Beyond Power Transitions
Questions about the likelihood of conflict between the United States and China have dominated international policy discussion for years. But the leading theory of power transitions between a declining hegemon and a rising rival is based exclusively on European examples, such as the Peloponnesian War, as chronicled by Thucydides, as well as the rise of Germany under Bismarck and the Anglo-German rivalry of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. What lessons does East Asian history offer for both the power transitions debate and the future of U.S.-China relations?
Examining the rise and fall of East Asian powers over 1,500 years, Beyond Power Transitions offers a new perspective on the forces that shape war and peace. Xinru Ma and David C. Kang argue that focusing on the East Asian experience underscores domestic risks and constraints on great powers, not relative rise and decline in international competition. They find that almost every regime transition before the twentieth century was instigated by internal challenges, and even the exceptions deviated markedly from the predictions of power transition theory. Instead, East Asia was stable for a remarkably long time despite massive power differences because of common understandings about countries’ relative status. Provocative and incisive, this book challenges prevailing assumptions about the universality of power transition theory and shows why East Asian history has profound implications for international affairs today.
About the Authors
Xinru Ma is a Research Fellow on the Stanford Next Asia Policy Lab research team at Stanford University’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center. Her scholarship focuses on nationalism, great power politics, and East Asian security.
David C. Kang is Maria Crutcher Professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California, where he also directs the Korean Studies Institute. His Columbia University Press books include East Asia Before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute (2010) and, with Victor D. Cha, Nuclear North Korea: A Debate on Engagement Strategies (revised and updated edition, 2018).
Book Review
By Stefan Messingschlager, Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg, Germany
International Studies Review, Volume 28, Issue 1, March 2026
"Beyond Power Transitions distinguishes itself through its theoretical originality, empirical rigor, and incisive critique of dominant IR paradigms. By adeptly integrating meticulous historical scholarship with critical theoretical insights, Ma and Kang not only challenge entrenched Eurocentric perspectives but significantly advance discourse on the normative underpinnings of international stability."
Extract
Amid escalating geopolitical tensions between the USA and China, Xinru Ma and David C. Kang’s Beyond Power Transitions thoughtfully engages one of the most pivotal contemporary debates in International Relations (IR): How can shifts between established and rising powers be conceptualized without presuming an inevitable conflict? Critically examining “power transition theory”—a paradigm famously articulated by A.F.K. Organski and recently popularized through Graham Allison’s concept of the “Thucydides Trap,” which contends that rapid shifts in relative power between a declining hegemon and an ascending challenger significantly heighten the risk of war—Ma and Kang persuasively argue that the theory’s predominantly materialist and Eurocentric foundations severely limit its explanatory power beyond Western historical contexts. By disproportionately emphasizing cases such as the Anglo-German rivalry of the late nineteenth century, traditional analyses systematically obscure alternative historical experiences and non-Western mechanisms for managing power shifts.
To redress this imbalance, Ma and Kang propose a theoretical recalibration that emphasizes the crucial role of normative and culturally embedded structures in managing interstate relations (Chapter 1). Central to their reconceptualization is the innovative notion of the “common conjecture,” defined as a socially constructed consensus among East Asian states regarding legitimate leadership roles, recognized hierarchies, and accepted status positions within the regional order (p. 5). Significantly, the authors stress that this normative consensus was not merely an abstract ideal but rather a concretely institutionalized system maintained through culturally embedded diplomatic rituals and tributary practices. Korea’s regular tribute missions to the Ming and Qing courts, involving highly formalized ceremonies, exemplify how these normative practices symbolically enacted legitimacy and mutual recognition, thereby actively reinforcing and stabilizing regional hierarchies. Ma and Kang convincingly argue that these normative frameworks functioned as “snap-back mechanisms,” effectively restoring regional stability after major disruptions, such as dynastic transitions or external invasions. Additionally, they underscore the strategic agency exercised by smaller states within these normative orders, demonstrating how such actors carefully balanced hierarchical obligations with their own political autonomy—thus highlighting the tangible political significance and practical effectiveness of normative diplomacy.
The Lessons of East Asian History and the Future of U.S.-China Relations
