China's "do-as-I-do" paradigm: practice-based normative diplomacy in the global South (original) (raw)
Related papers
Belt and Road Initiative: Chinese normative power in South Asia
2018
Chinese behavior in global politics is often viewed through the lenses of power, frequently linking this approach to the pessimistic outcome of seeing China as a threat in defining power as an act of domination. Nevertheless, without defining scope and domain, power is indeed a useless concept that can be politicized in many ways: power should therefore be approached in a normatively-neutral mode. In trying to do so, the focus of this paper is to analyze the Chinese-led Belt and Road Initiative through a relational power approach, especially focusing on South Asia as an empirical instance of Chinese normative power strategy. This paper will firstly consider power as relational because without taking in consideration scope, domain, and especially the subject of power, the analysis would be analytically unfruitful; secondly, a relational approach will shed light on the relation between Chinese power and the Belt and Road Initiative, which is not only related on military or economic statecraft; lastly, highlighting this aspect of Chinese power (normative) it shall be possible to argue that Chinese power is not necessarily a zero-sum game. Challenging the pessimistic view of China as a threat, the paper will conclude with the possibility of understanding Chinese power as related to the creation and strengthening of a cooperative behavior between states through the development of Chinese norms within the Belt and Road Initiative.
From norm-taker to institution-creator: China's growing role in international institutions
(Re-)emerging powers are taking a more active role at the global stage and are moving away from merely being 'norm-takers' toward becoming 'norm-shapers' and even 'institutioncreators'. China in particular is becoming a more important influencer regarding international norms and institutions. This paper explains how China has been evolving from being a 'normtaker' into an international 'norm-shaper' as well as an 'institution-creator' and the effect this development has been having on the traditionally 'normative power', the EU as well as its response. Thereby, arguing for the importance of bringing socialisation into IR theory and showing that the way socialisation has so far been applied in IR theory as well as in practice is outdated and needs a different approach that corresponds with the changes taking place within the world order. The paper will demonstrate through two case studies, the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Change Summit and the establishment of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), how China is no longer unilaterally being socialised into the existing global order by the existing, Western powers, but that is becoming an active 'socialiser' itself, shaping norms and institutions according to its views. Socialisation should thus no longer be viewed as a one-way process in which the existing powers socialise the 'rest', but as an increasingly two-way process in which (re-)emerging powers are playing an increasing role.
Field Overlaps, Normativity, and the Contestation of Practices in China's Belt and Road Initiative
China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a cornerstone of Xi Jinping's foreign policy. Chinese ministries, companies, and universities set up diplomatic networks, build roads and harbors, and facilitate scientific projects and educational programs to implement the BRI. Whereas some see the BRI as an integration project, others contend that it challenges the existing international order. We introduce the concept of field overlaps to study the normativity of international practices and argue that state and non-state actors contest international practices by drawing on competing normative inventories anchored in overlapping fields. We illustrate this argument by zooming in on China's infrastructural and educational practices. Their normativity comes to the fore in their ongoing contestation as they travel diplomatic, economic, security, and educational fields. Focusing on field overlaps provides a promising avenue for studying how actors stabilize, modify, or disrupt the normativity of international practices. Le projet chinois des « nouvelles routes de la soie » (Belt and Road Initiative ou BRI) constitue une pierre angulaire de la politique étrangère de Xi Jinping. Les ministères, entreprises et universités chinoises mettent en place des réseaux diplomatiques, construisent des routes et des ports, facilitent des projets scientifiques et des programmes éducatifs pour mettre en oeuvre le BRI. Quand certains considèrent le BRI tel un projet d'intégration, d'autres affirment qu'il remet en cause l'ordre international actuel. Nous présentons le concept de chevauchements de domaines pour étudier la normativité des pratiques internationales. Selon nous, les acteurs étatiques et non étatiques contestent les pratiques internationales en se fondant sur des inventaires normatifs concurrentiels, ancrés dans des domaines qui se chevauchent. Nous illustrons notre propos en nous focalisant sur les pratiques de la Chine en matière d'infrastructure et d'éducation. Leur normativité est particulièrement visible dans leur remise en question actuelle, que ce soit dans les domaines diplomatique, économique, sécuritaire ou éducatif. La focalisation sur les chevauchements de domaines fournit une piste intéressante pour étudier comment les acteurs stabilisent, modifient et perturbent la normativité des pratiques internationales. La Iniciativa de la Franja y la Ruta (BRI, por sus siglas en inglés) de China es uno de los pilares de la política exterior de Xi Jinping. Los ministerios, las empresas y las universidades chinas establecen redes diplomáticas, construyen carreteras y puertos, e impulsan proyectos científicos y programas educativos para aplicar la BRI. Mientras que algunos ven la BRI como un proyecto de integración, otros sostienen que desafía el orden internacional existente. Introducimos el concepto de solapamiento de campos para estudiar la normatividad de las prácticas internacionales y argumentamos que los actores estatales y no estatales se oponen a las prácticas internacionales recurriendo a inventarios normativos contrapuestos anclados en campos superpuestos. Ilustramos este argumento centrándonos en las prácticas infraestructurales y educativas de China. Su normatividad sale a relucir en su continua refutación al recorrer los ámbitos diplomático, económico, de seguridad y educativo. Centrarse en los solapamientos de campo ofrece una vía prometedora para estudiar cómo los actores estabilizan, modifican o alteran la normatividad de las prácticas internacionales. (European Commission 2019). Assessments of the normativity of BRI practices differ. International relations (IR) has offered various interpretations of the BRI (for a recent overview, see Hall and Krolikowski 2022). To begin with, scholars have highlighted its geopolitical and economic effects. They see the BRI as a "defensive move" against the United States (Wang 2015), as part of a grand strategy (Clarke 2017 , 72; Mulvad 2019 , 461), or as a response to globalization (Liu and Dunford 2016). Others have studied its normative effects on global and regional orders (
2018
By observing the formation of China’s discursive power through a breadth of academic literature, it can be argued that the discursive construction of China’s relationship with developing countries is not only for a broader political project of representing the “Global South”. Through a variety of mediums, developing countries are incentivized to allow China to speak for them as it has carefully articulated its interests to promote mutually beneficial economic gains through discourses on Asian culture, socialism ‘with Chinese characteristics’ and vilification of Western neoliberal institutions. Yet, China does not shy away from its aim to consciously reproduce exploitative core-periphery relations that advance its position in the capitalist world system. This can be seen in the case of the Belt Road Initiative (BRI) which China’s claim of being in solidarity with the developing world can be proven to be an unstable notion in foreign policy discourse.
China Faces the World: Making Rules for a New Order?
Journal of Global Policy and Governance, 2013
Does China's diplomatic practice create norms and rules that shape the behaviour of other states? To what extent do other states follow China's examples in international affairs? I argue in this paper that China's diplomatic practice does pose a real and credible challenge to the practices established by the West in managing global affairs. The paper tests this argument by analysing China's involvement in the areas of peacekeeping, the Six-Party talks, China's maritime security, and its development practice. Initial results from this analysis indicate that China has initiated some new norms and rules, but their effects are small and gradual at present.
China’s Global Order: a New Paradigm in South to South Relations
Croatian International Relations Review, 2015
This article analyses the evolution of Chinese political foreign policy and its strategy in approaching developing and less developed nations. In this context, the relationship between China and Latin America appears to reveal the practice of the Beijing Consensus when considering their interests: China needs natural resources and new markets for its products, and Latin America needs financial aid and loans to develop its infrastructure and provide social programmes. The absence of the US in the region and the rise of political movements denouncing the American imperialism of the Washington Consensus are all factors that contribute to the expansion of Chinese influence. All these considerations allow a discussion concerning the new role of China in developing countries as an expression of a new emerging order in which China is assuming an important role.
Power, Ideas and Institutions: China's Emergent Footprints in Global Governance of Development Aid
This paper investigates whether China possesses normative power to determine what passes for ‘normal’ in the politics of foreign aid in the context of an ongoing debate about whether China will soon replace the United States as the global hegemon. It proceeds from a proposition that a hegemon, backed by material power preponderance, wields global power through socially recognized norms, rules and institutions. The competing social norms and institutions under study are political conditionality and tying of aid, and the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and the China-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). We argue that there is a tendency towards a coalescence of Chinese and Western norms and practices, albeit not predicated on good governance. With pressing concerns over security threats, Beijing is re-interpreting its non-interference norm and practice into accepting tacitly a political conditionality approach. China’s ability to project its own norm on tied aid is, however, restrained by the multilateralism of the AIIB. The real machine that China would use to espouse normative changes in international development is its ‘One Belt, One Road’ (OBOR) initiative. However, while OBOR is institutionally shielded from international scrutiny and thus grants China more autonomy to operate, it will give China less normative power to set global standards and to define what passes for ‘normal’ in world politics.
CHINA’S GLOBAL ORDER: A NEW PARADIGM IN THE SOUTH TO SOUTH RELATIONS
This article aims to analyze the evolution of Chinese political foreign policy and its strategy to approach developing and less developed nations. In this context, the relations between China and Latin America appear to reveal the practice of the Beijing Consensus considering their interests: China needs natural resources and new markets for its products, while Latin America needs financial aid and loans to develop its infrastructure and provide social programs. Furthermore, the absence of US from the region and the rise of political movements denouncing the American imperialism of the Washington Consensus are all factors that contribute to the expansion of the Chinese influence. All these considerations allow a discussion concerning the new role of China in developing countries as an expression of a new emerging order in which China is assuming an important role.
The Theory behind the Practice - Toward a Chinese International Relations Theory
This paper’s main focus is to examine the reasons why no authentic “Eastern” theories of international relations have been proposed and explore the possibility that China, one of today’s most influential states, could achieve a disciplinary breakthrough in the near future and formulate its own theory of world politics,unencumbered by Western theoretical matrices. The author devotes special attention to the Belt and Road Initiative, analyzing the key postulates of the project and attempting to discern the elements of a “future” Chinese international relations theory in them.
China as Norm-Taker and Norm-Setter in Southeast Asia and Europe
Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) , 2020
In order to promote and implement its ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China acts in Southeast Asia and Europe still more as a norm-taker than a norm-setter. However, Beijing's ability to set regional norms will likely grow in the near future. China already demonstrated its political will to undermine the unity of the norm-setting regional organization ASEAN and the EU. A remedy could be to better include China in reformed international and regional governance mechanisms.