Dalton Lin
Assistant Professor
- Sam Nunn School of International Affairs
- Center for International Strategy, Technology, and Policy
Overview
Dalton Lin is a political scientist specializing in theories of international relations and foreign policy. His research interests focus on theorizing the bargaining between major and lesser countries in international politics, with an area focus on China and East Asia. He is a research associate with the China Research Center and founder of the Taiwan Security Issues. Before joining Georgia Tech, he was a Postdoctoral Research Fellow with the Princeton-Harvard China and the World Program at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University. He received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
- Ph.D. University of Wisconsin-Madison
Distinctions:
- Faculty Excellence in Research Award for Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2024-2025
- Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation for International Scholarly Exchange, Scholar Grants, 2024-2025
- Student Recognition of Excellence in Teaching: Class of 1934 CIOS Honor Roll, Georgia Institute of Technology, Fall 2021
- Student Recognition of Excellence in Teaching: Class of 1934 CIOS Honor Roll, Georgia Institute of Technology, Spring 2021
- Student Recognition of Excellence in Teaching: Class of 1934 CIOS Honor Roll, Georgia Institute of Technology, Fall 2020
- Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation for International Scholarly Exchange, Dissertation Fellowships, 2011-2012
- Government Scholarship for Study Abroad, Ministry of Education, Taiwan, 2011
- Fulbright Fellow, U.S. Department of State, 2005-2007
Expertise:
- China
- East Asia Security
- Foreign Policy
- International Relations
Interests
- International Security Policy
- Regional Security Challenges
Focuses:
- Asia (East)
- Armed Conflict
- Foreign Policy
- Politics
Courses
- INTA-1110: Intro to Int'l Relations
- INTA-2100: Great Power Relations
- INTA-2120: Intro to Intl Security
- INTA-2698: Research Assistantship
- INTA-3130: Foreign Policy of China
- INTA-3131: Pacific Security Issues
- INTA-4101: Vietnam War Politics
- INTA-4500: INTA Pro-Seminar
- INTA-6103: International Security
- INTA-6131: Pacific Security Issues
- INTA-8803: Special Topics
Publications
Selected Publications
Books
- Geopolitics and China's Patronage Strategy: The Wary Patron, the Autonomous Client, and the Vietnam War
In: Routledge Politics in Asia Series [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2025
China’s pursuit of geopolitical influence through patronage transfers such as the BRI has generated significant academic and policy interest. Geopolitics and China’s Patronage Strategy explains China's patronage strategy using two themes: the limited resources of a great-power patron and the agency of client countries in patron-client relations. In an effective patron-client relationship, the patron must agree to give, but the client also must agree to accept. The book highlights how neighboring countries’ domestic politics play a role in accepting a patron’s patronage, impacting their willingness to exchange geopolitical allegiances for patronage benefits and the costs involved in patronage transfers. Since China has no complete control over the domestic politics of peripheral countries, the costs and uncertainty of patronage transfers influence Beijing’s decisions. The book debunks the myths construed by China’s rhetoric of benevolence or the West's accusations of reckless acquisition. Instead, the agency of neighboring regimes and the resource constraints amid geopolitical competition incentivize Beijing to be a wary patron in its periphery!
Journal Articles
- The Belt and Road Initiative and China's Pursuit of Agenda-Setting Power
In: Orbis [Peer Reviewed]
Date: September 2023
The US-led, rules-based order enables China to pursue a peaceful international power transition by leveraging the agenda-setting power. The agenda that China proposes is development, and the lever to promote the agenda is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The BRI helps China publicize the development agenda, co-opt the existing US-led system, showcase China’s material success, legitimize its creation of new international institutions, and attract supporters of its calls to revise the current US-led order. Since Washington wants to avoid its competition with China turning apocalyptic, the most sensible US countermeasure is keeping China inside this rules-based order and competing to set its agenda.
View All Details about The Belt and Road Initiative and China's Pursuit of Agenda-Setting Power
- The “One China" Framework at 50 (1972–2022): The Myth of “Consensus” and Its Evolving Policy Significance
In: The China Quarterly [Peer Reviewed]
Date: December 2022
This lead article surveys the history and evolving policy legacies of the “one China” framework 50 years after US President Richard Nixon's historic 1972 visit to China. It begins by introducing key concepts and highlighting the crucial difference between Beijing's self-defined “one-China principle” and the US's, Japan's and key other countries’ variable “one China” policies as it relates to Taiwan. It argues that three seminal 1970s developments consolidated the “one China” framework as an informal institution of international politics. The ambiguity baked in by Cold War-era geopolitical necessity provided flexibility sufficient to enable diplomatic breakthroughs between erstwhile adversaries, but also planted seeds for deepening contestation and frictions today. Recent developments – especially Taiwan's democratization and Beijing's increasingly bold and proactive assertion of its claim to sovereignty over Taiwan – have transformed incentive structures in Taipei and for its major international partners. The net effect is that the myth of “consensus” and the ambiguities enabling the framework's half-century of success face unprecedented challenges today.
本篇专节的首文回顾了尼克松 1972 年历史性访华 50 年后，“一个中国”框架的发展和政策遗产。它首先定义几个贯串专节的关键概念，重点强调了中华人民共和国政府主张的“一个中国原则”与美国、日本和其他主要国家的“一个中国”政策之间的关键区别。本文指出 1970 年代三个开创性的发展如何巩固了“一个中国”框架作为国际政治的非正式机制。“一个中国”框架内含的模糊性为昔日冷战对手之间的外交突破提供了足够的灵活性，但也为今日升高的竞争和摩擦埋下了种子。最终结果是，支撑该框架半个世纪成功的模糊性现正面临着前所未有的挑战。
- “One China” and the Cross-Taiwan Strait Commitment Problem
In: The China Quarterly [Peer Reviewed]
Date: December 2022
Fifty years after the current “one China” framework emerged in international politics, the cross-Taiwan Strait “one China” dispute has transformed from its historical nature of indivisible sovereignty. As Taipei has stopped competing internationally to represent “China” since 1991, Beijing now worries that compromising its “one-China principle” in cross-Strait reconciliation would enhance Taiwan's separate statehood internationally and enable the island to push towards de jure independence. In contrast, Taipei worries that any perceived concessions on the question of “one China” would enhance China's sovereignty claim over Taiwan and enable Beijing to push for unification coercively with fewer concerns about international backlash. Improved cross-Strait relations thus rely on circumventing this quintessential commitment problem in international politics.
在现今的 “一个中国” 框架出现在国际政治中 50 年后，台湾海峡两岸的 “一个中国” 争端已经从主权不可分割的历史性质转变。由于台北自 1991 年以来已经停止在国际上竞争 “中国代表权”，北京现在担心，在两岸和解中损害其 “一个中国原则” 将加强台湾在国际上的独立国家地位，并使该岛能够推动法理独立。相对的，台北则担心任何在 “一个中国” 问题上的让步都会增强中国对台湾的主权主张，并使北京能够强制推动统一，而不必担心国际反弹。因此，改善两岸关系有赖于规避国际政治中这一个典型的承诺问题。
View All Details about “One China” and the Cross-Taiwan Strait Commitment Problem
All Publications
Books
- Geopolitics and China's Patronage Strategy: The Wary Patron, the Autonomous Client, and the Vietnam War
In: Routledge Politics in Asia Series [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2025
China’s pursuit of geopolitical influence through patronage transfers such as the BRI has generated significant academic and policy interest. Geopolitics and China’s Patronage Strategy explains China's patronage strategy using two themes: the limited resources of a great-power patron and the agency of client countries in patron-client relations. In an effective patron-client relationship, the patron must agree to give, but the client also must agree to accept. The book highlights how neighboring countries’ domestic politics play a role in accepting a patron’s patronage, impacting their willingness to exchange geopolitical allegiances for patronage benefits and the costs involved in patronage transfers. Since China has no complete control over the domestic politics of peripheral countries, the costs and uncertainty of patronage transfers influence Beijing’s decisions. The book debunks the myths construed by China’s rhetoric of benevolence or the West's accusations of reckless acquisition. Instead, the agency of neighboring regimes and the resource constraints amid geopolitical competition incentivize Beijing to be a wary patron in its periphery!
Journal Articles
- The Belt and Road Initiative and China's Pursuit of Agenda-Setting Power
In: Orbis [Peer Reviewed]
Date: September 2023
The US-led, rules-based order enables China to pursue a peaceful international power transition by leveraging the agenda-setting power. The agenda that China proposes is development, and the lever to promote the agenda is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The BRI helps China publicize the development agenda, co-opt the existing US-led system, showcase China’s material success, legitimize its creation of new international institutions, and attract supporters of its calls to revise the current US-led order. Since Washington wants to avoid its competition with China turning apocalyptic, the most sensible US countermeasure is keeping China inside this rules-based order and competing to set its agenda.
View All Details about The Belt and Road Initiative and China's Pursuit of Agenda-Setting Power
- The “One China" Framework at 50 (1972–2022): The Myth of “Consensus” and Its Evolving Policy Significance
In: The China Quarterly [Peer Reviewed]
Date: December 2022
This lead article surveys the history and evolving policy legacies of the “one China” framework 50 years after US President Richard Nixon's historic 1972 visit to China. It begins by introducing key concepts and highlighting the crucial difference between Beijing's self-defined “one-China principle” and the US's, Japan's and key other countries’ variable “one China” policies as it relates to Taiwan. It argues that three seminal 1970s developments consolidated the “one China” framework as an informal institution of international politics. The ambiguity baked in by Cold War-era geopolitical necessity provided flexibility sufficient to enable diplomatic breakthroughs between erstwhile adversaries, but also planted seeds for deepening contestation and frictions today. Recent developments – especially Taiwan's democratization and Beijing's increasingly bold and proactive assertion of its claim to sovereignty over Taiwan – have transformed incentive structures in Taipei and for its major international partners. The net effect is that the myth of “consensus” and the ambiguities enabling the framework's half-century of success face unprecedented challenges today.
本篇专节的首文回顾了尼克松 1972 年历史性访华 50 年后，“一个中国”框架的发展和政策遗产。它首先定义几个贯串专节的关键概念，重点强调了中华人民共和国政府主张的“一个中国原则”与美国、日本和其他主要国家的“一个中国”政策之间的关键区别。本文指出 1970 年代三个开创性的发展如何巩固了“一个中国”框架作为国际政治的非正式机制。“一个中国”框架内含的模糊性为昔日冷战对手之间的外交突破提供了足够的灵活性，但也为今日升高的竞争和摩擦埋下了种子。最终结果是，支撑该框架半个世纪成功的模糊性现正面临着前所未有的挑战。
- “One China” and the Cross-Taiwan Strait Commitment Problem
In: The China Quarterly [Peer Reviewed]
Date: December 2022
Fifty years after the current “one China” framework emerged in international politics, the cross-Taiwan Strait “one China” dispute has transformed from its historical nature of indivisible sovereignty. As Taipei has stopped competing internationally to represent “China” since 1991, Beijing now worries that compromising its “one-China principle” in cross-Strait reconciliation would enhance Taiwan's separate statehood internationally and enable the island to push towards de jure independence. In contrast, Taipei worries that any perceived concessions on the question of “one China” would enhance China's sovereignty claim over Taiwan and enable Beijing to push for unification coercively with fewer concerns about international backlash. Improved cross-Strait relations thus rely on circumventing this quintessential commitment problem in international politics.
在现今的 “一个中国” 框架出现在国际政治中 50 年后，台湾海峡两岸的 “一个中国” 争端已经从主权不可分割的历史性质转变。由于台北自 1991 年以来已经停止在国际上竞争 “中国代表权”，北京现在担心，在两岸和解中损害其 “一个中国原则” 将加强台湾在国际上的独立国家地位，并使该岛能够推动法理独立。相对的，台北则担心任何在 “一个中国” 问题上的让步都会增强中国对台湾的主权主张，并使北京能够强制推动统一，而不必担心国际反弹。因此，改善两岸关系有赖于规避国际政治中这一个典型的承诺问题。
View All Details about “One China” and the Cross-Taiwan Strait Commitment Problem
- Rebalancing Taiwan-US Relations
In: Survival [Peer Reviewed]
Date: November 2015
Journal - Editors
- Special Section: The “One China” Framework and International Politics
In: The China Quarterly [Peer Reviewed]
Date: September 2022
View All Details about Special Section: The “One China” Framework and International Politics
Chapters
- Destined for War? U.S.-China Relations
In: Benjamin Ho (eds.), Jiegou Meiguo: Shijie Baquan de Guoqv, Xianzai yu Weilai [Deconstructing America: The Past, Present, and Future of the World Hegemon]
Date: May 2024
View All Details about Destined for War? U.S.-China Relations
- The Political Economy of China s "Belt and Road Initiative"
In: Lowell Dittmer (ed.), China's Political Economy in the Xi Jinping Epoch [Peer Reviewed]
Date: April 2021
View All Details about The Political Economy of China s "Belt and Road Initiative"
- China’s Soft Power over Taiwan
In: Kingsley Edney, Stanley Rosen, and Ying Zhu (eds.), Soft Power with Chinese Characteristics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: December 2019
Internet Publications
- How Should Taiwan Play the "Trump" Card? (In Chinese)
In: SETN
Date: January 2025
President Trump faces a world moving from a unipolar US hegemony to multipolarity. From new international organizations such as BRICS that can rule out the United States to new interstate wars such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine that can break out and drag on despite US warnings and counteractions, the time that the United States can single-handedly dictate the world has gone. The issue faced by President Trump is maintaining US influence, interests, and position as the first among equals in the multipolarizing world.
Fortunately, in contrast to America's vibrant economy and powerful military capabilities witnessed in the ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East, America's geopolitical rivals, the so-called "Axis of Upheaval" countries, are facing difficulties--China's economic slowdown, Russia's war quagmire, North Korea's chronicle deprivation, and Iran's Potemkin strength exposed by Israel's military operations. President Trump now seems to have the opportunity to deal with these geopolitical challenges from the position of strength. He will also benefit from the "madman" image he acquired during his first term. Because he is perceived as unpredictable and crazy, no one can discard his threats lightly, making America's foes more likely to be deterred. The problem is that he also threatens allies and friends, making people uncertain whether he is shrewd or reckless.
President Trump's recent threats to take control of Greenland, an autonomous territory of America's NATO ally Denmark, and the Panama Canal exacerbate the confusion. However, behind the threats are solid geopolitical concerns linked to America's national security. With the help of seasoned foreign policy aides, including his National Security Advisor pick Mike Waltz and the Secretary of State nominee Marco Rubio, the hyperbole of using force will not happen. More likely, his threats are ways to enter the negotiation with strength and keep pushing the counterparts to move as close to what he wants as possible. The shrewdness can lead to America's geopolitical advantage. That said, it remains to be seen whether President Trump will eventually return to reckless unilateralism and coercion, especially when these "adults" leave his administration, including against America's allies and friends, making them have nothing to show in return for their alliances with the United States and leading to the collapse of America's bandwagon. Trump the Shrewd will know that coercion is only a means to acquire strength in negotiation and that loyal allies are fundamental to US strength in competition against geopolitical foes. The wisdom is especially essential in a world that America no longer dominates.View All Details about How Should Taiwan Play the "Trump" Card? (In Chinese)
- Pineapple Ban Another Prickle in Cross-Strait Relations
In: East Asia Forum [Peer Reviewed]
Date: April 2021
View All Details about Pineapple Ban Another Prickle in Cross-Strait Relations
- Decrypting China’s Narratives to the World
In: The Cipher Brief
Date: November 2020
View All Details about Decrypting China’s Narratives to the World
- Great Power Competition Below the Line: Comparative (and Contending) Approaches to Strategic Stability
In: Present and Future Challenges to Maintaining Balance Between Global Cooperation and Competition
Date: November 2020
- Why Beijing Should Work with Tsai Ing-wen
- China’s ‘One Belt One Road’ Project and Its International Relations
In: US-China Perception Monitor
Date: September 2015
View All Details about China’s ‘One Belt One Road’ Project and Its International Relations
- The Cross-Strait Diplomatic Truce in the Pacific Islands
In: Thought Leaders
Date: October 2014
View All Details about The Cross-Strait Diplomatic Truce in the Pacific Islands
- How Should We Interpret China’s Assertive Diplomacy?
In: Taipei Perspective
Date: January 2014
View All Details about How Should We Interpret China’s Assertive Diplomacy?
- Taiwan’s 2012 Presidential Election, Evolving Sino-US Relations, and the Prospect of Taiwan’s Security
In: Ballots & Bullets
Date: December 2011
Interviews
- How to Get Americans to Support Taiwan? An Interview With Dalton Lin
In: Mindi World News
Date: December 2024
View All Details about How to Get Americans to Support Taiwan? An Interview With Dalton Lin
- Dr. Dalton Lin on the Triangular Security Dynamics between Beijing, Taipei, and Washington
In: The Carter Center U.S.-China Perception Monitor
Date: February 2023
Reports
- Great Power Competition Below the Line: Comparative (and Contending) Approaches to Strategic Stability
In: SMA Perspectives: Emerging Issues for US National Security
Date: November 2020
- China’s "One Belt One Road" Project and Its International Relations (Chinese)
In: The Carter Center
Date: September 2015
View All Details about China’s "One Belt One Road" Project and Its International Relations (Chinese)
Other Publications
- The Evolution of Contemporary US-China Relations
In: CAPASUS Journal
Date: August 2024
View All Details about The Evolution of Contemporary US-China Relations
- Security Implications of Geopolitics and Governance in the Pacific
In: The Islander [Peer Reviewed]
Date: November 2015
View All Details about Security Implications of Geopolitics and Governance in the Pacific
- New Asia Pivot: Obama’s Double Balancing Strategy (Chinese)
In: United Daily News
Date: April 2014
View All Details about New Asia Pivot: Obama’s Double Balancing Strategy (Chinese)