IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v10y2019i2p250-257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Engagement to Competition? The Logic of the US China Policy Debate

Author

Listed:
  • Nien‐chung Chang‐Liao

Abstract

This article explores the logic of the ongoing debate in the United States over its China policy. Scholarly assessments of China's power and intentions are more diverse than ever before, so it is no wonder that the United States is faced with an array of policy options, including continuing engagement, accommodation, competition and containment. This makes it more difficult for US policy makers to forge a consensus regarding the course of engagement with China. This paper provides an analytic framework for explaining the logic of US policy choices within the debate and examines the implications for the Trump administration. It is hoped that it can help US policy makers interpret China's rise, and act as a baseline from which they can formulate an optimal approach towards dealing with the PRC.

Suggested Citation

  • Nien‐chung Chang‐Liao, 2019. "From Engagement to Competition? The Logic of the US China Policy Debate," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(2), pages 250-257, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:10:y:2019:i:2:p:250-257
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12667
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.12667?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:10:y:2019:i:2:p:250-257. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.