Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Admission into the Great-Power Club
- 2 Managing Rising Powers: The Role of Status Concerns
- 3 Status Considerations in International Politics and the Rise of Regional Powers
- 4 Status Is Cultural: Durkheimian Poles and Weberian Russians Seek Great-Power Status
- Part III Status Signaling
- Part IV International Institutions and Status
- Part V Status, Authority, and Structure
- Part VI Conclusions
- Index
- References
2 - Managing Rising Powers: The Role of Status Concerns
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Admission into the Great-Power Club
- 2 Managing Rising Powers: The Role of Status Concerns
- 3 Status Considerations in International Politics and the Rise of Regional Powers
- 4 Status Is Cultural: Durkheimian Poles and Weberian Russians Seek Great-Power Status
- Part III Status Signaling
- Part IV International Institutions and Status
- Part V Status, Authority, and Structure
- Part VI Conclusions
- Index
- References
Summary
The Emergence of Rising Powers
At the December 2009 Copenhagen meeting on climate change, when President Barack Obama arrived for a hastily arranged bilateral meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, he was faced with not only Premier Wen but also the heads of the governments of Brazil, South Africa, and India. As a further snub, the president was subjected to a finger-wagging harangue by a lower-level Chinese official. At least President Obama was allowed into the room; Europeans were shut out while Obama and the emerging markets negotiated.
The Copenhagen climate change conference illustrates how the United States and Europe can no longer decide global issues alone but often need the approval of new powers such as Brazil, India, China, and Turkey: emerging powers that have distinctive national interests and may not be amenable to accepting arrangements drafted by the established powers. The diffusion of power reflects three decades of stunning economic growth in China, followed closely by India’s emergence as a major economic power and the enrichment of commodity producers such as Russia and Brazil due to the increasing demand for raw materials and energy. The redistribution of economic power was dramatized by the 2008–2009 financial crisis, when emerging markets continued to grow while the more advanced states sputtered. In order to sort out the problems created by the financial crisis, in 2008 the Group of 7 (G7) finance ministers dominated by the Western countries and Japan was replaced by the Group of 20 (G20), which includes India, China, and South Africa. In 2003, Goldman Sachs famously predicted that Brazil, Russia, India, and China (the BRIC) would surpass the share of global GDP of the Group of 6 (G6) by 2040, a prediction that now appears too conservative, as the financial institution has moved up the date for Brazil, Russia, India, and China (the BRIC) to outdo the G7 to 2032.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Status in World Politics , pp. 33 - 57Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
and , Dreaming with BRICS: The Path to 2050, Global Economic Paper No. 99 (New York: Goldman Sachs, October 2003), 4Google Scholar
, “The Psychological Structure of Intergroup Relations,” in Differentiation between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, ed. (London: Academic Press, 1978), 27–98Google Scholar
and , “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict,” in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, eds. and (Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1979), 33–47Google Scholar
, Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982)Google Scholar
, “Intergroup Differences in Group Perceptions,” in The Social Dimension: European Developments in Social Psychology, vol. 2, ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984) 560–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations and Group Processes (London: Routledge, 1988)Google Scholar
, “Anarchy and Identity,”International Organization 49, no. 2 (Spring 1995), 229–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Shortcut to Greatness: The New Thinking and the Revolution in Soviet Foreign Policy,”International Organization 57, no. 1 (Winter 2003), 77–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Social Construction of Russia’s Resurgence: Aspirations, Identity, and Security Interests (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009)Google Scholar
and , “Status Seekers: Chinese and Russian Responses to U.S. Primacy,”International Security 34, no. 4 (Spring 2010), 63–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Social Identity Theory,” in Contemporary Social Psychological Theories, ed. (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006), 111–136Google Scholar
, Zero-Sum World: Politics, Power and Prosperity after the Crash (London: Atlantic Books, 2010)Google Scholar
, “Irresponsible Stakeholders? The Difficulty of Integrating Rising Powers,”Foreign Affairs 89, no. 5 (November/December 2010), 47–48Google Scholar
, “For Syria, Reliant on Russia for Weapons and Food, Old Bonds Run Deep,”New York Times, February 19, 2012, 11Google Scholar
and , “Delhi Resists Rising Western Pressure to Toe Line on Tehran Sanctions,”Financial Times, March 2, 2012, 4Google Scholar
, War and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 30–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Atomic Energy Policy in France under the Fourth Republic (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1965), xvii-xviii, 216–217Google Scholar
, French Nuclear Diplomacy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1971), 35, 150–156Google Scholar
, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons? Three Models in Search of a Bomb,”International Security 21, no. 3 (Winter 1996/1997), 76–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
et al., Power Transitions: Strategies for the 21st Century (New York: Chatham House Publishers, 2000), 35Google Scholar
and , “‘Compared to What?’ Comparison Choice in an Internation Context,”European Journal of Social Psychology 29, no. 1 (February 1999), 31–423.0.CO;2-6>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Weberian Sociological Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 162–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Strategies in Intergroup Relations,” in Group Motivation: Social Psychological Perspectives, eds. and (New York: Harvester/Wheatsheaf, 1993), 21Google Scholar
, A Cultural Theory of International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , “The Influence of Permeability of Group Boundaries and Stability of Group Status on Strategies of Individual Mobility and Social Change,”British Journal of Social Psychology 29, no. 3 (September 1990), 233–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Ethnic Politics in Europe: The Power of Norms and Incentives (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004)Google Scholar
, “The Prestige Factor in International Affairs,”International Affairs 51, no. 2 (April 1975), 190–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Influence of Socio-structural Variables on Identity Management Strategies,”European Review of Social Psychology 4, no. 1 (1993), 27–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Social Comparison and Social Identity: Some Prospects for Intergroup Behavior,”European Journal of Social Psychology 5, no. 1 (March 1975), 5–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Mahan, a ‘Place in the Sun,’ and Germany’s Quest for Sea Power,”Comparative Strategy 23, no. 1 (January–March 2004), 52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Stalin Years: The Soviet Union 1929–1953 (Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1998), 31Google Scholar
, “Social Differentiation and Social Originality,”European Journal of Social Psychology 4, no. 1 (January/March 1974), 17–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Choosing the Right Pond: Human Behavior and the Quest for Status (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 23–30Google Scholar
, Luxury Fever: Why Money Fails to Satisfy in an Era of Excess (New York: Free Press, 1999), chapter 9Google Scholar
, Darwin, Sex, and Status: Biological Approaches to Mind and Culture (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), 187–191Google Scholar
, “Identity and Conflict in Sino-American Relations,” in New Directions in the Study of China’s Foreign Policy, eds. and (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006), 325Google Scholar
, “To Build a ‘Harmonious World’: China’s Soft Power Wielding in the Global South,”Journal of Chinese Political Science 13, no. 2 (August 2008), 193–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Discourse of China‘s Soft Power and its Discontents,” in Soft Power: China’s Emerging Strategy in International Politics, ed. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009), 51, 60nGoogle Scholar
, The Slavophile Controversy: History of a Conservative Utopia in Nineteenth-Century Russian Thought, trans. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1989), 166Google Scholar
, The Agony of the Russian Idea (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), 24–25, 44Google Scholar
and , “Power and Status Differentials in Minority and Majority Intergroup Relations,”European Journal of Social Psychology 21, no. 1 (January 1991), 1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , “Suffering from the Possibility of Status Loss: Physiological Responses to Social Identity Threat in High Status Groups,”European Journal of Social Psychology 39, no. 6 (October 2009), 1075–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “When the Pressure is Up: The Assessment of Social Identity Threat in Low and High Status Groups,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 41, no. 2 (March 2005), 192–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Emotion, Social Theory, and Social Structure (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 161–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Collective Self-esteem Consequences of Out-Group Derogation When a Valued Social Identity is On Trial,”European Journal of Social Psychology 24, no. 6 (November–December 1994), 641–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference Dependent Model,”Quarterly Journal of Economics 106, no. 4 (November 1991), 1039–1061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Status, Power and Ritual Interaction: A Relational Reading of Durkheim, Goffman, and Collins (Burlington: Ashgate, 2011), 18Google Scholar
and , “’Different’ Just Means ‘Better’: Some Obvious and Some Hidden Pathways to In-group Favouritism,”British Journal of Social Psychology 23, no. 4 (November 1984), 363–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , “Intergroup Emotions: Explaining Offensive Action Tendencies in an Intergroup Context,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79, no. 4 (October 2000), 602–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “India, An Emerging Power, but How Far” in Emerging States: The Wellspring of a New World Order, ed. , trans. (London: Hurst, 2008), 88–89Google Scholar
, “India’s Approach to Great-Power Status,”The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs 35, no. 1 (Winter 2011), 61–89Google Scholar
and , India in the World Order: Searching for Major-Power Status (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 133Google Scholar
, China at the Center: 300 Years of Foreign Policy (New York: Free Press, 1984), 421–422Google Scholar
, India and the United States: Estranged Democracies, 1941–1991 (Washington, D.C.: National Defense University Press, 1992), 121, 123Google Scholar
, The Sino-Indian Border Dispute and Sino-Indian Relations (Lanham: University Press of America, 1994), 26–36Google Scholar
, “The Soviet Union’s Partnership with India,”Journal of Cold War Studies 12, no.3 (Summer 2010), 50–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Crossing the Rubicon: The Shaping of India’s New Foreign Policy (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), xv, 149–150Google Scholar
, In Spite of the Gods: The Rise of Modern India (New York: Anchor Books, 2007), 27n, 39Google Scholar
, India’s Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 441, 448–449Google Scholar
, Engaging India: Diplomacy, Democracy, and the Bomb (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2004), 58Google Scholar
and , “India: Rising Power or a Mere Revolution of Rising Expectations?”Polity 42, no. 1 (January 2010), 90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Is India a Responsible Great Power?”Third World Quarterly 32, no. 9 (October 2011), 1610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “The Pragmatic Challenge to Indian Foreign Policy,”The Washington Quarterly 34, no. 2 (Spring 2011), 148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Rising India: Partner in Shaping the Global Commons?”The Washington Quarterly 33, no. 3 (July 2010), 140Google Scholar
, “Peculiar Chauvinism or Strategic Calculation? Explaining the Negotiating Strategy of a Rising India,”International Affairs 82, no. 1 (January 2006), 72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “A New Politics of Confrontation? Brazil and India in Multilateral Trade Negotiations,”Global Society 20, no. 4 (October 2006), 415–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Brazil as an Intermediate State and Regional Power: Action, Choice, and Responsibilities,”International Affairs 82, no. 1 (January 2006), 21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Brazil: The Burden of the Past: The Promise of the Future,”Daedalus 129, no. 2 (Spring 2000), 65–68Google Scholar
, “Brazil: What Kind of Rising State in What Kind of Institutional Order?” in Rising States, Rising Institutions, eds. and (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2010), 133Google Scholar
and , “Brazil: To Be Or Not to Be a BRIC?”Asian Perspective 31, no. 4 (October 2007), 46Google Scholar
, Starting Over: Brazil Since 1985 (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2011), 164–165Google Scholar
, “Building Trust and Flexibility: A Brazilian View of the Fuel Swap with Iran,”The Washington Quarterly 34, no. 2 (Spring 2011), 62Google Scholar
and , “Decoding Turkish Foreign Policy Hyperactivity,”Washington Quarterly 33, no. 4 (October 2010), 76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “An Unlikely Trio: Can Iran, Turkey, and the United States Become Allies,”Foreign Affairs 89, no. 5 (September/October 2010), 129Google Scholar
- 35
- Cited by