Student Presentation Paper prepared on the Article: The tragedy of offensive realism: case study on the rise of China
Student Name: Makuac Gak
Overview
The greatest difficulty in International relations is focusing change to the world power transition, which traditionally has usually been decided by war(Kirshner, 2008, p. 431). The realism theory position on the rise of China, concerns preventing the power of China to expand their domination. China’spower includes three main factors. Such as the first concerns economic interdependence by trading with other states and themilitary capability of China to develop vital power expansion expecting to take world power (Abdelal, 1999). The second, aspect is China population growth, which is increasingly higher than the other countries. Therefore, most researchersargued that China’s rise is peaceful, but nobody is so sure about China’s future political plans, because they keep denying their military capability (Kirshner, 2008. According to the realist perspective, China must be contained from escalating its power, making a mistake to let it happen, would cause a major consequences around the globe.
Analysis
Classical realist school of traditions’ perspective is decided by observing how this great power emerging contains China’s rise, because of possible dangerous disruption of the international structure (Friedberg 2005). This article is addresses the factors concerns China’s need to overtake the world and try to replace the United States. Mounting power particular is significant in termsof insecurity because China’s attention will develop potential until power reached (Friedberg 2005). For China, to try to face the great world, power would invite a very high cost to economics, not only for China, but also on an international level. The realism traditions, in the case of China can be taken as a potential threat to the international security. Therefore, according to the realist perspective China’s economic development in the last decades has made them think they should seek world power Abdelal, 1999. Another important idea is to look at the main structural approach to world powers concerning China’s riseChina’s rise will cost them in terms of military capability security Asian and remain as a threat to their regional disputes (Mearsheimer 2001). Offensive realism does consider of China’s rise, which means there must be possibilities of war. Knowing this, China is facing many borders’ disputes in an attempt to expand its powers (Robert Gilpin, 1981). This impact on China’s rise, for example, concerns countries in the Asia – Pacific has territory’s disputes with China. Another issue concerns China looking is world powers based on their economic development. Many world policymakers thought about China’s rise aggressively because of military capabilities.
Summary
Therefore, the offensive realist concerning China’s as competing power military and economic (Mearsheimer, 2001). However, the United States and their allies work hard to contain China’s rising power. The United States needs to be watchful about China’s development and how it will impact on transnational power. Hence, in this existing world, the power dominance of China and expansion is being monitored. The Chinese are prepared to think about going to war with the world’s great powers. Nevertheless, offensive realism requires containing China’s, power because their acts impact on international relations(Mearsheimer, 2001).The main reason behind the rise of China is their military capability to prevent foreign policies, indeed China is thinking of many aspects to fightwar with the United States. No one is sure, whether China’s will use the balance of power or aggression (Waltz, 1979). China rise includes the involvement of arms conflict and other territorial disputes. The offensive theories look at China’s arms and conflicting issues with neighbours.
References:
Abdelal, R and Kirshner, J 1999, Strategy, economic relations, and the definition of national interests. Security Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2, P. 119-156.
Friedberg A 2005, the future of U.S. – China relations: is conflict inevitable? Intermational Security Vol. 30, No. 2, P. 7-45.
Gilpin R 1981, War and change World politics. Cambridge University Press.
Kirshner J 2008, Dollar primacy and America power: what is stake? Review of International Political Economic, p. 418-438.
Mearsheimer J 2001, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: Norton.
Waltz K 1979, Theory of International Politics. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
