Insights from China’s
International Relations Scholars (Singapore, Palgrave MacMillan, 2019)
By: Safia Malik
China is emerging as a global power by focusing on geoeconomic and geostrategic issues to lead the world. Beijing has extended its economic corridors which connect several parts of the world and is actively playing its role in the international political economy. To understand Chinese scholars’ views about the Chinese perspective of the world, Huiyun Feng, Kai He and Xiaojun Li’s book “How China Sees the World: Insights from China’s International Relations Scholars” is interesting to read. The book presents the analysis of Chinese scholars synthesized through their writing and a survey. Chinese Community of Political Science and International Studies (CCPSIS) conducted a survey in which they selected top five Chinese research Journals’ publications published during 2014-2017 to assess the changes in the perception of Chinese scholars over time. Research articles published in: (i) Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies; (ii) World Economics and Politics; (iii) Contemporary International Relations; (iv) Foreign Affairs Review; and (v) China International Studies are analyzed. The authors examined the views of scholars on key issues of Chinese foreign policy and China’s interaction with the world. The book consists of two broader themes: (i) Chinese scholarship; and (ii) Global geostrategic developments. The authors have addressed these themes by dividing the study in five chapters.
Chapter 1, Taking Chinese IR Scholars Seriously: It mentions three strata in Chinese society which are: elites, sub-elites and masses. Elites are the policymakers, masses are common people and sub-elites are scholars, analysts and media groups. Authors drew a conclusion that analysts and intellectuals suggest as policy recommendations but the state is independent in deciding whether to follow those recommendations or not. Although it is intricate to define to what extent sub-elites can have impact on foreign policy because it is still unclear whether a state’s decisions are influenced by public opinion or public opinion is manipulated by the state. However, authors agree that sub-elites help manage the masses-elite relationship as mediators. In this regard, their perspective matters in promoting a state’s narrative among masses.
Chapter II, On China’s Power and the International Order: Is China a Challenger? It assesses China’s rise as global power and its impact on international order. The optimistic view is that “China’s rise is within the existing Liberal order, and that China is becoming more socialized into the international system” [page 21]. The pessimistic view argues that China’s rise is a threat to the US hegemony falling into the “Thucydides Trap” where war is inevitable between both powers [page 21]. Chinese scholars have mentioned “Great 2” which suggests that the future international order will be bipolar where the US and China will dominate the two poles. Their conclusions are based on the arguments that the power gap between the two countries is gradually narrowing. In terms of soft power, majority of the survey respondents agreed that China will surpass the US through Made in China policy 2025, the Belt and Road initiative (BRI) and the expansion of its aid to developing countries. Scholars have proposed that China’s GDP is the second largest but its GDP per capita ranked 80th in the world. Therefore, Beijing needs to work on enhancing its political and economic power.
Chapter III, On US-China Relations: Problems and Prospects, stresses the importance of US-China relations. Chinese scholars believe that Beijing’s ties with Washington are complicated and problematic but are important one. The US involvement in the South China Sea, unconditional support for Taiwan and facilitating the Japanese stance on Senkaku Island could further worsen the bilateral ties. The two countries can cooperate on nuclear balance, economic interdependence, socio-economic linkages and global climate change [page 63]. The scholars have adopted the Realist and Liberal approaches to observing the US-China ties. Realists scholars believe: (i) The US considers China as its strategic competitor, their clash would manifest in military, geopolitical and geoeconomic spheres; (ii) The US has adopted mixed-strategy of engagement, containment, balancing and cooperation to counter China; and (iii) Tension and competition would create trust deficit in the US-China ties. Conversely, Liberals by holding optimistic approach have suggested that there are avenues of cooperation between the two on common interests in the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. Cooperative measures would enhance confidence and ultimately both would avoid the way to war and conflict.
Chapter IV, On Chinese Foreign Policy and International Relations: It focuses on China’s foreign policy and its relations with other countries including Russia, Japan, India, North Korea, African Union, European Union, Association of Southeast Asian Nations and Latin American countries. Scholars signaled positive bilateral Russia-China ties while having a disquieting view of China-Japan’s possible conflict in the East China sea. “Our survey analysis shows that most Chinese IR scholars are positive and satisfied about China’s foreign policy practices in general with respect to bilateral relationship with Africa, Russia, the EU and Latin America but are less optimistic with respect to India and Japan” [page 94]. This Chapter also explores Deng Xiaoping’s “keeping a-low-profile doctrine”, survey respondents supported Deng’s doctrine, while textual analysis suggested that there was another group of scholars who wanted a change in Deng’s doctrine. This discrepancy shows that Chinese scholars hesitate to challenge official policies in their publications.
Chapter V, Understanding China’s Rise Through the Eyes of Scholars and Beyond: The authors have given observations about China’s rise. They concluded that both the US and China should cooperate if they intend to share leadership and prestige as well as cope with common challenges in the future such as poverty, climate change and pandemics. In addition, the US and China can coordinate in peaceful settlement of Iran and North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. “Therefore, the United States should consider welcoming a rising China to share some of the burden and responsibilities of global governance that it has had to bear alone in the past” [page111]. Authors also suggested that “Beijing seems to have no choice but to continue deepening its economic openness and market-oriented reforms and further integrating itself into the world economy to offset the negative impact of the trade war” [page 109].
The book presents a focused view of Chinese scholars’ perception about Beijing’s foreign policy, China’s understanding of the world and its position in the international system. The four-year (2014-2017) comprehensive opinion survey and textual analysis of Chinese publications provide an interesting perspective. The authors have used qualitative and quantitative research methods to carry out this study. The book lacks the background of historical explanation of Chinese foreign policy, but it provides a valuable analysis of changing international geopolitical and geoeconomic landscape. The authors have factored in domestic variables which may contribute to the development of China’s international relations. Moreover, it is interesting to note that while authors envisioned a bipolar world in the future, they also suggest a world order in which two powers would cooperate for the greater good of the international community. The study is helpful for academics, policymakers, practitioners and students who are interested in China’s foreign policy.