Ki Hoon Michael. 2016. The Country Upon a Hill? American National Identity in 2010. In Hopf and Allan 2016, 183–98.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, G. John. 2001. After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order After Major Wars. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, G. John. 2011. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, G. John, and Kupchan, Charles A.. 1990. Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization 44 (3):283315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald F., and Norris, Pippa. 2016. Trump, Brexit, and the Rise of Populism: Economic Have-Nots and Cultural Backlash. Research Working Paper 16-026, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Paul. 1987. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kugler, Jacek, and Lemke, Douglas, eds. 1996. Parity and War: Evaluations and Extensions of the War Ledger. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kupchan, Charles A. 2010. When Enemies Become Friends. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kupchan, Charles A. 2014. The Normative Foundations of Hegemony and the Coming Challenge to Pax Americana. Security Studies 23 (2):2157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, Shivaji. 2016. The World's Largest Democracy Between Two Futures: Indian National Identity in 2010, Hindi Sources. In Hopf and Allan, 132–48.Google Scholar
Laïdi, Zaki. 2014. Towards a Post-hegemonic World: The Multipolar Threat to the Multilateral Order. International Politics 51 (3):350–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legro, Jeffrey W. 2007. What China Will Want: The Future Intentions of a Rising Power. Perspectives on Politics 5 (3):515–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Jack S. 1987. Declining Power and the Preventive Motivation for War. World Politics 40 (1):82107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, W. Bruce. 1982. In the Vanguard of Reform: Russia's Enlightened Bureaucrats 1825–1861. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Mearsheimer, John. 2010. The Gathering Storm: China's Challenge to US Power in Asia. Chinese Journal of International Relations 3 (4):381–96.Google Scholar
Neumann, Iver B. 2008a. Russia's Standing as a Great Power, 1492–1815. In Russia's European Choice, edited by Hopf, Ted, 1134. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Neumann, Iver B. 2008b. Russia as a Great Power, 1815–2007. Journal of International Relations and Development 11 (2):128–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, Iver B., and Pouliot, Vincent. 2011. Untimely Russia: Hysteresis in Russian–Western Relations Over the Past Millennium. Security Studies 20 (1):105–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nexon, Daniel. 2017. A New International Order with President Trump. Newsday, 22 January. Available at <http://www.newsday.com/opinion/commentary/a-new-international-order-with-president-donald-trump-1.12995189>. Accessed 26 January 2017..+Accessed+26+January+2017.>Google Scholar
Nexon, Daniel H., and Neumann, Iver B.. 2017. Hegemonic-Order Theory: A Field-Theoretic Account. European Journal of International Relations. <https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066117716524>. FirstView, 4 July.Google Scholar
Organski, A.F.K., and Kugler, Jacek. 1980. The War Ledger. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Perkins, Bradford. 1968. The Great Rapprochement: England and the United States, 1895–1914. New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar
Ruggie, John G. 1982. International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order. International Organization 36 (2):379415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rupert, Mark. 2006. Ideologies of Globalization. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sarup, Madan. 1996. Identity, Culture and the Postmodern World. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Saull, Richard. 2012. Rethinking Hegemony: Uneven Development, Historical Blocs, and the World Economic Crisis. International Studies Quarterly 56 (2):323–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweller, Randall L. 1999. Managing the Rise of Great Powers: History and Theory. In Engaging China: The Management of an Emerging Power, edited by Johnston, Alistair Iain and Ross, Robert S., 131. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schweller, Randall L. 2001. The Problem of International Order Revisited: A Review Essay. International Security 26 (1):161–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweller, Randall L., and Pu, Xiaoyu. 2011. After Unipolarity: China's Visions of International Order in an Era of US Decline. International Security 36 (1):4172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, J. David, Bremer, Stuart, and Stuckey, John. 1972. Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820–1965. In Peace, War, and Numbers, edited by Russet, Bruce, 1948. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Snidal, Duncan. 1985. The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory. International Organization 39 (4):579614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telhami, Shibley, and Barnett, Michael. 2002. Identity and Foreign Policy in the Middle East. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Tsai, Tung-Chieh, and Liu, Tony Tai-Ting. 2017. Hegemonic Turnover in East Asia: A Historical Review Since the Nineteenth Century. In Power Transition in Asia, edited by Walton, David and Kavalski, Emilian, 2644. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vucetic, Srdjan. 2011. The Anglosphere: A Genealogy of a Racialized Identity in International Relations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Vucetic, Srdjan. 2016. America's “Only Friend”: British National Identity in 2010. In Hopf and Allan, 168–83.Google Scholar
Vucetic, Srdjan. 2017. Identity and Foreign Policy. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Available at <http://politics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-435>. Accessed 26 April 2017..+Accessed+26+April+2017.>Google Scholar
Watson, D.R. 1969. The British Parliamentary System and the Growth of Constitutional Government in Western Europe. In Britain Pre-eminent: Studies of British World Influence in the Nineteenth Century, edited by Bartlett, C.J., 101–28. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, Jessica Chen. 2014. Powerful Patriots: Nationalist Protest in China's Foreign Relations. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witte, Griff, Rauhala, Emily, and Phillips, Dom. 2016. Trump's Win May Be the Beginnings of a Global Populist Wave. Washington Post, 13 November. Available at <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/trumps-win-may-be-just-the-beginning-of-a-global-populist-wave/2016/11/13/477c3b26-a6ba-11e6-ba46-53db57f0e351_story.html>. Accessed 26 January 2017..+Accessed+26+January+2017.>Google Scholar
Worth, Owen. 2011. Recasting Gramsci in International Politics. Review of International Studies 37 (1):373–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jinping, Xi. 2017. President Xi's Speech to Davos in Full. World Economic Forum Annual Meeting, 17 January. Available at <https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/full-text-of-xi-jinping-keynote-at-the-world-economic-forum>. Accessed 26 January 2017..+Accessed+26+January+2017.>Google Scholar
Zhang, Feng. 2015. Chinese Hegemony: Grand Strategy and International Institutions in East Asia. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Yongjing. 2015. China and the Struggle for Legitimacy of a Rising Power. Chinese Journal of International Politics 8 (3):301–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Suisheng. 2004. A Nation-State by Construction: Dynamics of Modern Chinese Nationalism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Allan et al. supplementary material 1

Allan et al. supplementary material

Download Allan et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 285 KB
52
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Distribution of Identity and the Future of International Order: China's Hegemonic Prospects
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Distribution of Identity and the Future of International Order: China's Hegemonic Prospects
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Distribution of Identity and the Future of International Order: China's Hegemonic Prospects
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *