• Kingsley Edney
Part of the Asia Today book series (ASIAT)


Since the beginning of the era of reform and opening, China’s interactions with the rest of the world have become steadily broader and deeper. During this period the policies of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have permitted, and sometimes even encouraged, the gradual expansion of the ways in which China’s state, economy, and society engages with its foreign counterparts. After abandoning its revolutionary foreign policy following Mao’s death and instead adopting an official doctrine of international peace and development, the Party-state has expanded its diplomatic activities, raised the level of economic interaction between China and other countries, deepened its participation in international institutions, and increased China’s involvement in social and cultural exchanges with the rest of the world.1 This shift toward opening up to and engaging with the outside world has ensured that China’s contemporary development has been inextricably bound up with the process of globalization— the accelerating and deepening of global interconnectedness. At the same time, according to nearly any method of assessment, China’s power in international politics is increasing. Scholars discuss China’s growing global diplomatic status, economic clout, and soft power; they debate whether or not its increasing military capabilities are a threat and highlight the issues raised by its newfound influence in Africa, Southeast Asia, the Pacific, and South America.2


Chinese Communist Party Soft Power Official Discourse Public Diplomacy Chinese Perspective 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See Evan S. Medeiros and M. Taylor Fravel, “China’s New Diplomacy,” Foreign Affairs 82, no. 6 (2003): 22–35;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Peter Nolan, China and the Global Economy: National Champions, Industrial Policy and the Big Business Revolution (Houndmills, UK: Palgrave, 2001);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alastair Iain Johnston, Social States: China in International Institutions, 1980–2000 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008);Google Scholar
  4. Mingjiang Li, ed., Soft Power: China’s Emerging Strategy in International Politics (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2009).Google Scholar
  5. 2.
    Some of the collected editions that address such issues include Robert S. Ross and Zhu Feng, eds., China’s Ascent: Power, Security, and the Future of International Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2008);Google Scholar
  6. Alastair Iain Johnston and Robert S. Ross, eds., New Directions in the Study of China’s Foreign Policy (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006);Google Scholar
  7. David Shambaugh, ed., Power Shift: China and Asia’s New Dynamics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005).Google Scholar
  8. See also Yong Deng, China’s Struggle for Status: The Realignment of International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Robert G. Sutter, China’s Rise in Asia: Promises and Perils (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005);Google Scholar
  10. Alastair Iain Johnston, “Beijing’s Security Behavior in the Asia-Pacific: Is China a Dissatisfied Power?,” in Rethinking Security in East Asia: Identity, Tower, and Efficiency, ed. J. J. Suh, Peter J. Katzenstein, and Allen Carlson (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004);Google Scholar
  11. Ching Kwan Lee, “Raw Encounters: Chinese Managers, African Workers and the Politics of Casualization in Africa’s Chinese Enclaves,” The China Quarterly 199 (2009): 647–66;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sheng Ding, “To Build a ‘Harmonious World’: China’s Soft Power Wielding in the Global South,” in “Harmonious World” and China’s New Foreign Policy, ed. Sujian Guo and Jean-Marc F. Blanchard (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2008);Google Scholar
  13. Yongjin Zhang, “China and the Emerging Regional Order in the South Pacific,” Australian Journal of International Affairs 61, no. 3 (2007): 367–81;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. R. Evan Ellis, China in Latin America: The Whats and Wherefores (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2009).Google Scholar
  15. 3.
    Yongjin Zhang, “Reconsidering the Economic Internationalization of China: Implications of the WTO Membership,” Journal of Contemporary China 12, no. 37 (2003): 699–714; Johnston, Social States. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 4.
    For an assessment of Chinese debates about globalization, see Nick Knight, Imagining Globalisation in China: Debates on Ideology, Politics and Culture (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2008).Google Scholar
  17. 5.
    See Susan L. Shirk, “Changing Media, Changing China,” in Changing Media, Changing China, ed. Susan L. Shirk (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).Google Scholar
  18. 6.
    For example, see James S. Fishkin et al., “Deliberative Democracy in an Unlikely Place: Deliberative Polling in China,” British Journal of Political Science 40, no. 2 (2010): 435–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 7.
    Susan L. Shirk argues that the domestic insecurity of the Chinese leadership is an important factor in China’s foreign policy decision making; William A. Callahan, who employs a constructivist approach, argues that Chinese national insecurity stems from the way that discourses— particularly a discourse of national humiliation—shape national identity. Similarly, historian Julia Loveli claims that the failure of outside observers to realize that Chinese political leaders prioritize domestic problems and have relatively little interest in foreign relations was an important factor in pushing Britain into war with China in the nineteenth century and continues to generate conflict today. Susan L. Shirk, China: Fragile Superpower (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007);Google Scholar
  20. William A. Callahan, China: The Pessoptimist Nation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010);Google Scholar
  21. Julia Loveli, The Opium War: Drugs, Dreams and the Making of China (London: Picador, 2011). See also Deng, China’s Struggle for Status. Google Scholar
  22. 8.
    For example, Sheng Ding, The Dragon’s Hidden Wings: How China Rises with Its Soft Tower (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2008);Google Scholar
  23. Joshua Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive: How China’s Soft Tower Is Transforming the World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007);Google Scholar
  24. Bates Gill and Yanzhong Huang, “Sources and Limits of Chinese ‘Soft Power,’” Survival 48, no. 2 (2006): 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 9.
    Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998), 213;Google Scholar
  26. Miles Kahler and David A. Lake, “Globalization and Changing Patterns of Political Authority,” in Governance in a Global Economy: Political Authority in Transition, ed. Miles Kahler and David A. Lake (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003), 428.Google Scholar
  27. 10.
    See Juan J. Linz, Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2000);Google Scholar
  28. Patrick Köllner and Steffen Kailitz, “Comparing Autocracies: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Analyses,” Democratization 20, no. 1 (2013): 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 11.
    See Bruce Gilley, “Beyond the Four Percent Solution: Explaining the Consequences of China’s Rise,” Journal of Contemporary China 20, no. 72 (2011):795–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 12.
    The majority of these have focused on political and economic governance. For example, Suisheng Zhao, “The China Model: Can It Replace the Western Model of Modernization?,” Journal of Contemporary China 19, no. 65 (2010): 419–36;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Barry Naughton, “China’s Distinctive System: Can It Be a Model for Others?,” Journal of Contemporary China 19, no. 65 (2010): 437–60;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Scott Kennedy, “The Myth of the Beijing Consensus,” Journal of Contemporary China 19, no. 65 (2010): 461–77;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. William A. Callahan, “Chinese Visions of World Order: Post-Hegemonic or a New Hegemony?,” International Studies Review 10, no. 4 (2008): 749–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. A few have examined the potential of Chinese cultural or philosophical ideas to gain greater international influence. For example, Daniel A. Bell, China’s New Confucianism: Politics and Everyday Life in a Changing Society (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008), 19–37.Google Scholar
  35. 13.
    See Andrew Moravcik, “The New Liberalism,” in The Oxford Handbook of International Relations, ed. Christian Reus-Smit and Duncan Snidai (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).Google Scholar
  36. 14.
    See Ted Hopf, “The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory,” International Security 23, no. 1 (1998): 171–200;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jim George, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1994);Google Scholar
  38. David Campbell, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  39. Recent examples of studies that focus on discourse in international politics include Charlotte Epstein, “Who Speaks? Discourse, the Subject and the Study of Identity in International Politics,” European Journal of International Relations 17, no. 2 (2011): 327–50;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lene Hansen, Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War (London: Routledge, 2006);Google Scholar
  41. Krista Hunt and Kim Rygiel, eds., (En)Gendering the War on Terror: War Stories and Camouflaged Politics (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2006).Google Scholar
  42. 15.
    For example, Ren Xianliang, Yulun yindao yishu: Lingdao ganbu ruhe miandui meiti [The art of guiding public opinion: How leading cadres should face the media] (Beijing: Xinhua Chubanshe, 2010);Google Scholar
  43. Hong Xianghua, ed., Meiti lingdao li: Lingdao ganbu ruhe yu meiti da jiaodao [Media leadership strength: How leading cadres deal with the media] (Beijing: Zhonggongdang Shi Chubanshe, 2009);Google Scholar
  44. Wu Hao, Wu Hao shuo xinwen: Yi wei Xinhuasbe jizhe de xinwen shizhan shouji [Wu Hao discusses the news: A Xinhua journalist’s notes from the news frontline] (Beijing: Xinhua Chubanshe, 2008);Google Scholar
  45. Ye Hao, ed., Zhengfu xinwenxue anli: Zhengfu yingdui meiti de xin fangfa [Government media studies cases: The government’s new methods of responding to the media] (Nanjing: Jiangsu Renmin Chubanshe, 2007).Google Scholar
  46. 16.
    See Peter Gourevitch, “The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics,” International Organization 32, no. 4 (1978): 881–912;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peter Gourevitch, “Domestic Politics and International Relations,” in Handbook of International Relations, ed. Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons (London: Sage, 2002).Google Scholar
  48. 19.
    For example, Zheng Yongnian first differentiates between the Party and the state when examining their relationship with each other and only treats them as a collective entity when he moves to analyze the Party-state’s relationship with Chinese society. Zheng Yongnian, The Chinese Communist Party as Organizational Emperor: Culture, Reproduction and Transformation (Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2010).Google Scholar
  49. 20.
    Richard K. Herrmann, “Linking Theory to Evidence in International Relations,” in Handbook of International Relations, ed. Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons (London: Sage, 2002), 130.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kingsley Edney 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kingsley Edney

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations