Social Psychology and the Identity-Conflict Debate: Is a ‘China Threat’ Inevitable?

Are the relations among nations inevitably conflictual? Neorealism and neoliberalism share the rationalist assumption that states are self-regarding, but debate over whether states pursue relative or absolute gains. Scholars focusing on identity have recently joined the controversy. Wendt (1992) has argued against the realists that conflict is not the inevitable product of anarchy. Drawing on social psychology to defend realism, Mercer (1995) has countered that conflict is ‘an inescapable feature of... interstate relations’. This paper argues that international identity dynamics do not inexorably lead to competition, let alone conflict. Mercer’s pessimism is unwarranted. Drawing on social identity theory (SIT), it argues that intergroup conflict is a highly contingent outcome, and that social psychology provides insights into when the realists are right, and when the liberals are. Utilizing examples from Sino-American relations, the paper also seeks to contribute to the stalemated debate in the China field between optimists and pessimists over the existence of a ‘China threat’.