Search results

China's rise has inspired a variety of interpretations arguing for either its potentially disruptive or alternatively its benign impact on Asia–Pacific security. This article aims to contribute to this debate. It focuses on the upsurge in Beijing's multilateral diplomacy since the beginning of the 1990s, which has been reflected in China's willingness to take part in many regional institutions, such as Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Six Party Talks (6PT), East Asia Summit (EAS) or Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). But what are China's motivations for participation in these institutions? Are they instrumental, driven by pragmatic self-interest, or moral, driven by normative values of peace? Or, has China merely accepted the need to play a socially 'appropriate' role within the region? The article offers a theoretically informed typology of the different kinds of motivation that can explain China's multilateral diplomacy in the last three decades. It argues that whereas social motivation played a decisive part in the first phase of China's multilateralism, instrumental motivation can be seen as defining the more recent phase.

Over the course of the twentieth century, Japan has experienced a radical shift in its self-perception. After World War II, Japan embraced a peaceful and anti-militarist identity, which was based on its war-prohibiting Constitution and the foreign policy of the Yoshida doctrine. For most of the twentieth century, this identity was unusually stable. In the last couple of decades, however, Japan's self-perception and foreign policy seem to have changed. Tokyo has conducted a number of foreign policy actions as well as symbolic internal gestures that would have been unthinkable a few decades ago and that symbolize a new and more confident Japan. Japanese politicians – including Prime Minister Abe Shinzō – have adopted a new discourse depicting pacifism as a hindrance, rather than asset, to Japan's foreign policy. Does that mean that "Japan is back"?In order to better understand the dynamics of contemporary Japan, Kolmaš joins up the dots between national identity theory and Japanese revisionism. The book shows that while political elites and a portion of the Japanese public call for re-articulation of Japan's peaceful identity, there are still societal and institutional forces that prevent this change from entirely materializing.