Sea power as a dominant paradigm

The rise of China’s new strategic identity

Dados Bibliográficos

ID13120772
AutoresJun J Nohara (Tokyo University of the Arts, autor correspondente)
Ano2017
Volume6
Fascículo2
Páginas210-232
Data de publicação2017-07-03
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Contemporary East Asia Studies (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 2476-1028 • E-ISSN: 2476-1036
EditoraTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/24761028.2017.1391623
OpenAlexW2766897629
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas4
Referências citadas36

Background: The current body of literature on China’s maritime expansion has, on most occasions, approached this phenomenon from the perspective of realism and materialistic interpretations. However, seminal works accomplished by authors such as Ross or Heginbotham show that realist approaches cannot entirely account for China’s quest for a sea power identity. It is thus surprising that relatively little attention was paid to the role of strategic identity in China’s desire to change its strategic paradigm. Purpose: Drawing from the works of Wendt and other constructivists on identity, as well as from the literature on strategic culture, this article attempts to show how and why a continental power, in this instance China, would seek to morph into a sea power and come to view sea power as a dominant strategic paradigm. Main Argument: In order to do so, the argumentation follows three steps. First, I examine earlier historical accounts of sea power being actively promoted as a dominant paradigm. Second, I consider China’s characteristics as a continental power. Third, I offer a depiction of the processed change of China’s strategic identity. Conclusion: As a conclusion, this article unveils several implications. In particular, it insists on how sea power as an identity can become a nexus of contention between an established sea power and a continental power seeking to become a sea power, transcending the traditional opposition of sea power and continental power. The conclusion also presents several caveats as starting points for future researches

Aesthetics · Argument (complex analysis · China · Epistemology · Identity (music · Political economy · Political science · Power (physics · Sociology · International Development and Aid · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Maritime Security and History · Philosophy