The rising power’s audiences and cost trade-offs: explaining China’s escalation and deescalation in maritime disputes

Q1 Social Sciences
S. Luo
{"title":"The rising power’s audiences and cost trade-offs: explaining China’s escalation and deescalation in maritime disputes","authors":"S. Luo","doi":"10.1080/14799855.2021.2012159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Observers characterize China’s behavior in the South China Sea in the recent decade as a continuity of assertiveness, coercion, or delay. Yet, even within a pattern of continuity, China’s way of handling interstate crises arising from its maritime territorial claims has varied from case to case, vacillating between escalation that prioritizes “safeguarding sovereign rights” (weiquan) and deescalation that puts an emphasis on “maintaining stability” on its periphery (weiwen). How can we explain this variation? In this article, I develop a framework, the audience cost trade-off hypothesis, to explain when and why China is likely to escalate or deescalate in maritime disputes. I argue that when deciding whether to escalate, Chinese decision makers usually weigh and make a trade-off between their anticipated domestic political costs should they back down and their potential international costs should they take an escalatory stance. I illustrate the framework with a case study of two major interstate crises in the South China Sea: the 2012 China-Philippine standoff in the Scarborough Shoal and the 2014 Sino-Vietnamese clash over the deployment of the oil drilling platform HYSY-981.","PeriodicalId":35162,"journal":{"name":"Asian Security","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2021.2012159","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Observers characterize China’s behavior in the South China Sea in the recent decade as a continuity of assertiveness, coercion, or delay. Yet, even within a pattern of continuity, China’s way of handling interstate crises arising from its maritime territorial claims has varied from case to case, vacillating between escalation that prioritizes “safeguarding sovereign rights” (weiquan) and deescalation that puts an emphasis on “maintaining stability” on its periphery (weiwen). How can we explain this variation? In this article, I develop a framework, the audience cost trade-off hypothesis, to explain when and why China is likely to escalate or deescalate in maritime disputes. I argue that when deciding whether to escalate, Chinese decision makers usually weigh and make a trade-off between their anticipated domestic political costs should they back down and their potential international costs should they take an escalatory stance. I illustrate the framework with a case study of two major interstate crises in the South China Sea: the 2012 China-Philippine standoff in the Scarborough Shoal and the 2014 Sino-Vietnamese clash over the deployment of the oil drilling platform HYSY-981.
崛起大国的受众和成本权衡:解释中国在海上争端中的升级和降级
观察人士将中国近十年来在南海的行为描述为一种持续的自信、胁迫或拖延。然而,即使在一个连续性的模式下,中国处理由其海洋领土主张引起的国家间危机的方式也因情况而异,在优先考虑“维护主权”的升级和强调“维护周边稳定”的降级之间摇摆不定。我们如何解释这种差异呢?在这篇文章中,我提出了一个框架,即受众成本权衡假设,来解释中国何时以及为什么可能在海洋争端中升级或降级。我认为,在决定是否升级时,中国决策者通常会权衡并权衡,如果他们退缩,他们的预期国内政治成本,以及如果他们采取升级立场,他们的潜在国际成本。我以南海两大国家间危机的案例研究来说明这一框架:2012年中菲在斯卡伯勒浅滩的对峙,以及2014年中越在石油钻井平台HYSY-981的部署上的冲突。
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
Asian Security
Asian Security Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信