ABSTRACT
This chapter considers competing theoretical perspectives which have provided a basis for analysis of the 1994 decision regarding China's human rights practices and Most-Favored-Nation. The literature review places the opinions of analysts within the context of the competing schools of thought of realism, liberalism, and radicalism, with specific focus given to U. S. China policy. As in realism, liberal thought extends across both political and economic spheres. Unlike realism, which claims that morality is relative and subject to the interpretations of different societies, morality in liberalism is thought to be absolute. Radicalism's strength may also be in its ability to explain U. S. foreign economic policy failures. Radicalism neglects to consider such broader international interests as international regimes, international organizations, and a global economic interdependence of nations that result in international cooperation rather than immisseration.
