The Paradoxes of Paramountcy: Regional Rivalries and the Dynamics of American Hegemony in East Asia

It has become increasingly commonplace to describe the United States as hegemonic. And yet, despite America's dominant position at a number of levels strategic, political-economic and ideational, there are plainly limits to US hegemony. These limits and the enduring strengths of American hegemony are revealed quite clearly in East Asia. This paper critically assesses a number of theories of hegemony, and argues that the concept continues to provide a useful way of conceptualising America's evolving relationship with East Asia. Theories of hegemony can, with appropriate caveats, also help us to understand the limits to Chinese and Japanese power in the region; two countries that are routinely cited as potential hegemonic rivals

American hegemony: the view from Australia

Australia and the United States have been extremely close allies since World War II. The engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq have continued this tradition. Yet even before the bombings in Bali and the confrontation with Iraq, an important debate about the costs and benefits of the relationship with the United States was underway in Australia. At a number of levels—economic, political, and even strategic—increasing numbers of Australians were critically reassessing the relationship and questioning the supposed benefits. Recent events have accelerated this process and thrown the relationship into even starker relief. This paper argues that the increasingly unilateral nature of American economic and strategic policy is imposing major costs on even its most loyal allies, a situation that threatens to undermine the legitimacy of, and support for, U.S. hegemony.

US hegemony and Southeast Asia - The impact of, and limits to, US power and influence

The United States has exerted a major influence on Southeast Asia, especially since World War II. As both a promoter of neoliberal reform and as the key strategic actor in the wider East Asian region, the impact of U.S. power has been immense. But both the Asian economic crisis and its aftermath, and the more recent war on terror, have highlighted the contradictory impact of evolving U.S. foreign policy and intervention in the region. At both an elite and a mass level there is evidence of resentment about, and hostility toward, U.S. policy and its perceived negative effects. This article outlines how U.S. foreign policy has impacted the region in the economic, political, and security spheres, and argues that not only has it frequently not achieved its goals, but it may in fact be undermining both America's long-term hegemonic position in the region and any prospects for political liberalization.

Hegemony, Institutionalism and US Foreign Policy: theory and practice in comparative historical perspective

This paper explores the theoretical and policy implications of contemporary American hegemony. A key argument is that the development of US hegemony generally, and the distinctive turn in US foreign policy that has occurred in the wake of 11 September in particular, can best be understood by placing recent events in a comparative and historical framework. The immediate post-World War II order laid the foundations of a highly institutionalised multilateral system that provided key benefits for a number of countries while simultaneously constraining and enhancing US power. An historical reading of US hegemony suggests that its recent unilateralism is undermining the foundations of its power and influence.

Futures dreaming outside and on the margins of the western world

In this article, we challenge the hegemony of western science fiction, arguing that western science fiction is particular even as it claims universality. Its view remains based on ideas of the future as forward time. In contrast, in non-western science fiction the future is seen outside linear terms: as cyclical or spiral, or in terms of ancestors. In addition, western science fiction has focused on the good society as created by technological progress, while non-western science fiction and futures thinking has focused on the fantastic, on the spiritual, on the realization of eupsychia-the perfect self. However, most theorists assert that the non-west has no science fiction, ignoring Asian and Chinese science fiction history, and western science fiction continues to 'other' the non-west as well as those on the margins of the west (African-American woman, for example). Nonetheless, while most western science fiction remains trapped in binary opposites-alien/non-alien; masculine/feminine; insider/outsider-writers from the west's margins are creating texts that contradict tradition and modernity, seeking new ways to transcend difference. Given that the imagination of the future creates the reality of tomorrow, creating new science fictions is not just an issue of textual critique but of opening up possibilities for all our futures.

Australia's relationship with the United States: The case for greater independence

A number of recent events-especially attempts to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement and Australia's participation in the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq(1)-have thrown Australia's relationship with the United States into sharp relief. While this relationship has historically enjoyed strong bilateral endorsement, such uncritical support is beginning to unravel. At the very least, the relationship is being subjected to a renewed, more critical scrutiny. This paper argues that a dispassionate analysis of the relationship is appropriate and overdue. Not only are the benefits that accrue to 'Australia' from the relationship debateable, even when judged within the limited calculus of the 'national interest', but Australia's uncritical support for US foreign policy is also helping to entrench potentially damaging aspects of American foreign policy and somewhat ironically-undermining the legitimacy of its pre-eminent 'hegemonic' position.

Rethinking regionalism: Europe and East Asia in comparative historical perspective

Regionally based processes of political and economic integration, security co-operation, and even social identification have become increasingly important and prominent parts of the international system. Nowhere have such processes gone further than in Western Europe. Somewhat surprisingly, similar patterns of regional integration have been steadily developing in East Asia - a region many observers consider unlikely to replicate the European experience. This paper uses an historically grounded comparative approach to examine the historical preconditions that underpinned the formation of the European Union, and then contrasts them with the situation in East Asia today. While the overall geopolitical and specific national contexts are very different, such an analysis highlights surprising similarities and differences, particularly in the role played by the United States in both periods. A comparative analysis allows us to understand and rethink the incentives for, and constraints on, regional integrative processes.