Chinese Global Orders: Socialism, Tradition, and Nation in China–Russia Relations

William A. Callahan
{"title":"Chinese Global Orders: Socialism, Tradition, and Nation in China–Russia Relations","authors":"William A. Callahan","doi":"10.1142/s1013251123400088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While many use rational IR theory to explain Chinese foreign policy behavior, this paper follows global IR to employ interpretivist theory to examine how Chinese elites understand their country’s role in the world. In particular, it explores the Chinese global order ideas of socialism, tradition, and nation through a comparative analysis of how they work in China–Russia relations, especially after China’s 20th Communist Party Congress in 2022. The first section presents a critical analysis of the realist understanding of the China–Russia–U.S. strategic triangle. It argues that the socialist concept of “united front work” better explains Chinese (and Russian) policy in terms of short-term “tactical triangles.” To probe China’s long-term global order ideas, the second section explores narratives of tradition to examine the concentric circles model of global order seen in Chinese tianxia and Russian Eurasianism. To understand these competing Russocentric and Sinocentric global orders, the third section explores how each country’s official historiography highlights narratives of the nation and especially how national rejuvenation requires correcting the “national humiliation” of lost territories. Rather than see these narratives in a linear chronological history — i.e., from tradition to socialism to nationalism — this paper considers how they overlap in socialism, tradition, and nation, a non-linear dynamic triad of global order ideas. It concludes first that further research is necessary to examine the interrelation of these three narratives: while nation and tradition are often employed to support the overarching narrative of socialism in recent years, this could certainly change. The conclusion then argues that while these narratives may be coherent theoretically, they have not been very successful in achieving Beijing and Moscow’s foreign policy objectives.","PeriodicalId":274099,"journal":{"name":"Issues & Studies","volume":"115 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Issues & Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/s1013251123400088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

While many use rational IR theory to explain Chinese foreign policy behavior, this paper follows global IR to employ interpretivist theory to examine how Chinese elites understand their country’s role in the world. In particular, it explores the Chinese global order ideas of socialism, tradition, and nation through a comparative analysis of how they work in China–Russia relations, especially after China’s 20th Communist Party Congress in 2022. The first section presents a critical analysis of the realist understanding of the China–Russia–U.S. strategic triangle. It argues that the socialist concept of “united front work” better explains Chinese (and Russian) policy in terms of short-term “tactical triangles.” To probe China’s long-term global order ideas, the second section explores narratives of tradition to examine the concentric circles model of global order seen in Chinese tianxia and Russian Eurasianism. To understand these competing Russocentric and Sinocentric global orders, the third section explores how each country’s official historiography highlights narratives of the nation and especially how national rejuvenation requires correcting the “national humiliation” of lost territories. Rather than see these narratives in a linear chronological history — i.e., from tradition to socialism to nationalism — this paper considers how they overlap in socialism, tradition, and nation, a non-linear dynamic triad of global order ideas. It concludes first that further research is necessary to examine the interrelation of these three narratives: while nation and tradition are often employed to support the overarching narrative of socialism in recent years, this could certainly change. The conclusion then argues that while these narratives may be coherent theoretically, they have not been very successful in achieving Beijing and Moscow’s foreign policy objectives.
中国的全球秩序:中俄关系中的社会主义、传统与民族
虽然许多人使用理性国际关系理论来解释中国的外交政策行为,但本文遵循全球国际关系,采用解释主义理论来研究中国精英如何理解他们的国家在世界上的角色。特别地,它通过比较分析社会主义、传统和民族的全球秩序思想如何在中俄关系中发挥作用,特别是在2022年中国共产党第二十次代表大会之后,探讨了中国的全球秩序思想。第一部分对现实主义对中俄美关系的理解进行了批判性分析。战略三角形。它认为,“统一战线工作”的社会主义概念更好地解释了中国(和俄罗斯)在短期“战术三角形”方面的政策。为探究中国长期的全球秩序理念,第二部分探讨传统叙事,考察中国天下主义和俄罗斯欧亚主义中的全球秩序同心圆模式。为了理解这些相互竞争的以俄罗斯为中心和以中国为中心的全球秩序,第三部分探讨了每个国家的官方史学如何突出民族叙事,特别是民族复兴如何需要纠正失地的“国耻”。而不是看到这些叙述在线性时间顺序的历史-即,从传统到社会主义到民族主义-本文考虑他们如何在社会主义,传统和国家,全球秩序思想的非线性动态三位一体重叠。它首先得出的结论是,有必要进一步研究这三种叙事的相互关系:虽然近年来国家和传统经常被用来支持社会主义的总体叙事,但这种情况肯定会改变。结论认为,尽管这些叙述在理论上可能是连贯的,但它们在实现北京和莫斯科的外交政策目标方面并不十分成功。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书