Structural change in Asia among India, China, and Pakistan has been intense and is directly associated with the instability that has resulted. As these governments move forward on their regional and global power cycles, what points of non-linearity (critical points) yet await the region and the larger system, and with what effect? The article calls for management of the foreign policy role such that comparative calm is sustained in the midst of structural change and uncertainty.
Bertsch, Gary K. , Seema Gulati and Anupam Srivastava, eds (1999). Engaging India: us Strategic Relations with the World's Largest Democracy. New York: Routledge.
2.
Chan, S. (1990). East Asian Dynamism: Growth, Order, and Security in the Pacific Region. Boulder, co: Westview Press.
3.
Doran, C.F. (1971). The Politics of Assimilation: Hegemony and Its Aftermath. Baltimore, md: Johns Hopkins University Press.
4.
Doran, C.F. (1991). Systems in Crisis: New Imperatives of High Politics at Century's End. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Doran, C.F. (1995). “The Power Cycle and Peaceful Change.” In Beyond Confrontation (J.A. Vasquez, et al., eds), 179-198. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
6.
Doran, C.F. (2000). “Economics, Philosophy of History, and the `Single Dynamic' of Power Cycle Theory (Market Share): Implications for Asian Power Cycles.” Paper, 18th World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Quebec.
7.
Doran, C.F. and S. Kumar (1998). “Asian Power Cycles: Establishing the Levels and Trajectories of Power.” Paper, Joint Meeting of the Third Pan-European International Relations Conference and the International Studies Association, Vienna, Austria, 16-19 September.
8.
Garver, John W.L. (2001). Protracted Contest: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the 20th Century. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
9.
Haggard, S. and B.A. Simmons (1987). “Theories of International Regimes.”International Organization, 41(3): 491-517.
10.
Jervis, R. (1978). “Cooperation Under the Security Dilemma.”World Politics, 30 (January): 58-79.
11.
Keohane, R. (1982). “The Demand for International Regimes.”International Organization, 36(2): 325-355.
12.
Kim, Samuel S. (1994). China and the World: Chinese Foreign Relations in the Post-Cold War Era. Boulder, co: Westview Press.
13.
Kissinger, H. (2001). Does America Need a Foreign Policy? Toward a Diplomacy for the 21st Century, 153-160 especially. New York: Simon and Schuster.
14.
Kumar, S. (1997). “Tracing Asian Power Cycles: India, Pakistan, China.” Paper, 17th World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Seoul.
15.
Leng, R.J. (2000). Bargaining and Learning in Recurring Crises: The Soviet-American, Egyptian-Israeli, and Indo-Pakistani Rivalries. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
16.
Martin, L. (1992). “Interest, Power, and Multilateralism.”International Organization, 46(autumn): 765-792.
17.
Ranganathan, C.V. (1999) “Sino-Indian Negotiations.” Paper International Seminar on Cooperation in South Asia on Resolution of Inter-State Conflicts, at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
18.
Ruggie, G. (1992). “Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution.”International Organization, 46Summer: 561-598.
19.
Synnott, H. (1999). “The Causes and Consequences of South Asia's Nuclear Tests.”Adelphi Papers, No. 32. London: International Institute of Strategic Studies.
20.
Wolf, Charles, Jr , K.C. Yeh, Anil Bamezai, Donald P. Henry, and Michael Kennedy (1995). Long-Term Economic and Military, Trends, 1994-2015: United States and Asia. Santa Monica: rand.
21.
Zhang Wenmu (1999). “prc's Future Security Viewed.” Paper, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
