The Cooptation Dilemma: Explaining US Contestation of the Liberal Trade Order

Tim Heinkelmann‐Wild, Andreas Kruck, Bernhard Zangl
{"title":"The Cooptation Dilemma: Explaining US Contestation of the Liberal Trade Order","authors":"Tim Heinkelmann‐Wild, Andreas Kruck, Bernhard Zangl","doi":"10.1093/isagsq/ksae024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n While the United States (US) acted as a liberal hegemon in setting up the Liberal International Order (LIO), it is increasingly contesting the inclusive legacy institutions underpinning the LIO and is instead moving towards alternative, more exclusive institutions. Why is the US contesting the institutions it once set up to stabilize the LIO? We argue that hegemonic contestation is the result of a reactive sequence that is endogenous to cooptation-based orders where hegemons face a trade-off between inclusion and control. This Cooptation Dilemma is particularly pronounced in strongly institutionalized liberal (sub-)orders, such as the international trade regime. It unfolds in three stages: Privileging control, the liberal hegemon first creates exclusive institutions, which are likely to breed contestation by excluded states. To tame their contestation, the hegemon secondly includes previously excluded states into the order, making the previously exclusive institutions more and more inclusive. To compensate for the related control loss, the hegemon finally promotes alternative, more exclusive institutions, successively turning away from the inclusive legacy institutions. We demonstrate this reactive sequence by tracing the process that led to the US contestation of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Our findings suggest that cooptation-based orders in general and strongly institutionalized liberal orders in particular are prone to dynamic instability.","PeriodicalId":380017,"journal":{"name":"Global Studies Quarterly","volume":"148 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Studies Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksae024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the United States (US) acted as a liberal hegemon in setting up the Liberal International Order (LIO), it is increasingly contesting the inclusive legacy institutions underpinning the LIO and is instead moving towards alternative, more exclusive institutions. Why is the US contesting the institutions it once set up to stabilize the LIO? We argue that hegemonic contestation is the result of a reactive sequence that is endogenous to cooptation-based orders where hegemons face a trade-off between inclusion and control. This Cooptation Dilemma is particularly pronounced in strongly institutionalized liberal (sub-)orders, such as the international trade regime. It unfolds in three stages: Privileging control, the liberal hegemon first creates exclusive institutions, which are likely to breed contestation by excluded states. To tame their contestation, the hegemon secondly includes previously excluded states into the order, making the previously exclusive institutions more and more inclusive. To compensate for the related control loss, the hegemon finally promotes alternative, more exclusive institutions, successively turning away from the inclusive legacy institutions. We demonstrate this reactive sequence by tracing the process that led to the US contestation of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Our findings suggest that cooptation-based orders in general and strongly institutionalized liberal orders in particular are prone to dynamic instability.
合作困境:解释美国对自由贸易秩序的竞争
虽然美国在建立自由国际秩序(LIO)时充当了自由主义霸主的角色,但它却越来越多地对支撑自由国际秩序的包容性传统机构提出质疑,转而转向其他更具排他性的机构。为什么美国要对其曾经为稳定自由国际秩序而建立的机构提出质疑?我们认为,霸权争夺是基于合作的秩序内生的反应序列的结果,在这种秩序中,霸权面临着包容与控制之间的权衡。这种合作困境在制度化程度较高的自由(次)秩序中尤为明显,如国际贸易体制。它分为三个阶段:自由主义霸权者为了优先获得控制权,首先建立了排他性的制度,而这些制度很可能会引发被排斥国家的争议。为了平息这些争论,霸权者会将先前被排斥在外的国家纳入秩序,使先前的排他性制度越来越具有包容性。为了弥补相关的控制权损失,霸权国最终会推行替代性更强的排他性制度,相继放弃包容性更强的传统制度。我们通过追踪美国对世界贸易组织(WTO)的争夺过程来证明这一反应序列。我们的研究结果表明,基于合作的秩序,尤其是制度化程度较高的自由秩序,很容易出现动态不稳定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信