IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/intare/v24y2021i2p135-148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

US–China commercial rivalry, great war and middle powers

Author

Listed:
  • Bora Jeong

    (University of North Texas, USA)

  • Hoon Lee

    (Texas Tech University, USA)

Abstract

This paper examines whether the recent trade war between the US and China would lead to a great power war. In so doing, we rely on two theoretical frameworks, mercantilism and power transition theory, that are likely to link trade war to a military confrontation. Evidence shows that the trade war per se is not a sufficient condition for an all-out war between the US and China. Unlike mercantilists argue, first, we identify the importance of domestic coalitions before trade war being escalated to a military conflict. Second, we find that trade war as economic statecraft is a viable means to suppress a challenger’s capability, which may stop or delay the power transition process. The findings provide implications for middle power countries where strategic choices are required between the two major powers.

Suggested Citation

  • Bora Jeong & Hoon Lee, 2021. "US–China commercial rivalry, great war and middle powers," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 24(2), pages 135-148, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:24:y:2021:i:2:p:135-148
    DOI: 10.1177/22338659211018322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/22338659211018322
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/22338659211018322?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Woosang Kim & Scott Gates, 2015. "Power transition theory and the rise of China," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 219-226, September.
    2. Woosang Kim, 2015. "Rising China, pivotal middle power South Korea, and alliance transition theory," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 251-265, September.
    3. Shujiro Urata, 2020. "US–Japan Trade Frictions: The Past, the Present, and Implications for the US–China Trade War," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 15(1), pages 141-159, January.
    4. Gartzke, Erik & Li, Quan & Boehmer, Charles, 2001. "Investing in the Peace: Economic Interdependence and International Conflict," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 391-438, April.
    5. Timothy M. Peterson & Yuleng Zeng, 2021. "Conflict and cooperation with trade partners," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(2), pages 266-290, March.
    6. Fearon, James D., 1995. "Rationalist explanations for war," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 379-414, July.
    7. Solomon William Polachek, 1980. "Conflict and Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 55-78, March.
    8. Laura D'Andrea Tyson, 1992. "Who's Bashing Whom? Trade Conflict in High-Technology Industries," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 86, January.
    9. David Rapkin & William Thompson, 2003. "Power Transition, Challenge and the (Re)Emergence of China," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 315-342, October.
    10. Cullen F Goenner, 2010. "From toys to warships: Interdependence and the effects of disaggregated trade on militarized disputes," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 47(5), pages 547-559, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yuleng Zeng, 2021. "Biding time versus timely retreat: Asymmetric dependence, issue salience, and conflict duration," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 719-733, July.
    2. Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2011. "Disaggregated Trade Flows and International Conflict," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 25, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Han Dorussen, 2006. "Heterogeneous Trade Interests and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(1), pages 87-107, February.
    4. Massoud Tansa G. & Magee Christopher S., 2012. "Trade and Political, Military, and Economic Relations," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 1-39, May.
    5. Erik Gartzke & Dominic Rohner, 2010. "Prosperous pacifists: The effects of development on initiators and targets of territorial conflict," IEW - Working Papers 500, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. Timothy M Peterson, 2011. "Third-party trade, political similarity, and dyadic conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 48(2), pages 185-200, March.
    7. Yuleng Zeng, 2020. "Bluff to peace: How economic dependence promotes peace despite increasing deception and uncertainty," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(6), pages 633-654, November.
    8. Brandon J Kinne, 2014. "Does third-party trade reduce conflict? Credible signaling versus opportunity costs," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(1), pages 28-48, February.
    9. Erik Gartzke & Dominic Rohner, 2010. "To conquer or compel: war, peace, and economic development," IEW - Working Papers 511, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    10. Patrick J. McDonald, 2004. "Peace through Trade or Free Trade?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(4), pages 547-572, August.
    11. Håvard Hegre, 2005. "Development and the Liberal Peace," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 31, pages 17-46.
    12. Jie Cai & Lian An, 2014. "Is Protectionism Rational Under the Financial Crisis? Analysis from the Perspective of International Political Relations," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(3), pages 278-299, March.
    13. Desbordes, Rodolphe & Vicard, Vincent, 2009. "Foreign direct investment and bilateral investment treaties: An international political perspective," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 372-386, September.
    14. Chang, Yuan-Ching & Polachek, Solomon W. & Robst, John, 2004. "Conflict and trade: the relationship between geographic distance and international interactions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 491-509, September.
    15. Lingyu Lu & Cameron G. Thies, 2010. "Trade Interdependence and the Issues at Stake in the Onset of Militarized Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(4), pages 347-368, September.
    16. Idean Salehyan, 2010. "The Delegation of War to Rebel Organizations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(3), pages 493-515, June.
    17. Philippe Martin & Thierry Mayer & Mathias Thoenig, 2008. "Make Trade Not War?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(3), pages 865-900.
    18. Vicard, Vincent, 2012. "Trade, conflict, and political integration: Explaining the heterogeneity of regional trade agreements," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 54-71.
    19. Enrico Spolaore & Romain Wacziarg, 2016. "War and Relatedness," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(5), pages 925-939, December.
    20. David Lektzian & Glen Biglaiser, 2014. "The effect of foreign direct investment on the use and success of US sanctions," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(1), pages 70-93, February.

    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:sae:intare:v:24:y:2021:i:2:p:135-148. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.hufs.ac.kr/user/hufsenglish/re_1.jsp .

    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.