IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/woraff/v186y2023i2p353-383.html

Symmetric Interests And Attention Patterns In Asymmetry

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Ameyaw‐Brobbey
  • Dennis Senam Amable

Abstract

This article uses the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to examine the asymmetric relationship between China and Kazakhstan under a proposed framework—symmetric interest. It breaks from the domination–submission, divergent stakes, interests, patterns, and misperception perspectives characterizing asymmetry to show how asymmetric relations in a non‐external security context elucidate peaceful relations. Under what conditions do asymmetric relationships defy misperception and confrontation to produce peaceful cooperation? How is the BRI likely to manage China's asymmetric relationship with Kazakhstan? The study argues that asymmetric relations within domestic security and other non‐external military security issue areas engender peaceful cooperation. This peaceful cooperation emerges because the stakes and interests of the parties become more symmetrical in absolute terms; thus managing misperceptions and associated confrontation. We propose a framework of symmetric interest and employ the cases of China and Kazakhstan to test the hypotheses and support the conclusion. Beyond providing an alternative perspective in the asymmetry literature, we lastly offer a discussion of the policy relevance. Este artículo utiliza la Iniciativa Belt and Road (BRI) para examinar la relación asimétrica entre China y Kazajstán bajo un marco propuesto: interés simétrico. Rompe con la dominación–sumisión, las apuestas, intereses y patrones divergentes y las perspectivas de percepción errónea que caracterizan la asimetría para mostrar cómo las relaciones asimétricas en un contexto de seguridad no externa aclaran las relaciones pacíficas. ¿Bajo qué condiciones las relaciones asimétricas desafían la percepción errónea y la confrontación para producir una cooperación pacífica? ¿Cómo es probable que el BRI gestione la relación asimétrica de China con Kazajistán? El estudio argumenta que las relaciones asimétricas dentro de la seguridad interna y otras áreas temáticas de seguridad militar no externa generan una cooperación pacífica. Esta cooperación pacífica se debe a que las apuestas y los intereses de las partes se vuelven más simétricos en términos absolutos. Por lo tanto, gestionar las percepciones erróneas y la confrontación asociada. Proponemos un marco de interés simétrico y empleamos los casos de China y Kazajstán para probar las hipótesis y apoyar la conclusión. Más allá de proporcionar una perspectiva alternativa en la literatura sobre asimetría, este estudio tiene relevancia política. 本文使用“一带一路”倡议(BRI)来分析所提出的对称利益框架下中国和哈萨克斯坦的不对称关系。本文打破了以不对称为特征的支配‐服从视角、不同的利害关系视角、利益和模式视角、以及错误感知视角,展示了非外部安全背景下的不对称关系如何阐明和平关系。不对称关系在什么情况下能克服错误感知和对抗,进而产生和平合作?BRI可能如何处理中国与哈萨克斯坦的不对称关系?我们论证认为,国内安全和其他非外部军事安全问题领域内的不对称关系会产生和平合作。这种和平合作是因为各方的利害关系在绝对意义上更加对称,因此能应对错误感知和相关的对抗。我们提出了一项对称利益框架,并利用中国和哈萨克斯坦的案例来检验假设并支持结论。除了为不对称文献提供另一种观点外,本研究还具有政策相关性。

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Ameyaw‐Brobbey & Dennis Senam Amable, 2023. "Symmetric Interests And Attention Patterns In Asymmetry," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 186(2), pages 353-383, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:woraff:v:186:y:2023:i:2:p:353-383
    DOI: 10.1177/00438200231167831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/00438200231167831
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00438200231167831?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. Cooley, Alexander, 2012. "Great Games, Local Rules: The New Great Power Contest in Central Asia," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199929825.
    2. Moravcsik, Andrew, 1997. "Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(4), pages 513-553, October.
    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. Aukje van Loon, 2020. "The Selective Politicization of Transatlantic Trade Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 325-335.
    2. Jonas Tallberg & Thomas Sommerer & Theresa Squatrito, 2016. "Democratic memberships in international organizations: Sources of institutional design," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 59-87, March.
    3. Klaus H. Goetz & Ronny Patz & Theresa Squatrito, 2017. "Resourcing Global Justice: The Resource Management Design of International Courts," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8, pages 62-74, August.
    4. Annie Young Song, 2023. "Beyond intergovernmental cooperation: domestic politics of transboundary air pollution in Korea and Singapore," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 397-413, December.
    5. Stabak Roy & Saptarshi Mitra, 2023. "Enhancing Bilateral Relations and Regional Cooperation: Analysing the Feasibility and Implications of India–Myanmar Railway Connectivity," South Asian Survey, , vol. 30(1), pages 72-98, March.
    6. Anita Sengupta, 2021. "New Realms of Influence: Infrastructure Development, Financial Institutions and Markets," International Studies, , vol. 58(3), pages 324-341, July.
    7. Vaclav Vlcek, 2023. "Who cares about the UN General Assembly? National delegations size from 1993 to 2016," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(2), pages 349-360, May.
    8. Jeffry Frieden & Stefanie Walter, 2019. "Analyzing inter-state negotiations in the Eurozone crisis and beyond," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(1), pages 134-151, March.
    9. Anna Michalski, 2013. "Europeanization of National Foreign Policy: The Case of Denmark's and Sweden's Relations with China," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 884-900, September.
    10. Vennesson Pascal, 2010. "Military Strategy in the Global Village," New Global Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-43, February.
    11. Matera Paulina & Matera Rafał, 2019. "Why does cooperation work or fail? The case of EU-US sanction policy against Iran," Croatian International Relations Review, Sciendo, vol. 25(85), pages 30-62, November.
    12. Andrew Stravers, 2021. "Pork, parties, and priorities: Partisan politics and overseas military deployments," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(2), pages 156-177, March.
    13. Daniel S. Andrews & Stav Fainshmidt & Michael A. Witt & Ajai Gaur, 2025. "Foreign policy: implications for multinational firms," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 105-119, March.
    14. Axel Dreher & Valentin F. Lang & B. Peter Rosendorff & James Raymond Vreeland, 2018. "Buying Votes and International Organizations: The Dirty Work-Hypothesis," CESifo Working Paper Series 7329, CESifo.
    15. Paul Novosad & Eric Werker, 2019. "Who runs the international system? Nationality and leadership in the United Nations Secretariat," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-33, March.
    16. Jiping Dong & Shuai Chen & Fangyu Ding & Jun Zhuo & Mengmeng Hao, 2025. "Spatiotemporal characteristics and drivers of global cyber conflicts," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    17. Rebecca Adler-Nissen, 2016. "Towards a Practice Turn in EU Studies: The Everyday of European Integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 87-103, January.
    18. Mathieu Rousselin, 2012. "The EU as a Multilateral Rule Exporter - The Global Transfer of European Rules via International Organizations," KFG Working Papers p0048, Free University Berlin.
    19. Wolfgang Wagner, 2017. "Liberal Power Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(6), pages 1398-1414, November.
    20. Justin Leinaweaver & Robert Thomson, 2014. "Testing models of legislative decision-making with measurement error: The robust predictive power of bargaining models over procedural models," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 43-58, March.

    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:wly:woraff:v:186:y:2023:i:2:p:353-383. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (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.