Show Summary Details

Page of

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, International Studies. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 28 February 2024

Conflict Management and Peacebuilding in Asialocked

Conflict Management and Peacebuilding in Asialocked

  • Monalisa AdhikariMonalisa AdhikariUniversity of Stirling
  •  and Yuji UesugiYuji UesugiWaseda University

Summary

While Asian states do not have a coherently delineated international peacebuilding policy, their increased role and leverage in conflict management are being recognized both in scholarship and praxis. This article underlines how the geopolitical context of Asia, defined by competing regional hegemons, a weakly institutionalized regional organization, and a role of the United States as a security guarantor, has defined the conflict-management approaches of different states. “Asian” conflict-management approaches are situated within the burgeoning literature on “alternative” forms of peacebuilding and the emerging body of work on authoritarian, and illiberal forms of peacebuilding. The normative priorities of the primary Asian states of India, China, and Japan in their conflict management, including stability and development, are teased out, and the forms or modalities through which these are executed are unpacked. What such norms and practices mean for conflict-affected states in Asia are discussed in the end.

Subjects

  • Conflict Studies
  • Diplomacy
  • Foreign Policy

You do not currently have access to this article

Login

Please login to access the full content.

Subscribe

Access to the full content requires a subscription