The well-grounded and academic article by Allan, Vucetic, and Hopf (2018) published in International Organization deals with the idea of China’s hegemony that has become a topic of many discussions due to the state’s rise. In contrast to the majority of works that strive only to describe the future transition, this paper’s authors consider several essential factors that prevent China’s leadership. These factors include the country’s authoritarian identity, the peculiarities of Western order, and the identity of others states. Since this study has based on many credible sources and has quite a logical organization, focus on the primary idea, and paragraphs’ unity, it is high-quality and meaningful. It contributes to developing hegemonic theories, national relations, and the distribution of identities. Moreover, the authors create a map that reflects the features of nine considerable powers’ identities. Therefore, this paper’s thorough and profound analysis allows exploring whether it is possible for China to get superiority and control over other states.
The purpose of this article is to consider the interconnection between China’s rise and potential hegemony transition. The paper’s central thesis claims that due to a range of reasons, including relatively stable current political order and the country’s authoritarian character, China will hardly become a hegemon (Allan et al., 2018). This article considers such essential concepts as hegemony theory, distribution of identity, counter-hegemonic coalition, and international relations and their interdependence. As for crucial arguments, the authors have concluded three primary points related to the main thesis. Firstly, the current order “is strongly supported by the distribution of identity in both Western states and rising powers” (Allan et al., 2018, p. 839).
Secondly, although China’s prosperity is undeniable, it can hardly lead to hegemony since “the identities of rising states and the hegemonic ideology are inconsistent” (Allan et al., 2018, p. 859). Finally, the creation of a counter-hegemonic bloc is also improbable. Thus, the authors focus on various factors related to China and its potential hegemony using well-thought arguments and credible data.
This article has both strong claims and several minor weaknesses. As for its advantages, for instance, this study pays attention to the present Western order’s strength and measures China’s chances to change it. Due to this merit, the article allows assessing China’s position and Western future. In addition, one more paper’s strength is the idea that “no ideological hegemony can be established among the masses unless it resonates with their lived daily commonsense” (Allan et al., 2018, p. 846). As for the weakness, this paper does not cover the issue of hegemonic stability’s effects to the full extent. Focusing on other significant topics, authors only claim that the “stability of hegemonic orders depends on the broader distribution of ideas” (Allan et al., 2018, p. 840). Moreover, perhaps it would also be helpful for authors to use more sources that were published in the last five years. Considering that the paper was created in 2018, it is not difficult to count in that the references dated after 2013 amount to about only 30% (Allan et al., 2018). However, despite the minor demerits, the article can be quite helpful and is worthy of reading.
- What can be considered a fully accomplished hegemony transition, and what is needed to become the hegemony stable?
- Does hegemony stability have a positive or negative influence on the states’ residents?
Allan, B. B., Vucetic, S., & Hopf, T. (2018). The distribution of identity and the future of international order: China’s hegemonic prospects. International Organization, 72(4), 839-869.