IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mes/chinec/v56y2023i4p281-291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Political Economy of Japan’s Development Strategy under China-US Rivalry: The Crane, the Dragon, and the Bald Eagle

Author

Listed:
  • Guanie Lim
  • Chengwei Xu

Abstract

Much has been written on how an increasingly assertive China has sought to challenge the incumbent players in the global and regional arenas. Japan, as East Asia’s regional hegemon, is said to be throwing its weight behind the US because it has much to lose in an era of China rising. Nevertheless, how much of this resembles reality? This article seeks to unpack some commonly held assumptions, focusing on the political/security as well as economic choices facing Japan. It argues that the Japanese have seemingly forged a rather strong alignment with the US in the sphere of politics/security, often with an eye to limit the influence of China. However, the situation is less clear cut when it comes to opportunities and challenges in the economic realm. Indeed, in some of Japan’s most prominent industries, one observes complementarity effects and close interdependence with the Chinese economy. These findings illustrate that China-Japan competition is more complex than commonly portrayed, in addition to raising questions about the complicating effects that economic interdependence can have in a nation’s “strategic” policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Guanie Lim & Chengwei Xu, 2023. "The Political Economy of Japan’s Development Strategy under China-US Rivalry: The Crane, the Dragon, and the Bald Eagle," Chinese Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(4), pages 281-291, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:mes:chinec:v:56:y:2023:i:4:p:281-291
    DOI: 10.1080/10971475.2022.2136692
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10971475.2022.2136692
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10971475.2022.2136692?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chengwei Xu & Guanie Lim, 2024. "Global Britain, Belt and Road Initiative, and New Southbound Policy: Which One Matters to Southeast Asia?," GRIPS Discussion Papers 24-05, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mes:chinec:v:56:y:2023:i:4:p:281-291. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/MCES20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.