How are Foreign Policy Decisions Made in China?

Jakobson, Linda; Manuel, Ryan

doi:10.1002/app5.121

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…6For good overviews, see Sun 2013; Bush 2010; Jakobson and Knox 2010; Christensen 2012; Jakobson 2014.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

More than Peripheral: How Provinces Influence China's Foreign Policy

Wong

2018

The China Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most analyses of China's foreign and security policies treat China as a unitary actor, assuming a cohesive grand strategy articulated by Beijing. I challenge this conventional wisdom, showing how Chinese provinces can affect the formulation and implementation of foreign policy. This contributes to existing research on the role of subnational actors in China, which has focused on how they shape domestic and economic policies. Using Hainan and Yunnan as case studies, I identify three mechanisms of provincial influence – trailblazing, carpetbagging, and resisting – and illustrate them with examples of key provincial policies. This analysis provides a more nuanced argument than is commonly found in international relations for the motivations behind evolving and increasingly activist Chinese foreign policy. It also has important policy implications for understanding and responding to Chinese behaviour, in the South China Sea and beyond.

show abstract

“…6For good overviews, see Sun 2013; Bush 2010; Jakobson and Knox 2010; Christensen 2012; Jakobson 2014.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

More than Peripheral: How Provinces Influence China's Foreign Policy

Wong

2018

The China Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Turning from the domestic level analysed in the previous article (Jakobson & Manuel 2015) to the regional level, we show how a new 'Northeast Asian history spiral'-much like a classic security dilemma, but with purely ideational characteristics-has taken hold in this region. We argue that this 'history spiral' in Northeast Asia is the product of Asia's changing strategic order: China, Japan and South Korea are using history in instrumental ways to shape and contest a regional order that is being transformed by China's rising power.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Northeast Asia's New ‘History Spiral’

King¹,

Taylor²

2015

Asia & Pacific Policy Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The remembered history of the Second World War continues to infect contemporary relations between China and its Northeast Asian neighbours. This article argues that a 'history spiral' has taken hold in Northeast Asia as a result of the region's changing strategic order and domestic politics in China, Japan and South Korea. Using the case studies of the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands territorial dispute, the Dokdo/Takeshima territorial disputes, and Sino-South Korean memorial diplomacy, we explore the interactive spiralling dynamics of Northeast Asia's history problems. We suggest that despite some recent signs of an improvement in Northeast Asian relations since late 2014, the 'history spiral' is likely to remain a fixture of Northeast Asia's international politics owing to the region's changing strategic order.

show abstract

“…Xi’s crackdown on corruption can be viewed from power struggle perspective (e.g., Shih, 2016; Zhu & Zhang, 2017). A host of studies highlight the more fragmented decision-making process in post-Deng China (e.g., Jakobson & Knox, 2010; Lai & Kang, 2014). More actors are involved, yet the authority to make the final call resides in the top leadership.…”

Section: China’s Non-unitary Domestic Audiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Assertiveness Paying the Bill? China’s Domestic Audience Costs in the South China Sea Disputes

Ramadhani

2019

Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China's assertiveness in the South China Sea has drawn international attention, especially in the past decade. Yet China has not always resorted to assertive foreign policy. Efforts to de-escalate tension are evident despite the domestic preference for tougher action. This study centres on a question: what makes for China's assertiveness. I argue that China's assertive foreign policy originates in leaders' domestic consideration. Utilizing audience costs theory I focus on two assumptions that need to be relaxed: unitary domestic audiences and consistency in leaders' crisis behaviour. China's non-unitary domestic audiences, namely the elites and public, have different interests, although they share support for assertiveness in the South China Sea. Domestic audiences can tolerate inconsistency insofar as leaders are able to justify their decision, that is, to de-escalate the South China Sea disputes without dropping assertiveness. Foreign policy decision-making in China remains somewhat opaque, but domestic audiences can influence the process albeit not directly. In this regard, China's assertiveness serves to generate audience costs so as to underpin regime legitimacy.

show abstract

How are Foreign Policy Decisions Made in China?

Cited by 34 publications

References 1 publication

More than Peripheral: How Provinces Influence China's Foreign Policy

More than Peripheral: How Provinces Influence China's Foreign Policy

Northeast Asia's New ‘History Spiral’

Is Assertiveness Paying the Bill? China’s Domestic Audience Costs in the South China Sea Disputes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About