Cultural Approach to China Foreign Policy
china foreign J OF CHIN POLIT SCI DOI 10.1007/s11366-012-9192-4 R E S E A R C H A RT I C L E
Chinese Foreign Policy Making 2010–2011: Using the Cultural Approach to Explain Complexity
Mark W. Lai
# Journal of Chinese Political Science/Association of Chinese Political Studies 2012
Abstract The rising economic strength of China over the past decade has aroused concern over the imbalance of global power. Research on Chinese foreign policy has again become of critical importance to the study of international relations and comparative politics. This article will begin with an overview of pertinent studies, categorizing them into cultural and non-cultural approaches, then it will re-examine the methodological problems associated with studying Chinese foreign policy making. Essentially, this article argues that that any research approach can generate methodological mistakes if undertaken without due care and attention. Rather, a multi-approach with emphasis on cultural factors will be a good model for future study. In other words, we have advocated an improved synergy of rational choice, structural, and cultural approaches. In the case study of Chinese foreign policy making between 2010 and 2011, the multi-approach provided a comprehensive picture of the Chinese thinking process behind seemingly irrational or illogical policy choices. It was the rising sense of frustration, the combination of over-confidence and self-doubt, which made foreign policy choices reflect the national interests at certain times and not at other times. Keywords Chinese Foreign Policy . Cultural Approach . China Study . Sino-US Relation . China in 2010
The rising economic strength of China over the past decade has aroused concern over the imbalance of global power. Research on Chinese foreign policy has again become of critical importance to the study of international relations and comparative politics.1
1
For an updated literature review of Chinese foreign policy research in
Chinese Foreign Policy Making 2010–2011: Using the Cultural Approach to Explain Complexity
Mark W. Lai
# Journal of Chinese Political Science/Association of Chinese Political Studies 2012
Abstract The rising economic strength of China over the past decade has aroused concern over the imbalance of global power. Research on Chinese foreign policy has again become of critical importance to the study of international relations and comparative politics. This article will begin with an overview of pertinent studies, categorizing them into cultural and non-cultural approaches, then it will re-examine the methodological problems associated with studying Chinese foreign policy making. Essentially, this article argues that that any research approach can generate methodological mistakes if undertaken without due care and attention. Rather, a multi-approach with emphasis on cultural factors will be a good model for future study. In other words, we have advocated an improved synergy of rational choice, structural, and cultural approaches. In the case study of Chinese foreign policy making between 2010 and 2011, the multi-approach provided a comprehensive picture of the Chinese thinking process behind seemingly irrational or illogical policy choices. It was the rising sense of frustration, the combination of over-confidence and self-doubt, which made foreign policy choices reflect the national interests at certain times and not at other times. Keywords Chinese Foreign Policy . Cultural Approach . China Study . Sino-US Relation . China in 2010
The rising economic strength of China over the past decade has aroused concern over the imbalance of global power. Research on Chinese foreign policy has again become of critical importance to the study of international relations and comparative politics.1
1
For an updated literature review of Chinese foreign policy research in
References: 1. Johnston, Alastair Iain, Robert S. Ross (Eds.) (2006). New directions in the study of China’s foreign policy. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. 2. Chiu, K.-S. 2009. Chinese foreign policy and international relations theory: an emerging conversation in taiwan. East Asian Studies 40: 2. Chiu, Kun-Shuan. 2009. Chinese foreign policy and international relations theory: an emerging conversation in taiwan. East Asian Studies 40: 2. 3. Kurlantzick, Joshua. 2008. Charm offensive: how China’s soft power is transforming the world. Yale University Press 4. Nye, Joseph S. 2005. Soft power: the means to success in world politics. Public Affairs Press 5. Geertz, Clifford. 1977. “Religion as a Cultural System.” The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, Harper Torchbooks, p. 89. 6. Spiro, Melford E. 1984. Some reflection on cultural determinism and relativism with special reference to emotion and reason. In Cultural theory: essays on mind, self, and emotion. eds. Richard A. Schweder, Robert A. LeVine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 7. Kroeber, A. L., Clyde Kluckholm. 1952. Culture: a critical review of concepts and definitions. Papers of the Peabody Museum of American Archeology and Ethnology 47: 1 8. Johnston, Alastair Iain. 1995. Cultural realism—strategic culture and grand strategy in Chinese History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, p. 35 9. Laitin, David D. 1988. Political culture and political references. American Political Science Review 82: 589–593. 10. Ross, Marc Howard. 1988. Studying politics cross-culturally: key concepts and issues. Behavior Science Research 22: 105–129. 11. Keesing, Roger M. 1974. Theories of culture. In Annual review of anthropology, 3. ed. Bernard Siegal, et al., pp. 75–76, 91. 12. Almond, Gabriel A., G. Bingham Powell. 1963. The civic culture: political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press 13. Inglehart, Ronald. 1988. The renaissance of political culture. American Political Science Review 82: 1203–1230 14. Putnam, Robert D. 1993. Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press 15. Ross, Marc Howard. 1997. Culture and identity in comparative political analysis. In Comparative politics: rationality, culture and structure. eds. Mark Irving Lichbach, Alan S. Zuckerman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 61 Chinese Foreign Policy Making 2010–2011 16. Waltz, Kenneth. 1979. Theory of international politics. New York: McGraw-Hill Press 17. Shih, Chih-yu. 1990. The spirit of Chinese foreign policy, Ch.4. New York: St. Martin’s Press 18. Tretiak, Daniel. 1981. Who makes Chinese Foreign Policy Today (Late 1980). The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 5: 137 19. Nathan, Andrew J. 1997. China’s transition, Ch.10. New York: Columbia University Press 20. Hunt, Michael H. 1996. The genesis of chinese communist foreign policy. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 3 21. Fu, Zhengyuan. 1993. Autocratic tradition and Chinese politics. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 7, 10. 22. Chih-yu Shih. 1993. China’s just world—the morality of Chinese foreign policy. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 201–203 23. Zheng, Yongnian. 1999. Discovering Chinese Nationalism in China: modernization, identity, and international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 3 24. Lichbach, Mark I., Alan S. Zuckerman. 1997. Research tradition and theory in comparative politics. In Comparative politics: rationality, culture and structure. eds. Mark Irving Lichbach and Alan S. Zuckerman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–16 25. Levi, Margaret. 1997. A model, a method, and a map: rational choice in comparative and historical analysis. In Comparative politics: rationality, culture and structure. eds. Mark Irving Lichbach and Alan S. Zuckerman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 20 26. Pye, Lucian. 1981. The dynamics of Chinese politics. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, Publishers, Inc., p. 35 27. Kohli, Atul, Peter Evans, Peter J. Katzenstein, Adam Przeworski, Susanne Hoeber, Rudolph, James C. Scott, Theda Skocpol. 1995. The role of theory in comparative politics: a symposium. World Politics 48: 1–49 28. Steiner, H. 1950. Arthur Mainsprings of Chinese communist foreign policy. The American Journal of International Law 44(1): 71. 29. Allison, Graham T. 1969. Conceptual models and the Cudan missile crisis. American Political Science Review 63(3): 689–718 30. Fairbank, John King (ed.). 1968. The Chinese world order: traditional China’s foreign relations. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 6, 21, 111, 138. 31. Johnston, Alastair Iain. 1995. Cultural realism—Strategic Culture and grand strategy in Chinese history. Princeton: Princeton University Press, p. 1 32. BBC. News. 2011. Sino-US ties worse in 2010 says China survey. Jan. 17th, Asia-Pacific. 33. Kleine-Ahlbrandt, Stephanie, Andrew Small. 2008. China’s new dictatorship diplomacy. Foreign Affairs 87(1): 00157120 Mark Lai is Assistant Professor, Department of International Affairs, Wenzao Ursuline College of Languages. With doctoral degree from State University of New York, Albany, Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy, master degree from New York University, and bachelor degree from National Taiwan University, his academic career specialized in international relations, political economy and foreign policy analysis. Published works are in Review of Global Politics, Feng Chia Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, and book chapter published by Rowman and Littlefiled-Lexington Books. He is currently working on various projects titled: Rethinking Rogowski’s Model in Taiwan’s Case (using statistical model to detect the relations between foreign policy and domestic politics over time) and Friend or Foe— Empirical Study on the Global Reaction to US Hegemon 2011.