Knowledge Communities in US Foreign Policy Making: The American China Field and the End of Engagement with the PRC

IF 2.2 2区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Security Studies Pub Date : 2022-08-08 DOI:10.1080/09636412.2022.2133629

David M. McCourt

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The United States’ long-standing approach to the People’s Republic of China—“engagement”—is at an end, replaced by a tougher approach, labeled “strategic competition.” Foregrounding the role of knowledge communities in the making of US foreign policy, I show that engagement’s demise followed less a rational process responding to shifts in Chinese behavior and the balance of power, and more a paradigmatic turnover in key individuals’ views of China within the government and the China expert community. Adopting a sociological perspective attuned to the social and professional underpinnings of US foreign policy, I trace the paradigmatic turnover in US views of China to three processes: politicization, professional status competition, and personalization. Drawing on a range of sources, including over one hundred original interviews with members of the US China expert community, this article traces the entanglement of engagement at once political, professional, and deeply personal.

查看原文本刊更多论文

美国外交政策制定中的知识社区:美国中国领域与与中国接触的结束

摘要美国对中华人民共和国的长期做法——“接触”——已经结束，取而代之的是一种更强硬的做法，被称为“战略竞争”，我表明，参与的消亡与其说是一个理性的过程，不如说是对中国行为和权力平衡的转变的回应，更多的是政府和中国专家群体中关键人物对中国看法的典型转变。采用与美国外交政策的社会和职业基础相适应的社会学视角，我将美国对中国看法的典型转变追溯到三个过程：政治化、职业地位竞争和个性化。这篇文章引用了一系列来源，包括对美中专家群体成员的一百多次原创采访，追溯了接触的政治、专业和深刻的个人色彩。

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

Security Studies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Security Studies publishes innovative scholarly manuscripts that make a significant contribution – whether theoretical, empirical, or both – to our understanding of international security. Studies that do not emphasize the causes and consequences of war or the sources and conditions of peace fall outside the journal’s domain. Security Studies features articles that develop, test, and debate theories of international security – that is, articles that address an important research question, display innovation in research, contribute in a novel way to a body of knowledge, and (as appropriate) demonstrate theoretical development with state-of-the art use of appropriate methodological tools. While we encourage authors to discuss the policy implications of their work, articles that are primarily policy-oriented do not fit the journal’s mission. The journal publishes articles that challenge the conventional wisdom in the area of international security studies. Security Studies includes a wide range of topics ranging from nuclear proliferation and deterrence, civil-military relations, strategic culture, ethnic conflicts and their resolution, epidemics and national security, democracy and foreign-policy decision making, developments in qualitative and multi-method research, and the future of security studies.