英语翻译Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye (1977) argued that contemp

英语翻译Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye (1977) argued that contemporary international politics is a mosaic,composed of different issue areas each of which is characterized by diversified interdependent relations.As it is difficult to coordinate all these distinct interactions,relations among different issue areas have to be guided through institutions and regimes.Within them,countries can opt for coordinating their behaviors as cooperation becomes necessary.Indeed,thanks to institutions and regimes there are rules and regulations acknowledged,accepted,and abided by every country.According to the interdependence theorists,the relatively recent development of several international institutions in Asia,such as APEC,ASEAN,SCO,SAARC,and ARF,can be interpreted as a consciousness raising from Asian countries of the benefits they can experience deciding to coordinate their behaviors with the help of a suprastate body.①Within these institutions,Asian and non-Asian countries are currently demonstrating that it is possible to achieve agreements and compromises on several issues and,as a consequence,deepen integration and interrelation among them in a peaceful and consensus-based way.The neorealists contrasted this picture with the hegemonic-stability theory.This theory gains more influence in the Asian scenario as the four countries this paper is taking into consideration,China,India,Pakistan,and the United States,are playing a careful role within these institutions.First outlined by Charles Kindleberger (1973),who identified the reasons of the depression of the 1930s in the lack of a stabilizing power,such as a leader state burdening the recession costs,this theory was expanded upon by Robert Gilpin (1981).② Gilpin argued that the international system can be in balance only when no state considers convenient changing it.Usually,the balance is guaranteed by the strongest country.However,the costs for maintaining the status quo can be very high,and sometimes they can become even higher than what the strongest country can effectively stand.In such a condition,if the equilibrium is not immediately and effectively restored,a hegemonic war can occur,ending in a new balance.Gilpin identified a set of three factors that can foreshadow a potential hegemonic war:a differential growth of power between countries,environmental variables (economic and technologic factors or infrastructure differences),and divergent internal variables.③ Any change in the balance of these factors can disturb or even smash the existing order; therefore a hegemonic war can break out ending with a new hegemon assuming the control of the new status quo.