Between Core National Interest and a Harmonious World: Reconciling Self-role Conceptions in Chinese Foreign Policy

Shih, Chih‐yu; Yin, Jun

doi:10.1093/cjip/pos023

Cited by 41 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…By traversing multiple levels of analysis, role theory often provides a richer account of why states go to war (Ghose and James 2005), why states pursue liberal, internationalist foreign policies (Bergman 2007), how presidential candidates navigate role conflict to frame their political platforms (Abidguo 2008), and instrumental changes in a state's foreign policy (Aras and Gorener 2010). In the case of China, most scholars treat China's international role taking as determined by its manipulation of cultural and historical identities in response to fluctuating external and internal demands (Shih 1988(Shih , 2012Shih and Yin 2013). Moreover, institutions have traditionally been treated as unitary actors navigating a two-level role taking game, oftentimes appeasing nationalist sentiments or invoking historical "victimhood" in response to alter expectations to secure their preferred NRC (Brittingham 2007;Suzuki 2008;Tang 2008;Liao 2013).…”

Section: Role Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“Sellout” Ministries and Jingoes: China’s Bureaucratic Institutions and the Evolution of Contested National Role Conceptions in the South China Sea

Jones

2017

foreign policy anal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article extends the role theory literature on domestic role contestation process by specifically examining bureaucracies as potential advocates of competing national role conceptions. While recent scholarship on domestic role contestation affirms the influence of party politics and cabinet dynamics on role enactment, bureaucracies remain underexplored as key actors despite the presence of a robust literature that supports their relevance in the foreign policymaking process. This article draws on expectations from both the role theory and bureaucratic politics literatures to explain how bureaucracies contest national roles and how such contestation may be resolved. The article tests these propositions through the study of China's inter-bureaucratic contestation over its appropriate role in the South China Sea territorial disputes between 1979 and 1992. The article concurrently advances role studies on China by integrating them with more recent arguments about domestic role contestation. Traditionally, role theorists interested in China have either black-boxed the state or only focused on elite-mass role contestation, while this article explores intra-elite role contestation. Evan Jones received his BA in International Relations from Oakland University's Honors College. He also studied Mandarin at Nanjing University. Some of his research interests include China's foreign policy, the South China Sea territorial disputes, leadership and decision-making, bureaucratic politics, and role theory. Author's Note: I would like to thank Cristian Cantir for his invaluable comments on earlier versions of this work. I also thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful feedback.

show abstract

Section: Role Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“Sellout” Ministries and Jingoes: China’s Bureaucratic Institutions and the Evolution of Contested National Role Conceptions in the South China Sea

Jones

2017

foreign policy anal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been noted that the increase in maritime border disputes and a threat of conflict (and even war) are fueling geobody politics in China and other nations in the South China Sea. Such dynamics are further complicated by the fact that China is depicted as a "civilizational state" (Shih and Yin 2013), where the logic of modern sovereign states and the logic of the imperial tributary system are fused into one identity under a solitaristic discourse of "peaceful rise" or "peaceful development. " 17 Obviously, while this is not to suggest that the modern Chinese state has been remade into a civilizational state on the lines of the great ancient dynasties, there is an element of suzerain logic collapsing into a Westphalian logic, as manifested in the nine-dash line.…”

Section: Solitaristic Identity and The Risk Of Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geopolitics or Geobody Politics? Understanding the Rise of China and Its Actions in the South China Sea

Ataka¹

2016

AJP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The "rise of China," especially within U.S. academic and policy circles, has been increasingly analyzed through a geopolitical lens. Yet geopolitics alone cannot account for the complex political mobilization of historical memory and how it frames any discussion of peace and cooperation in the region. Drawing on the concept of geobody, or how space and people are connected in a biopolitical manner, this article examines how the territorial disputes in the South China Sea are remaking the identity and interests of China. It develops an alternative theoretical understanding of China's rise that focuses on identity (or geobody) politics, and explores the risks involved in a further escalation of tensions for peace and cooperation in the area, and in East Asia more generally. Keywords maritime disputes, South China Sea, China's "peaceful rise, " identity politics, geobody politics China has reclaimed over 2,000 acres, more than all other claimants combined, and more than in the entire history of the region.... The United States is deeply concerned about the pace and scope of land reclamation in the South China Sea, the prospect of further militarisation, as well as the potential for these activities to increase the risk of miscalculation or conflict among claimant states. (Ashton Carter 2015) 2 An increasingly popular and dominant approach on "the rise of China," especially within U.S. academic and policy circles, is to focus on geopolitics

show abstract

“…Shih and Yin (2013) hold that two discourses are derived from Chinese self-role conceptions: core national interest and harmonious world. The pragmatic calculation coupled with these two discourses has produced two approaches in Chinese regional diplomacy.…”

Section: Diplomatic Goals and Strategies Of The Four Partiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Institution-Building in East Asia

Yoshimatsu

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Between Core National Interest and a Harmonious World: Reconciling Self-role Conceptions in Chinese Foreign Policy

Cited by 41 publications

References 0 publications

“Sellout” Ministries and Jingoes: China’s Bureaucratic Institutions and the Evolution of Contested National Role Conceptions in the South China Sea

“Sellout” Ministries and Jingoes: China’s Bureaucratic Institutions and the Evolution of Contested National Role Conceptions in the South China Sea

Geopolitics or Geobody Politics? Understanding the Rise of China and Its Actions in the South China Sea

Comparing Institution-Building in East Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About