Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Negotiating regional order: regional power influences on nuclear nonproliferation in East Asia

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Politics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the relationship between regional powers and security norms by examining the influence of the liberal international order (LIO) on regional security dynamics in East Asia. In examining the influence of the LIO on East Asian nonproliferation norms, the USA and its partner nations have displayed a great deal of inconsistency regarding nuclear nonproliferation. We contend that this inconsistency offers opportunities for regional powers like China to reinforce or contest expectations associated with international nuclear norms. Often perceived as a stable pillar of the international order, variations in nuclear nonproliferation norms from the global to those in East Asia suggest a need to reconsider the influence and nature of the ILO on regional orders more broadly. Due to the role regional powers play in this relationship between the global and regional levels, this research also reinforces the continued importance of the Regional Powers Research Program.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. One might argue that even the economic dimension is by no means certain given recent actions by states to protect sovereignty from the encroachments of interdependence (e.g., Brexit, US protectionism, etc.…), but this is beyond the scope of the paper.

  2. Lake et al. (2021) offer that sub-orders can be broken up along a range of issue-specific or regional categorizations.

  3. Recent trends perhaps suggest a regression in this area due to a rise in support for more autocratic governance and perceptions of democracies’ struggles to address growing inequality and maintain rule of law.

  4. While this statement is clearly made with respect to the lack of security in Afghanistan, it bears mentioning that US foreign policy in Africa has been motivated by this logic as well. Carmody notes that the globalization of security as it relates to transnational terrorism has been particularly influential in debates regarding the strengthening of state capabilities in Africa to protect from these threats. See Padraig Carmody (2005).

  5. This is not to suggest that China has no global power aspirations, has not engaged in activities that are more globally oriented, or that it cannot someday be considered in this regard. Rather, we contend that the regional concerns China much more at this time than the global, and in any event the region will be necessary to dominate if it is to further pursue any global power goals.

  6. While beyond the scope of this study, the recent assassination of Iran’s top nuclear scientist, Moshen Fakhrizadeh drives home this point about alternatives to traditional mechanisms of deterrence when it comes to nuclear weapons proliferation.

  7. Indeed, it is the focus on these issues that has led to both the USA and China failing to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, despite both agreeing to the treaty in principle. This failure illustrates the competing issues both states are trying to reconcile as it relates to nonproliferation and deterrence.

References

  • Acharya, A. 2014. The End of American World Order. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acton, J. 2021. Why the AUKUS Submarine Deal is Bad for Nonproliferation – And What to Do About It. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace commentary, 21 September, https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/09/21/why-aukus-submarine-deal-is-bad-for-nonproliferation-and-what-to-do-about-it-pub-85399. Accessed 5 Apr 2022.

  • Alagappa, M. 2003. The study of international order: An analytical framework. In Asian Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features, ed. M. Alagappa, 33–69. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, G. 2018. The Myth of the Liberal Order. Foreign Affairs 97 (4): 124–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayson, R., and M.S. Pardesi. 2017. Asia’s Diplomacy of Violence: China-US Coercion and Regional Order. Survival 59 (2): 85–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batterton, K. 2018. Testing the Liberal Order. MPhil Thesis. Maxwell Air Force Base: Air University Press.

  • Becker, U., H. Müller, and S. Wisotzki. 2008. Democracy and Nuclear Arms Control—Destiny or Ambiguity? Security Studies 17 (4): 810–854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betts, R.K. 2013. The Lost Logic of Deterrence: What the Strategy That Won the Cold War Can—and Can’t—Do Now. Foreign Affairs 92 (2): 87–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull, H.J. 1977. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, B. 1991. People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzan, B., and O. Wæver. 2003. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. 2021. Seoul’s Misguided Desire for a Nuclear Submarine. Naval War College Review 74 (4): 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmody, P. 2005. Transforming Globalization and Security: Africa and America Post-9/11. Africa Today 52 (1): 97–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, S. 2005. Is There a Power Transition between the U.S. and China? The Different Faces of National Power. Asian Survey 45 (5): 687–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, S., W. Hu, and K. He. 2018. Discerning states’ Revisionist and Status-Quo Orientations: Comparing China and the US. European Journal of International Relations 25 (2): 613–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai, X. and D. Renner. 2016. China and international order: The limits of integration. Journal of Chinese Political Science 21: 177–197.

  • Fawcett, L., and S. Jagtiani. 2022. Regional powers, global aspirations: Lessons from India and Iran. International Politics, forthcoming.

  • Federation of American Scientists. 2022. Status of World Nuclear Forces. https://fas.org/issues/nuclear-weapons/status-world-nuclear-forces/. Accessed 1 Mar 2022.

  • Gilpin, R. 1981. War and Change in International Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilpin, R. 2011. Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, C.L. 2019. A Flawed Framework: Why the Liberal International Order Concept Is Misguided. International Security 43 (4): 51–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, E. 2003. Hegemonic constraints: The implications of 11 September for American power. Australian Journal of International Affairs 57 (1): 77–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, E. 2008. Hierarchy and the Role of the United States in the East Asian Security Order. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 8 (3): 353–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, E. 2019. Contesting Hegemonic Order: China in East Asia. Security Studies 28 (3): 614–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, S.T. 2016. Chinese Nuclear Proliferation: How Global Politics is Transforming China’s Weapons Buildup and Modernization. Lincoln, NE: Potomac Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • He, K. 2015. Contested Regional Orders and Institutional Balancing in the Asia Pacific. International Politics 52 (2): 208–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heibach, J. 2022. Public Diplomacy and Regional Leadership Struggles: The Case of Saudi Arabia. International Politics, forthcoming.

  • Hess, A., and G. Marcus. 2019. UN Security Council Resolution 1540 and the Importance of Regional Coordinators. The Nonproliferation Review 25 (5–6): 545–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horsburgh, N. 2017. China and Global Nuclear Order: From Estrangement to Active Engagement. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikenberry, G.J. 2011. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, V. 2017. Deterring a Nuclear-Armed Adversary in a Contested Regional Order. Asia Policy 23: 97–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lake, D., L. Martin, and T. Risse. 2021. Challenges to the Liberal Order: Reflections on International Organization. International Organization 75: 225–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lantis, J. 2018. Nuclear Cooperation with non-NPT member states? An Elite -Driven Model of Norm Contestation. Contemporary Security Policy 39 (3): 399–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J.J. 2019. Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order. International Security 43 (4): 7–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. 2023. The Global Security Initiative Concept Paper. https://www.mfa.gov.cn/eng/wjbxw/202302/t20230221_11028348.html. Accessed 1 May 2023.

  • Ogilive-White, T. 2006. Non-proliferation and Counter-terrorism Cooperation in Southeast Asia: Meeting Global Obligations through Regional Security Architectures? Contemporary Southeast Asia 28 (1): 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panda, A. 2017. THAAD and China’s Nuclear Second-Strike Capability. The Diplomat, 8 March. https://thediplomat.com/2017/03/thaad-and-chinas-nuclear-second-strike-capability/. Accessed 22 May 2022.

  • Roberts, B. 2007. All the king’s men? Refashioning Global Nuclear Order. International Affairs 83 (3): 523–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruggie, J.G. 1982. International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order. International Organization 36 (2): 379–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagan, S.D. 1996. Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons? Three Models in Search of a Bomb. International Security 21 (3): 54–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart-Ingersoll, R., and D. Frazier. 2012. Regional Powers and Security Orders: A Theoretical Framework. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thakur, R. 2013. The Global Governance Architecture of Nuclear Security. The Stanley Foundation Policy Analysis Brief. https://stanleycenter.org/publications/pab/Thakur_PAB_313.pdf. Accessed 5 Mar 2022.

  • Thakur, R. 2018. Japan and the Nuclear Weapons Prohibition Treaty: The Wrong Side of History, Geography, Legality, Morality, and Humanity. Journal for Peace in Nuclear Disarmament 1 (1): 11–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, W. 2007. Nuclear Engagement and Counter-Enlightenment. International Affairs 83 (3): 431–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, W. 2011. A Perpetual Menace: Nuclear Weapons and International Order. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, J., and J. Wallace. 2021. Domestic Politics, China’s Rise, and the Future of the Liberal International Order. International Organization 75: 635–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, O.R. 1978. Anarchy and Social Choice: Reflections on the International Polity. World Politics 30 (2): 241–263.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, T. and R. Wang. 2017. China and the Nuclear Weapons Prohibition Treaty. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/2017/09/21/china-and-nuclear-weapons-prohibition-treaty-pub-73488. Accessed 1 May 2023.

  • Zhexin, Z. 2015. China’s Pursuit of a new Asia-Pacific Security Architecture: Underlying Rationale, Ongoing Actions, and Future Prospects. China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies 1 (4): 573–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA

    Nicholas Kirk Sobecki

  2. School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, Montgomery, Alabama, USA

    Derrick V. Frazier

Authors
  1. Nicholas Kirk Sobecki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Derrick V. Frazier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Derrick V. Frazier.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sobecki, N.K., Frazier, D.V. Negotiating regional order: regional power influences on nuclear nonproliferation in East Asia. Int Polit 61, 125–144 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-023-00505-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-023-00505-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation