Implications

Abstract

Based inter alia on the analyzed (post-Cold War) structural frame of Sino-U.S. ties, the thesis (re-)constructed a neoliberal and a neorealist IR (grand) theory perspective on post-Cold War Sino-U.S. relations – and then empirically verified these theoretical alternatives. Since “[s]ocial science (…) seeks to develop and evaluate theories” (King et al. 1995: 475), and “[t]he clash of theories (…) across competing research programs is essential to progress in the social sciences” (Walt 1997: 934), the thesis thus stands in a major research tradition. Ultimately, and to the extent possible by a case study design, the research question – if the ascent of the People’s Republic of China has evoked a post-Cold War relationship with the hegemonic United States characterized rather by economically based cooperation or by strategic power politics – has been answered in support of the latter; this confirms a neorealist picture of Sino-U.S. relations and world politics. More precisely, since the empirical confrontation of alternative theories in the same cases remains among the most effective research designs in the social sciences (Opp 2005: 191-203; Eckstein 1975: 125f.; McKeown 1999: 182), and the empirical confrontation here of neoliberalism and neorealism in four (“most likely/least likely”) cases regarding post-Cold War PRC and U.S. (relational) foreign policy behavior in the Taiwan issue and the North Korea issue revealed greater explanatory power of the neorealist (grand) theory perspective, one may conclude that confidence in the (post-Cold War) validity of neorealism has risen (King et al. 1994: 103).