Conflict in transpolital relations: The cases of the Chinas and the Koreas

This dissertation, using a comparative historical approach, tries to study conflict in the relationship between the PRC and the ROC between 1949 and 1993 and between the DPRK and the ROK between 1948 and 1993. It asserts that the relationship between these entities is neither international relations nor domestic relations but political relations sui generis. They are termed transpolital relations in this dissertation which refer to relations between political entities which have the characteristics of both international and domestic relations but are neither pure and simple. It is argued that transpolital relations are generally more volatile, more prone to conflict and more difficult to manage for the relevant parties than ordinary international or domestic relations. The main reason for this is the lack of institutions international or domestic which are designed to control conflict in such relations as most international and domestic institutions do not concern themselves with transpolital relations. The three main types of conflict in transpolital relations studied are the military conflict, competition for national legitimacy and competition for international legitimacy, the second and the third being conflict peculiar to transpolital relations. The history of these different types of conflict is periodized and the main patterns of interactions such as Fight, Standoff, Put-down and Disengagement are identified to facilitate analysis. Through comparing the Chinese case with the Korean case, an effort is made to account for the different patterns and levels of conflict. Such variables as geography, local balance of power, regional and global balance of power, and political leadership type within the four entities are given particular attention. It is found that the U.S. has played a major role in the control of conflict in the transpolital relations under study. This is done either through contributing to the defensive and deterrent capacity of one side as in the Korean case during the best part of the history of that conflict or through having good relations with both sides as in the Chinese case since the beginning of the 1970s.