Author
Listed:
- Colin Mianqing Xie
(Department of International and Strategic Studies, Faculty of Arts of Social Sciences, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 17221694@siswa.um.edu.my)
- Khoo Ying Hooi
(Department of International and Strategic Studies, Faculty of Arts of Social Sciences, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. yinghooi@um.edu.my)
- Roy Anthony Rogers
(Department of International and Strategic Studies, Faculty of Arts of Social Sciences, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. rarogers@um.edu.my)
- Karl Chee Leong Lee
(Institute of China Studies, Faculty of Arts of Social Sciences, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. karlcllee2021@um.edu.my)
Abstract
After the 2019 Anti-extradition Amendment Bill Movement, the United States’s Hong Kong policy experienced significant changes. The change is closely related to the escalating rivalry between the United States and China. This article investigates the role of status considerations in the United States’s Hong Kong policy since 1997. The authors introduce entry-level and in-depth interpretive analyses to examine 3 Hong Kong–related legislative acts and 44 reports from the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, which is part of the U.S. Department of State. Wendtian constructivism, status anxiety and prospect theory are introduced to construct a conceptual framework that emphasises status considerations as a key factor in the United States’s Hong Kong policy. The findings indicate that the United States, as a dominant power in the international hierarchy, is likely to experience status anxiety in confronting China’s rise across status dimensions (economic and military capabilities as well as prestige), prompting a more aggressive approach to its China strategy, which will subsequently influence its Hong Kong policy.
Suggested Citation
Colin Mianqing Xie & Khoo Ying Hooi & Roy Anthony Rogers & Karl Chee Leong Lee, 2025.
"Between Dominance and Rising: The Role of Status Considerations in United States’s Hong Kong Policy, 1997–2023,"
China Report, , vol. 61(2), pages 199-222, May.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:chnrpt:v:61:y:2025:i:2:p:199-222
DOI: 10.1177/00094455251317897
Download full text from publisher
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:chnrpt:v:61:y:2025:i:2:p:199-222. 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: 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.