IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/asseca/v2y2015i1p92-115.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Games, Changes and Fears: Exploring Taiwan’s Cross-Strait Dilemma in the Twenty-first Century

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Intal Magcamit

Abstract

This article examines Taiwan’s cross-strait relations with China by analyzing the linkages between their respective security interests and free trade objectives in the twenty-first century. It argues that these entanglements induce a scenario akin to the prisoner’s dilemma that compels Taiwanese leaders and policymakers to preserve the Chinese-dominated cross-strait status quo. To enhance their political appeals during general elections, the major political parties in Taiwan are being forced to cooperate with each other, albeit artificially. By adopting a parallel, watered-down approach to sensitive political issues, particularly with respect to Taiwan’s sovereignty status, the omnipresent China factor is being legitimized further. Such an approach homogenizes the parties’ political agendas with respect to Taiwanese autonomy which leads to the island’s perpetual entrapment within the One-China trajectory. Using original and secondary sources in the empirical analysis of the security–trade nexus mainly from the Taiwanese perspective, the article highlights the slow yet steady co-optation of Taiwan’s sovereign interests within China’s sinicization project.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Intal Magcamit, 2015. "Games, Changes and Fears: Exploring Taiwan’s Cross-Strait Dilemma in the Twenty-first Century," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 2(1), pages 92-115, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:2:y:2015:i:1:p:92-115
    DOI: 10.1177/2347797014565297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2347797014565297
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2347797014565297?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kreps, David M. & Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John & Wilson, Robert, 1982. "Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 245-252, August.
    2. Frank Muyard, 2012. "Taiwanese National Identity, Cross-Strait Economic Interaction, and the Integration Paradigm," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Peter C. Y. Chow (ed.), National Identity and Economic Interest, chapter 0, pages 153-186, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Solomon William Polachek, 1980. "Conflict and Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 55-78, March.
    4. Naiteh Wu, 2012. "Will Economic Integration Lead to Political Assimilation?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Peter C. Y. Chow (ed.), National Identity and Economic Interest, chapter 0, pages 187-202, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. York W. Chen, 2012. "ECFA and Beyond," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Peter C. Y. Chow (ed.), National Identity and Economic Interest, chapter 0, pages 205-231, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Paul R. Milgrom, 1984. "Axelrod's The Evolution of Cooperation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(2), pages 305-309, Summer.
    7. Peter C. Y. Chow, 2012. "The ECFA, Its Impact on Cross-Strait Relations, and Implications for the United States," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Peter C. Y. Chow (ed.), National Identity and Economic Interest, chapter 0, pages 67-91, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Gartzke, Erik & Li, Quan & Boehmer, Charles, 2001. "Investing in the Peace: Economic Interdependence and International Conflict," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 391-438, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jie Cai & Lian An, 2014. "Is Protectionism Rational Under the Financial Crisis? Analysis from the Perspective of International Political Relations," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(3), pages 278-299, March.
    2. Desbordes, Rodolphe & Vicard, Vincent, 2009. "Foreign direct investment and bilateral investment treaties: An international political perspective," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 372-386, September.
    3. Chang, Yuan-Ching & Polachek, Solomon W. & Robst, John, 2004. "Conflict and trade: the relationship between geographic distance and international interactions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 491-509, September.
    4. Lingyu Lu & Cameron G. Thies, 2010. "Trade Interdependence and the Issues at Stake in the Onset of Militarized Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(4), pages 347-368, September.
    5. Han Dorussen, 2006. "Heterogeneous Trade Interests and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(1), pages 87-107, February.
    6. David Lektzian & Glen Biglaiser, 2014. "The effect of foreign direct investment on the use and success of US sanctions," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(1), pages 70-93, February.
    7. Xiang Jun & Primiano Christopher B. & Huang Wei-hao, 2015. "Aggressive or Peaceful Rise? An Empirical Assessment of China’s Militarized Conflict, 1979–2010," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 21(3), pages 301-325, August.
    8. Ghulam Shabbir & Amjad Naveed & Muhammad Ali Khan & Shabib Haider Syed, 2022. "Does Peace Promote Bilateral Trade Flows? An Economic Analysis of Panel Data in Asian Perspective," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 64(1), pages 143-158, March.
    9. Zeev Maoz, 2009. "The Effects of Strategic and Economic Interdependence on International Conflict Across Levels of Analysis," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 223-240, January.
    10. Polachek Solomon W & Xiang Jun, 2010. "Opportunity Costs and the Probability of War in an Incomplete Information Game (With Comments by Lloyd Jeff Dumas)," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 1-6, June.
    11. Edward D. Mansfield & Brian M. Pollins, 2001. "The Study of Interdependence and Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(6), pages 834-859, December.
    12. Mintz Alex & Heo Uk, 2014. "Triads in International Relations: The Effect of Superpower Aid, Trade, and Arms Transfers on Conflict in the Middle East," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(3), pages 1-19, August.
    13. Bora Jeong & Hoon Lee, 2021. "US–China commercial rivalry, great war and middle powers," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 24(2), pages 135-148, June.
    14. Rohner, Dominic, 2011. "Reputation, group structure and social tensions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 188-199, November.
    15. John Robst & Solomon Polachek & Yuan-Ching Chang, 2007. "Geographic Proximity, Trade, and International Conflict/Cooperation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 1-24, February.
    16. Massoud Tansa G. & Magee Christopher S., 2012. "Trade and Political, Military, and Economic Relations," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 1-39, May.
    17. Erik Gartzke & Dominic Rohner, 2010. "Prosperous pacifists: The effects of development on initiators and targets of territorial conflict," IEW - Working Papers 500, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    18. Timothy M Peterson, 2011. "Third-party trade, political similarity, and dyadic conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 48(2), pages 185-200, March.
    19. Yuleng Zeng, 2020. "Bluff to peace: How economic dependence promotes peace despite increasing deception and uncertainty," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(6), pages 633-654, November.
    20. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2012. "War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Don’t Always Keep the Peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 257-278, July.

    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:sae:asseca:v:2:y:2015:i:1:p:92-115. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.