International regime theory assume s the hegemon's willingness and capability to be the necessary and sufficient conditions for creating regimes. The larger the power disparity between the hegemon and the subordinate countries, the better the conditions for regime formation will be. But in Asia-Pacific, regime formation has gained momentum since the U.S. hegemonic power began to decline. How do we explain the "anomaly" in Asia-Pacific cooperation? What distinct patterns of regime dynamics have demonstrated in this region? My central assumptions are first, Asia-Pacific regional cooperation is, to a great extent, determined by the respective postures of China and Japan as well as the nature of their bilateral relations; second, regime dynamics in this region can be better captured from the perspective of these two Asian indigenous major powers. I draw upon regime theory, constructivist arguments, and aspects of the traditional Chinese-dominated East Asian order to devise the theoretical frameworks for this study. These theoretical frameworks enable us to capture the fluidity and complexity that have characterized the process of Asia-Pacific regime creation. We find that China's great leap outward has facilitated an ideational change, bringing China closer to the rules, norms, and principles of regional economic regime. Yet China's cognitive support have been mixed and it has refrained from committing to any fora of regional cooperation. Similarly, Japan has adopted a minimalist approach to regional cooperation. Uncertainties and mixed feelings characterize Sino-Japanese relations. China and Japan have not formed and are unlikely to form a political partnership to forge an exclusively Asian bloc, nor have their bilateral relations evolved or are likely to evolve toward confrontation to effect the collapse of regional cooperation. Finally, I summarize how patterns of regime dynamics in Asia-Pacific can be identified and assessed by focusing on the category of the two Asian powers. I conclude that the embedded liberalism defining European-Atlantic regimes could never hold in Asia-Pacific. Regime dynamics in Asia-Pacific have proceeded and will continue to evolve in a fashion that reflects the distinctive power and cultural reality in this world arena.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--State University of New York at Buffalo, 1990. / Includes bibliographical references.

In 1993, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) held the first APEC Economic Leaders Meeting (AELM). Raising APEC interaction to the top track, the level of leaders, proved to be an effective and powerful dynamic; the AELM continues to meet annually and to shape APEC policy. The focus on the AELM as the source of vision and direction reinforces the pivotal importance of this political assemblage, reassures the populace that leaders do prevail and all is well: essential ingredients, according to Clifford Geertz, of political theater. The role of journalists, the contemporary scribes or critics, is to inform the audience of this political drama. The objective of this research is to demonstrate that real political value exists in the 'Staging of APEC' in terms of effective economic and political integration of benefit to broad regional interests. The findings draw on the results of a content analysis of news reports covering the first six years of the AELM (1993-1998). Formally, the AELM is an opportunity for regional political leaders to engage in regional policy formation outlined by the pillars of APEC (trade liberalization, facilitation and cooperation) guided by the principals of open regionalism and concerted unilateralism. Activity on the formal, or main stage, also flows to the small stage where leaders merge in a neutral venue. On this stage, leaders are free to examine distinctly non-economic, yet intersecting interests including domestic agendas, human rights and pluri-lateral security concerns. Together, these dual stages, neither one complete without the other, form the political theatre of APEC and provide the value added for the leaders and ultimately for the Asia – Pacific region.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Princeton University, 1995. / Includes bibliographical references.

In 1993, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) held the first APEC Economic Leaders Meeting (AELM). Raising APEC interaction to the top track, the level of leaders, proved to be an effective and powerful dynamic; the AELM continues to meet annually and to shape APEC policy. The focus on the AELM as the source of vision and direction reinforces the pivotal importance of this political assemblage, reassures the populace that leaders do prevail and all is well: essential ingredients, according to Clifford Geertz, of political theater. The role of journalists, the contemporary scribes or critics, is to inform the audience of this political drama. The objective of this research is to demonstrate that real political value exists in the 'Staging of APEC' in terms of effective economic and political integration of benefit to broad regional interests. The findings draw on the results of a content analysis of news reports covering the first six years of the AELM (1993-1998). Formally, the AELM is an opportunity for regional political leaders to engage in regional policy formation outlined by the pillars of APEC (trade liberalization, facilitation and cooperation) guided by the principals of open regionalism and concerted unilateralism. Activity on the formal, or main stage, also flows to the small stage where leaders merge in a neutral venue. On this stage, leaders are free to examine distinctly non-economic, yet intersecting interests including domestic agendas, human rights and pluri-lateral security concerns. Together, these dual stages, neither one complete without the other, form the political theatre of APEC and provide the value added for the leaders and ultimately for the Asia – Pacific region. / Arts, Faculty of / Asian Research, Institute of / Graduate

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Western Michigan University, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 164-178).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Temple University, 1995. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 96-102).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Northwestern University, 1989. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 131-139).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Arizona, 1995. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 298-325).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Canterbury, 2006. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 222-233). Also available via the World Wide Web.