Abstract
Chinese foreign policy practices contribute to international relations (IR) theory and the conduct of foreign policy analysis (FPA) in a peculiar way—they do so not necessarily by transforming IR/FPA theory but by refocusing IR theorization on the civilizational aspect.1 From the imperial times through the Republican and socialist eras in China, the purpose of achieving modernity from the point of view of Chinese leaders and intellectuals has been to transform a civilizational gathering in pervasive space, which could be practical, customary, or spiritual, into a rational construct in territorial space in order to exclude imperialist intrusion. Ironically, in the twenty-first century, China’s successful emergence as a nation-state resulted in the Chinese people’s spilling over their territorial boundary. However, from time to time, Chinese people from all over the world respond to the call of the Chinese foreign policy of national consciousness, making civilizational politics noteworthy again.2 Ambivalence among Chinese people toward China’s civilizational image causes a division in Chinese foreign policy between those motivated to reaffirm the civilizational pride of being Chinese and those who desire to transcend civilizational incapacity and act rationally on behalf of territorial China.3 Together, the two approaches create a self-role conflict within Chinese foreign policy and its analysis. This conflict further complicates and at the same time transforms the external analysis of Chinese foreign policy. In the past, FPA was not focused on ontological issues. However, as China’s unsettled situation between a civilizational and a territorial state gives it an increasingly uncertain identity, the self-role conceptions that sustain Chinese FPA become ambiguous. This ambiguity is a challenge to both Chinese foreign policy practitioners and internal as well as external narrators of Chinese FPA.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Peter Katzenstein (ed.), Sinicization and the Rise of China: Civilizational Processes beyond East and West (London: Routledge, 2012).
Stefan Halper, The Beijing Consensus: How China’s Authoritarian Model Will Dominate the Twenty-First Century (New York: Basic Books, 2010);
Martin Jacques, When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order (New York: The Penguin Press, 2009).3.
Weiwei Zhang, The China Wave: Rise ofa Civilizational State (Singapore: World Scientific, 2012);
Xuetong Yan, Ancient Chinese Thought, Modern Chinese Power (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011);
Ross Terrill, The New Chinese Empire: And What It Means for the United States (New York: Basic Books, 2004).
Daniel Vukovich, China and Orientalism: Western Knowledge Production and the PRC (London: Routledge, 2011).
Gordon White, Riding the Tiger: The Politics ofEconomic in Post-Mao China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1993);
Merle Goldman, From Comrade to Citizen: The Struggle for Political Rights in China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007).
Richard Bernstein and Ross H. Munro, The Coming Conflict with China (New York: Vintage, 1998);
John Mearsheimer, “The Gathering Storm: China’s Challenge to US Power in Asia,” The Chinese Journal of International Politics 3 (2010): 381–96.
Lucien Pye, “China: Erratic State, Frustrated Society,” Foreign Affairs 69, 4 (Fall, 1990): 56–74.
Zhao Tingyang, “A Political World Philosophy in Terms of All-Under-Heaven (Tianxia),” Diogenes 56, 1 (2009): 5–18.
Stephen Hoare-Vance, The Confucius Institutes and China’s Evolving Foreign Policy (Saarbrücken: LAP Academic Publishing, 2010).
Chih-yu Shih, “Assigning Role Characteristics to China: The Role State Versus the Ego State,” Foreign Policy Analysis 8, 1 (January 2012): 71–91.
Evan S. Medeiros, China’s International Behavior: Activism, Opportunism, and Diversification (Santa Monica: Rand, 2009), 49–50.
Jonathan Adelman and Chih-yu Shih, Symbolic War: The Chinese Use ofForce, 1840–1980 (Taipei: Institute of International Relations, 1993).
Wang Yiwei, “Why Is Pax-Americana Impossible? Comparing Chinese Ancient World Order with Today’s American World Order,” presented at the International Symposium on Civilizations and World Orders, Istanbul, Turkey, May 13, 2006.
M. Taylor Fravel, Strong Borders, Secure Nation: Cooperation and Conflict in China’s Territorial Disputes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008).
Khalid R. Al-Rodhan, “A Critique of the China Threat Theory: A Systematic Analysis,” Asian Perspective 31, 3 (2007): 64;
Drew Thompson, “Think Again: China’s Military,” Foreign Policy (March/April 2010): http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/02/22/think_again_chinas_military?page=full accessed on April 26, 2012;
Joseph Nye, “The Challenge of China,” in Stephen Van Evera (ed.), How to Make America Safe: New Policies for National Security (Cambridge, MA: Tobin Project, 2006), 74.
Tang Shiping and Dapeng Ji, “zhongguo waijiao taolun zhong de zhongguo zhongxinzhuyi yu meiguo zhongxinzhuyi” (China-Centrism and US-Centrism in China’s Diplomatic Narratives), Shijie Jingjie yu zhengzhi (World Economy and Politics) 12 (2008): 62–70.
William A. Callahan, China: Pessoptimist Nation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
Daniel Gomà, “The Chinese-Korean Border Issue: An Analysis of a Contested Frontier,” Asian Survey 46, 6 (November-December, 2006): 867–880;
Zhao Hongwei, “zhong mian bianjie weni de jiejue: guocheng yu yingxiang” (The Settlement of the China-Burma Border Dispute: Course and Impact), Nanyang wenti yanjiu (Southeast Asian Affairs) General Serial 143 or No. 3 (2010): 37–40.
Zhao Quansheng, “Achieving Maximum Advantage: Rigidity and Flexibility in Chinese Foreign Policy,” American Asian Review 13, 1 (Spring 1995): 61–93.
Amitav Acharya, “Seeking Security in the Dragon’s Shadow: China and Southeast Asia in the Emerging Asian Order,” Working Paper Series 44, Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies (March 2003), 5.
Yin Jinwu, “wenhua yu guoji xinren—jiyu dong ya xinren xingcheng de bijiao fenxi” (Culture and International Trust: A Comparative Analysis of Trust Formation in East Asia), Waijiao pinglun (Diplomatic Review) 4, 2011:21–39.
Duong Danh Huy, “‘Setting Aside Dispute, Pursuing Joint Development’ the Chinese Way,” Vietnamnet Bridge (November 7, 2011) http://english.vietnamnet.vn/en/politics/10482/-setting-aside-dispute—pursuing-joint-development—the-chinese-way.html accessed on November 12, 2011.
Rao Aimin, “Hu, Aquino Agree to Downplay Maritime Disputes,” Xinhua (September 1, 2011), http://www.china.org.cn/world/2011-09/01/content_23328684.htm.
Denny Roy, “Rising China and U.S. Interests: Inevitable vs. Contingent Hazards,” Orbis 47, 1 (2003): 125–137.
Allen S. Whiting, “China’s Use of Force, 1950–96, and Taiwan,” in International Security 26, 2 (Autumn, 2001): 103–131.
Zhang Qingmin, Meiguo dui Tai jun shou zhengce yanjiu: juece de shijiao (A Study of US Policy on Arms Sales to Taiwan: The Perspective of Decision Making) (Beijing: World Knowledge Press, 2006).
Yinghong Cheng, “From Campus Racism to Cyber Racism: Discourse of Race and Chinese Nationalism,” The China Quarterly 207 (2011): 561–579.
Dan Haglund, “In It for the Long Term? Governance and Learning among Chinese Investors in Zambia’s Copper Sector,” The China Quarterly 199 (September 2009): 643.
Hongying Wang and James N. Rosenau, “China and Global Governance,” Asian Perspective 33, 3 (2009): 17–22.
Wang Yizhou, Chuangzaoxing jieru: Zhongguo waijiao xin quxiang (Creative Involvement: New Orientations in Chinese Diplomacy) (Beijing: Peking University Press, 2011).
Sharad Soni and Reena Marwah, “Tibet as a Factor Impacting China Studies in India,” Asian Ethnicity 12, 3 (October 2011): 285–299.
Copyright information
© 2013 Chih-yu Shih
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shih, Cy. (2013). Harmonious Realism: Undecidable Responses to the China Threat. In: Sinicizing International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137289452_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137289452_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-45016-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-28945-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)