Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/14310
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, Phu Tan Huong.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2008-11-13T09:17:07Z-
dc.date.available2008-11-13T09:17:07Z-
dc.date.copyright2006en_US
dc.date.issued2006-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10356/14310-
dc.description.abstractThe post-Cold War debate among realists, liberals and constructivists over East Asian security has not been diminished. Some scholars believe in two dominant theories of realism and liberalism while the others (such as Nikolas Busse) try to prove his assumption of constructivism versus realism. In this thesis, I will argue that all the three lenses can explain for Southeast Asia's strategy towards the rising China, however, realism and constructivism are more effective. Realism can best explain for ASEAN strategies of bandwagoning and hedging with the US against the rising China or with China while engagement belongs to constructivism.en_US
dc.rightsNanyang Technological Universityen_US
dc.subjectDRNTU::Social sciences::Political scienceen_US
dc.titleSoutheast Asia and the rising China : balancing or bandwagoning?en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.supervisorAcharya, Amitaven_US
dc.contributor.schoolS. Rajaratnam School of International Studiesen_US
dc.description.degreeMaster of Science (International Relations)en_US
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextrestricted-
Appears in Collections:RSIS Theses
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
RSIS-THESES_136.pdf
  Restricted Access
6.6 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

Page view(s) 50

395
Updated on Jan 26, 2021

Download(s)

10
Updated on Jan 26, 2021

Google ScholarTM

Check

Items in DR-NTU are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.