{"title":"东盟国家应对中国推动的区域合作倡议:再看“一带一路”和“可持续发展战略”","authors":"Wang Jie, Liang Ce","doi":"10.1080/02185377.2023.2265326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTThis research contributes to an understanding of the ‘intertwined destiny’ of China’s twin initiatives, the BRI and the CSD. We find that the security implications of the twin initiatives drive different patterns of responses among ASEAN states. The dynamism emanates from diversifying preferences of ASEAN states amid complex interdependence. The BRI does a better job of projecting China’s material and soft power, as it aligns closely with ASEAN states’ comprehensive national interests. The CSD fares less well because it seeks to impose Beijing’s hegemonic claims on the SCS, thereby posing a security challenge to claimant states in the region. The nuances suggest that the charm of the BRI cannot be readily converted into a passport for the CSD. For some ASEAN states, power asymmetry inherent in their relations with China requires a security commitment from this giant northern neighbour, which Beijing is still reluctant to provide.KEYWORDS: ASEANChinabelt and road initiativea shared future for mankinda community of shared destinyXi Jinping diplomacySouth China Sea disputes AcknowledgmentThe authors express gratitude to Rose Yahui GU for data collection assistance. She worked at International SOS (Singapore, Headquarters) as a security risk specialist, in APAC between 2019–2021, and continues to provide advice afterward.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Guangzhou University: [Grant Number 2900603999; 69-6209190].Notes on contributorsWang JieWang Jie is an Assistant Professor at the Public Administration School, Guangzhou University, China. Postal address: 230 Wai Huan Xi Road, Guangzhou Higher Education Mega Center, Guangzhou 510006 China; e-mail: wangjie@u.nus.edu. She received Ph.D. from the Department of Political Science, National University of Singapore. She is a research associate at the Institute of Rural Revitalization GZHU (Guangzhou daxue xiangcun zhenxing yanjiu yuan).Liang CeLiang Ce received Ph.D. from the Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge. She was a Research Associate at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy between 2016 and 2017. Email: cl714@cantab.ac.uk","PeriodicalId":44333,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Political Science","volume":"100 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ASEAN states’ responses to China-driven regional cooperation initiatives: the BRI and the CSD revisited\",\"authors\":\"Wang Jie, Liang Ce\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02185377.2023.2265326\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTThis research contributes to an understanding of the ‘intertwined destiny’ of China’s twin initiatives, the BRI and the CSD. We find that the security implications of the twin initiatives drive different patterns of responses among ASEAN states. The dynamism emanates from diversifying preferences of ASEAN states amid complex interdependence. The BRI does a better job of projecting China’s material and soft power, as it aligns closely with ASEAN states’ comprehensive national interests. The CSD fares less well because it seeks to impose Beijing’s hegemonic claims on the SCS, thereby posing a security challenge to claimant states in the region. The nuances suggest that the charm of the BRI cannot be readily converted into a passport for the CSD. For some ASEAN states, power asymmetry inherent in their relations with China requires a security commitment from this giant northern neighbour, which Beijing is still reluctant to provide.KEYWORDS: ASEANChinabelt and road initiativea shared future for mankinda community of shared destinyXi Jinping diplomacySouth China Sea disputes AcknowledgmentThe authors express gratitude to Rose Yahui GU for data collection assistance. She worked at International SOS (Singapore, Headquarters) as a security risk specialist, in APAC between 2019–2021, and continues to provide advice afterward.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Guangzhou University: [Grant Number 2900603999; 69-6209190].Notes on contributorsWang JieWang Jie is an Assistant Professor at the Public Administration School, Guangzhou University, China. Postal address: 230 Wai Huan Xi Road, Guangzhou Higher Education Mega Center, Guangzhou 510006 China; e-mail: wangjie@u.nus.edu. She received Ph.D. from the Department of Political Science, National University of Singapore. She is a research associate at the Institute of Rural Revitalization GZHU (Guangzhou daxue xiangcun zhenxing yanjiu yuan).Liang CeLiang Ce received Ph.D. from the Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge. She was a Research Associate at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy between 2016 and 2017. Email: cl714@cantab.ac.uk\",\"PeriodicalId\":44333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Political Science\",\"volume\":\"100 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2023.2265326\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2023.2265326","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
ASEAN states’ responses to China-driven regional cooperation initiatives: the BRI and the CSD revisited
ABSTRACTThis research contributes to an understanding of the ‘intertwined destiny’ of China’s twin initiatives, the BRI and the CSD. We find that the security implications of the twin initiatives drive different patterns of responses among ASEAN states. The dynamism emanates from diversifying preferences of ASEAN states amid complex interdependence. The BRI does a better job of projecting China’s material and soft power, as it aligns closely with ASEAN states’ comprehensive national interests. The CSD fares less well because it seeks to impose Beijing’s hegemonic claims on the SCS, thereby posing a security challenge to claimant states in the region. The nuances suggest that the charm of the BRI cannot be readily converted into a passport for the CSD. For some ASEAN states, power asymmetry inherent in their relations with China requires a security commitment from this giant northern neighbour, which Beijing is still reluctant to provide.KEYWORDS: ASEANChinabelt and road initiativea shared future for mankinda community of shared destinyXi Jinping diplomacySouth China Sea disputes AcknowledgmentThe authors express gratitude to Rose Yahui GU for data collection assistance. She worked at International SOS (Singapore, Headquarters) as a security risk specialist, in APAC between 2019–2021, and continues to provide advice afterward.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Guangzhou University: [Grant Number 2900603999; 69-6209190].Notes on contributorsWang JieWang Jie is an Assistant Professor at the Public Administration School, Guangzhou University, China. Postal address: 230 Wai Huan Xi Road, Guangzhou Higher Education Mega Center, Guangzhou 510006 China; e-mail: wangjie@u.nus.edu. She received Ph.D. from the Department of Political Science, National University of Singapore. She is a research associate at the Institute of Rural Revitalization GZHU (Guangzhou daxue xiangcun zhenxing yanjiu yuan).Liang CeLiang Ce received Ph.D. from the Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge. She was a Research Associate at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy between 2016 and 2017. Email: cl714@cantab.ac.uk
期刊介绍:
Asian Journal of Political Science ( AJPS) is an international refereed journal affiliated to the Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University. Published since 1993, AJPS is a leading journal on Asian politics and governance. It publishes high-quality original articles in major areas of political science, including comparative politics, political thought, international relations, public policy, and public administration, with specific reference to Asian regions and countries. AJPS aims to address some of the most contemporary political and administrative issues in Asia (especially in East, South, and Southeast Asia) at the local, national, and global levels. The journal can be of great value to academic experts, researchers, and students in the above areas of political science as well as to practical policy makers, state institutions, and international agencies.