Economic or Cultural Encirclement? Differential Association in the Strategic Management of Multinational Asian and European Corporations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is emerging what may be considered to be an upheaval (known in international relations as a deracinement) in strategic diplomatic, economic, intelligence, military, and trade alliances across East Asia and South Asia, followed by Eastern Europe and the Middle East, with India and Japan veering toward the Russian Federation and away from their more traditional partners: United States and Europe, and the Russian Federation unilaterally recapturing the Crimean Peninsula by force from the Republic of Ukraine. The extent to which this political and economic upheaval is likely to exert an impact upon trade relations as well as military alliances between affected countries and the West is the research focus of this article. The research question here is whether this deracinement is likely to influence changes in strategic alliances between companies in all Asian countries including the Eurasian Russian Federation and corporations in the West, not only involving those countries that are changing alliances but also China, India, and Russia (“RIC” bloc without Brasil and South Africa) and members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), in addition to American, Canadian, and European companies, in reaction, with the conclusion being that this is likely. This paper draws upon current literature in global news reports plus the author’s participant observation. The aim of this paper is to identify reasons why this scenario is emerging, why at this moment, drawing on a theory of differential association applied from other disciplines: Asian countries will construct or abandon strategic corporate alliances depending upon their perception of an excess of definitions favorable or unfavorable to changing political alliances, and many American and European firms will do the same. What are such definitions? What will most likely be the economic, political, even military consequences of this sort of realignment? Is “encirclement” the primary cause or the primary effect? This paper argues that encirclement is both cause and effect, encirclement begets more encirclement, as countries and also companies from those countries tend to align and realign culturally then economically in what one might characterise as being a “two-tailed” pattern.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".