Abstract
Power-transition theory and institutionalist theory offer sharply contrasting views about the implications of China’s rise. Power-transition theory sees China’s rise as most likely dangerous because it will pose a challenge to the international order underpinned by American power. Institutionalist theory sees China’s rise presenting at least an opportunity for building cooperation, rather than intensifying conflict. The logic of these two theoretical perspectives as it pertains to China’s rise is explained and their different implications for three flashpoints in East Asia (the South China Sea, Korea, and the Taiwan Strait) is set forth. These expectations are then compared with the still skimpy empirical record of the post-Cold War era. Events in the South China Sea and Korea mainly lend credence to the expectations of institutionalist theory, though the evidence is arguably inconclusive. In the Taiwan Strait, however, the evidence mainly lends credence to the expectations of power-transition theory.
Read the article here