Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:49:48.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stories of Hegemony: The Political Stakes of the Rise and Decline of US Power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2016

Shampa Biswas
Shampa Biswas*
Affiliation:
Shampa Biswas (biswassa@whitman.edu) is Paul Garrett Professor of Political Science at Whitman College.
Get access

Extract

With Asia as its backdrop, Alfred McCoy's paper gives us a story of the rise of US hegemony after World War II. Using “military bases” rather than wars as a metric of imperial power, the paper traces the geopolitics of imperial expansion (and sometimes retraction) through a close and rich study of the many contestations around US military presence in the Philippines—contestations that occurred in both the United States and the Philippines. In doing so, one of the paper's most profound insights, made with considerable archival documentation, is that colonization and decolonization do not follow a linear trajectory and that its politics, rather than a simple imposition from the colonizer onto the colonized, are instead quite messy, complicated, and perhaps mostly importantly, in a constant state of negotiation. Thus, for instance, the paper shows us that political independence is not a clear rupture from colonization to decolonization, that arguments for the continuation or discontinuation of imperial relations post-independence are complex on both sides of the imperial divide and shift in different directions over time, and that who appears as a “threat” or an “enemy” that mobilizes a national community and nationalist resistance is also complex and inconstant. In other words, McCoy provides us with a historically detailed story of the rise of US hegemony in the latter half of the twentieth century through an account of the complex expansion of the US presence in Asia.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 75 , Issue 4 , November 2016 , pp. 1031 - 1039
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

List of References

Adas, Michael. 2005. “Improving on the Civilizing Mission?: Assumptions of United States Exceptionalism in the Colonization of the Philippines.” In The New American Empire: A 21st Century Teach-in on U.S. Foreign Policy, eds. Gardner, Lloyd and Young, Marilyn, 153–81. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
Boot, Max. 2002. The Savage Wars of Peace: Small Wars and the Rise of American Power. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Boot, Max. 2003. “Neither New nor Nefarious: The Liberal Empire Strikes Back.” Current History 102(667):361–66.Google Scholar
Coleman, Andrew, and Maogoto, Jackson Nyamuya. 2013. “‘Westphalian’ Meets ‘Eastphalian’ Sovereignty: China in a Globalized World.” Asian Journal of International Law 3(2):237–69.Google Scholar
Cox, Robert. 1987. Production, Power, and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Falk, Richard. 2003. “Will the Empire Be Fascist?” Global Dialogue 5(1):22–31.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Niall. 2004a. Colossus: The Price of America's Empire. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Niall. 2004b. “A World Without Power.” Foreign Policy 143:32–39.Google Scholar
Fidler, David P., Kim, Sung Won, and Ganguly, Sumit. 2009. “Eastphalia Rising?: Asian Influence and the Fate of Human Security.” World Policy Journal 26(2):53–64. http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/facpub/114 (accessed November 4, 2016).Google Scholar
Friedberg, Aaron. 2011. A Contest for Supremacy: China, America, and the Struggle for Mastery in Asia. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
Gaddis, John Lewis. 1987. The Long Peace: Inquiries into the History of the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gaddis, John Lewis. 2002. “A Grand Strategy of Transformation.” Foreign Policy 133:50–57.Google Scholar
Gill, Stephen. 1990. American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gilpin, Robert. 1981. War and Change in World Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom. 2010. “Eastphalia as the Perfection of Westphalia.” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 17(1):27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ignatieff, Michael. 2002. “Nation-Building Lite.” New York Times Magazine, July 28.Google Scholar
Ignatieff, Michael. 2003. “The Burden.” New York Times Magazine, January 5.Google Scholar
Ikenberry, John. 2011. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lo, Chang-Fa. 2010. “Values to Be Added to an ‘Eastphalia Order’ by the Emerging China.” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 17(1):12–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackinder, H. J. [1904] 2004. “The Geographical Pivot of History (1904).” Geographical Journal 170(4):432–36.Google Scholar
Mearsheimer, John. 2014. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
Nye, Joseph. 2004. Soft Power: The Means to Succeed in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Packer, George. 2003. “Paved with Good Intentions: The Bush Administration Says Its Push Toward Global Dominance Is Driven by High-Minded Ideals. But That's Part of the Problem.” Mother Jones, July-August, 28–34.Google Scholar
Rupert, Mark. 2000. Ideologies of Globalization: Contending Visions of a New World Order. London: Routledge.Google Scholar