‘Barbarising’ China in American trade war discourse: the assault on Huawei

Abstract

How is the legitimation of the American trade war with China discursively managed and conferred in recent American political discourse? This paper critically examines this under-explored question in the current literature. Taking cues from critical international theory and its insight on discourse and foreign policy, I start by historicising the discursive practices, which I call 'barbarising China', in the construction of civilisation vs barbarism as a hierarchical opposition. Mapping authoritarian China onto this historically contingent liberal civilisational edifice, I argue, has prepared the ground for American political action in the trade war. Through a critical analysis of how China has been constructed as a 'barbarian' economic aggressor in recent American political discourse, I further argue that the 'political reality' and 'knowledge' this discursive practice produces serves not only the political imperative of legitimising American trade war policy choices, but also a particular need of the 'civilised' hegemon to legitimise its power and practices beyond the trade war. Through a close examination of a coordinated assault on Huawei, I illustrate how 'barbarising' China has been discursively done as an integral part of the trade war and assert that 'barbarising' China has become indispensable in American strategy to sustain its precarious hegemony.

Investment Analysis of Pylon Technologies

“…This investment in R&D has eventually become a competitive advantage, and this technological power makes sure of the products' comprehensive performance is better than the domestic industry standards [8][9][10].…”

The Wind from the East: China and European Economic Development

“…But this is also the case with the US government, which has sought to use a variety of trade policy and regulatory tools to target Chinese companies, such as Huawei in the context of the development of 5G technology (Shen and Shang, 2020; Friis and Lysne, this issue). Such initiatives are often bound up with a more general securitization of Chinese investments, and these relate to discourses about Chinese firms as security threats, especially in the USA (Zhang, 2021), but also increasingly in Europe (Rogelja and Tsimonis, 2020). When analysing the global externalization of Chinese capitalism, it is difficult to sideline securitization issues, as the Huawei case (Rühlig, 2020; Friis and Lysne, this issue) and others -such as the takeover of the UK semiconductor company, Imagination Technologies (Henderson and Hooper, this issue)demonstrate.…”

“…Friis and Lysne argue that while the nature of 5G technology made the securitization of Huawei more likely, the approach Europe has adopted differs to that of the US. It is an approach that has allowed for the securitization of Huawei's 5G technology, but without using Huawei as a launchpad for wider contestations with China as has happened in the United States (see Zhang, 2021).…”

China as a Threat and Balancing Behavior in the Realm of Emerging Technologies

“…The state-of-the-art on ETs includes several important contributions, such as exploring the securitization act in the context of US-China overall competition (Moore 2023) from a securitization studies perspective. Given that ETs have been characterized as a critical frontier for national security and development, several scholars have examined how China's advancements have raised concerns among other countries (Kania 2022), with China perceived as a technological threat and an existential challenge to the Western way of life (Zhang 2021). Others have explored security discourses on critical infrastructure, especially with regard to companies like Huawei or ZTE (Campion 2020), in addition to exploring China's ascent as a science and technology powerhouse with its growing influence on the global stage (Segal 2019).…”