Transcending Hegemonic International Relations Theorization: Nothingness, Re-Worlding, and Balance of Relationship

Year 2017, , 19 - 42, 02.05.2017

Chih-yu Shih

https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.310126

Cited By: 1

Abstract

The manuscript compares the World History Standpoint promoted by the

Kyoto School of Philosophy with two other competitors – post-Western reworlding

and the Chinese balance of relationships - in their shared campaign

for alternative international relations theory. The World History Standpoint

explains how nations influenced by major power politics judge their conditions

and rely on combining existing cultural resources to make sense of their

place in world politics. It predicts that international systemic stability cannot

be maintained over a set of congruent identities because history’s longevity

allows for previous politically incorrect identities to return in due time with

proper clues. It specifically predicts that nations caught between different

identities will experience cycles in their international relations; nations with

an expansive scope of international relations or declining from the hegemonic

status will adopt balance of relationships; and less influential nations will

practically reinterpret hegemonic order to meet their otherwise inexpressible

motivations. Accordingly, Japan will be focused upon as an exemplary case for

World History Standpoint; Taiwan for re-worlding; and China for balance of

relationships. The paper touches upon theoretical implications of their conflicts.

Keywords

The Kyoto School of Philosophy, place of nothingness, Japan, China, Taiwan, balance of relationship

Hegemonik Uluslararası İlişkiler Teorisini Aşmak: Hiçlik, Re-Worlding ve İlişkiler Dengesi

Abstract

Bu makale, Kyoto Felsefe Okulu tarafından ortaya
atılan Dünya Tarihi Yaklaşımı ile iki rakibini 
- Batı-sonrası Re-Worlding ve
Çinli ilişkiler dengesini-  alternatif bir
uluslararası ilişkiler teorisi oluşturma çabaları yönünden karşılaştırmaktadır.
Dünya Tarihi Yaklaşımı, büyük güç siyasetinden etkilenen ulusların içinde
bulundukları koşulları nasıl değerlendirdiklerini ve dünya siyasetindeki
yerlerini anlamlandırmak için mevcut kültür kaynaklarının biraraya
getirilmesine nasıl bel bağladıklarını açıklar. Bu görüş, uluslararası sistemin
istikrarının bir dizi birbirine uyumlu kimlik yoluyla korunamayacağı tahmininde
bulunur, çünkü tarih daha önceki “siyaseten hatalı” kimliklerin belli bir süre
sonunda tüm gereklilikleriyle beraber geri dönmesine izin verecek kadar
uzundur. Bu yaklaşım özellikle, farklı kimlikler arasında kalan ulusların
uluslararası ilişkilerde farklı döngüler yaşayacaklarını; genişleyen
uluslararası ilişkilere sahip ulusların ya da 
hegemonya statüsünden düşmekte olanların ilişkiler dengesini
benimseyeceklerini; daha az nüfuzlu ulusların ise aksi halde ifade edemedikleri
motivasyonlarını karşılamak için hegemonya düzenini pratik olarak yeniden
yorumlayacaklarını öngörür. Bu anlamda, birer vaka çalışması olarak Dünya Tarihi Yaklaşımı için Japonya; re-worlding için
Tayvan ve ilişkiler dengesi için de Çin ele alınacaktır. Makalede bu ülkeler
arasındaki çatışmaların kuramsal sonuçlarına değinilmektedir.

Keywords

Kyoto Okulu, Hiçlik, Nishida Kitaro, İlişkiler Dengesi, Çin, Tayvan, Japonya

References

• Abe, Shinzo. “Prime Minister of Japan Shinzo Abe ‘Japan is Back’.” CSIS Statesmen's Forum. Accessed March 20, 2013. http://csis.org/press/press-release/csis-statesmens-forum-prime-minister-japan-shinzo-abe-japan-back.
• Ames, Roger, and David Hall. Laozi, Dao De Jing: A Philosophical Translation. New York: Ballantine Books, 2003.
• Bilgin, Pinar. The International in Security, Security in the International. Oxon: Routledge, 2016.
• ———. “Thinking Past ‘Western’ IR?” Third World Quarterly 29, no. 1 (2008): 5-23.
• Chong, Alan. “An Unfinished ‘Diplomacy of Encounter’: Asia and the West 1500-2015.” Japanese Journal of Political Science 17, no. 2 (2016): 208-31.
• Connolly, William. Identity/Difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002.
• Davis, Bret, Brian Schroeder, and Jason M. Wirth. Japanese Continental Philosophy: Conversations with the Kyoto School. Bloomington: Indian University Press, 2011.
• Goto-Jones, Christopher. Re-Politicising the Kyoto School as Philosophy. London: Routledge, 2007.
• ———. Political Philosophy in Japan: Nishida, the Kyoto School and Co-prosperity. London: Routledge, 2005.
• Heisig, James W., and John C. Maraldo, eds. Rude Awakenings: Zen, the Kyoto School, and The Question of Nationalism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1995.
• Hirano, Kenichiro. The Japanese in Manchuria 1906-1931: A Study of the Historical Background of Manchukuo. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1982.
• Huang, Chiung-chiu. “Balance of Relationship: Myanmar’s China Policy.” Pacific Review 28, no. 2 (2015): 189- 210.
• Huang, Chia-ning, and Chih-yu Shih. “China’s Quest for Grand Strategy: Power, National Interest, or Relational Security?” The Chinese Journal of International Politics 8, no. 1 (2014): 1-26.
• ———. No Longer Oriental: Self and European Characteristics in Japan’s Views on China. Taipei: The Research and Educational Center for China Studies and Cross Taiwan-Strait Relations, National Taiwan University, 2009.
• Huang, Wen-hong. “Xitian jiduolang changsuo luoji de neizai zhuanxiang” [The internal turn in Nishida Kitaro’s logic of place]. National Chengchi University Journal 23 (2010): 1-31.
• Huang, Yu-chun. Zai Taiwan yu zhongguo zhi jian—li denthui de sixiang mailuo yu zhongguo renshi [Trajectory of Lee Teng-hui’s thought and his views on China]. Taipei: The Research and Educational Center for China Studies and Cross Taiwan-Strait Relations, National Taiwan University, 2013.
• Hubbard, James, and Paul Swanson, eds. Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1997.
• Hwang, Kwang-kuo. Foundations of Chinese Psychology: Confucian Social Relations. New York: Springer, 2012.
• Ikeda, Josuke. “Japanese Vision of International Society: A Historical Exploration.” In Is There A Japanese IR? Seeking an Academic Bridge through Japan’s History of International Relations, edited by Kosuke Shimizu, Josuke Ikeda, Tomoya Kamino, and Shiro Sato, 5-28. Ryukoku: Afrasian Centre for Peace and Development Studies, Ryukoku University, 2008.
• Iriye, Akira. “Asia and America.” In The World of Asia, edited by Akira Iriye and William J. Miller, 1-11. St Louis: Forum Press, 1979.
• Jiang, Zeming. “Gaodu zhongshi zhonghua minzu fazhan shi” [Highly stress Chinese national history of development]. In Jianming zhongguo lishi duben [Easy Readers for Chinese History]. Beijing: Chinese Social Science Press, 2012.
• Keohane, Robert. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
• Laruelle, Marlène. Russian Eurasianism: An Ideology of Empire. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008.
• Li, Guizhi. Jindia riben de dong yang gai nian: yi zhongguo yu ou mei wei jingwei [The concept of toyo in modern Japan: the two dimensions of China and Euro-America]. Taipei: The Research and Educational Center for China Studies and Cross Taiwan-Strait Relations, National Taiwan University, 2008.
• Liao, Minshu. “Qingdai zhongguo de waizheng zhisu” [Diplomatic order of Qing China]. In Jindai zhongguo: wenhua yu waijiao [Modern China: culture and diplomacy], edited by Luan Jing He, 130-53. Beijing: Social Science Literature Press, 2012.
• Ling, Lily H.M. The Dao of World Politics: Toward Post-Westphalian,Wordlist International Relations. Oxon: Routledge, 2014.
• ———. “Journeys beyond the West: World Orders and a 7th Century Buddhist Monk.” Review of International Studies 36 (2010): 225-48.
• ———. Postcolonial International Relations: Conquest and Desire between Asia and the West. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.
• Mearsheimer, John. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001.
• Mizoguchi, Yuzo. Zhongguo zuowei fangfa [China as method]. Translated by Lin You-chong. Taipei: National Institute for Compilation and Translation, 1999.
• Ng, Yu-kwan. “Juedui wu yu zhexue guannian de dianfan” [Absolute nothingness and the paradigms of philosophical concepts]. Zhengguan 56 (2011): 5-28.
• Nishitani, Keiji. Religion and Nothingness. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983.
• Noesselt, Nele. “Is There a ‘Chinese School’ of IR?” Working Paper No. 188, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, March 2012.
• Paolini, Albert J., Anthony Elliott, and Anthony Moran. Navigating Modernity: Postcolonialism, Identity, and International Relations. Boulder, US: Lynne Rienner, 1999.
• Parham, Thomas, A. “Cycles of Psychological Nigrescence.” The Counseling Psychologist 17, no. 2 (1989): 187- 226.
• Pettman, Jan Jindy. Worlding Women: A Feminist International Politics. London: Routledge, 1996.
• Qin, Yaqing. “Guanxi Benwei yu Guocheng Jiangou: Jiang Zhongguo Linian Zhiru Guoji Guuanxi Lilun” [Relationality and processual construction: bring Chinese ideas into IRT]. Social Sciences in China 3 (2009): 69-86.
• Scott, James. Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. Yale University Press, 1990.
• Shao, Hsuan-lei. Zhan hou riben zhi zhongguo yanjiu xipu [Post-war genealogy of China Studies in Japan]. Taipei: The Research and Educational Center for China Studies and Cross Taiwan-Strait Relations, National Taiwan University, 2009.
• Shih, Chih-yu. “Taiwan as East Asia in Formation: The Subaltern Appropriation of the Colonial Narrative.” In Taiwanese Identity in the 21st Century:Domestic, Regional, and Global Perspective, edited by Gunter Schubert and Jens Damm, 237-57. London: Routlege, 2011.
• ———, and Chiung-chiu Huang. “Bridging Civilizations through Nothingness: Manchuria as Nishida Kitaro’s ‘Place’.” Comparative Civilizations Review 65 (2011): 4-17.
• ———, and Chiung-chiu Huang. “Preaching Self-responsibility: The Chinese Style of Global Governance.” The Journal of Contemporary China 22, no. 80 (2013): 351-65.
• ———, and Josuke Ikeda. “International Relations of Post-hybridity: Dangers and Potentials in Non-synthetic Cycles.” Globalizations 13, no. 4 (2016): 454-68.
• Shimizu, Kosuke. “Materializing the ‘Non-Western’: Two Stories of Japanese Philosophers on Culture and Politics in the Inter-War Period.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 28, no. 1 (2014): 1-18. doi: 10.1080/09557571.2014.889083.
• ———. “Nishida Kitaro and Japan’s Interwar Foreign Policy: War Involvement and Culturalist Political Discourse.” Working Paper Series 44, Arasian Centre for Peace and Development Studies, Kyoto, 2009.
• Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Three Women’s Texts and A Critique of Imperialism.” Critique Inquiry 12, no. 1 (1985): 243-61.
• Sun, Ge. Zhuti misan de kongjian [The space with pervasive subjectivities]. Nanchang: Jiangxi Education Press, 2003.
• Takeuchi, Yoshimi. “Yoakeno Kuni” [Country of the dawn]. Vol. 4 of Takeuchi Yoshimi zenshū [Takeuchi Yoshimi complete works]. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1967.
• Tanaka, Stephen. Japan’s Orient: Rendering the Past into the Future. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.
• Tickner, Arlene, and David L. Blaney. Claiming the International. Oxon: Routledge, 2014.
• ———. Thinking International Relations Differently. London: Routledge, 2012.
• Tickner, Arlene, and Ole Waever. International Relations Scholarship around the World. London: Routledge, 2009.
• Wang, Hung-jen. The Rise of China and Chinese International Relations (IR) Scholarship. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2013.
• Wendt, Alexander. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
• ———. “Why A World State Is Inevitable?” European Journal of International Relations 9, no. 4 (2003): 491-542.
• Wilkinson, Robert. Nishida and Western Philosophy. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing, 2009.
• Williams, David. Defending Japan's Pacific War: The Kyoto School Philosophers and Post- White Power. London: Routledge, 2004.
• Womack, Brantly. China and Vietnam: The Politics of Asymmetry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
• Yan, Xuetong. Ancient Chinese Thought and Modern Chinese Power. Edited by Daniel Belland Zhe Sun. Translated by Edmund Ryden. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011.
• Zhao, Tingyang. “A Political World Philosophy in Terms of All-under-heaven (Tian-xia).” Diogenes 221 (2009): 5-18.