Canary in the coal mine? China, the UNGA, and the changing world order

Abstract

How China assumes its position of superpower is one of the most important questions regarding global order in the twenty-first century. While considerable and sustained attention has been paid to China’s growing economic and military might, work examining how China is attempting, if at all, to influence the ecosystem of global norms is in its earlier stages. In this article we examine China’s actions in an important venue for the development of global norms, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). Using a unique dataset that captures how other countries move into or out of alignment with China on UNGA resolutions that are repeated over time, we find statistical evidence that China used diplomatic and economic means in an attempt to subtly alter international norms. We further illustrate these findings by examining four states that made substantive moves toward China on resolutions concerning national sovereignty, democracy, international order, non-interference, and human rights.

Power Plays and Balancing Acts: The Paradoxical Effects of Chinese Trade on African Foreign Policy Positions

“…This argument has been applied in the context of China’s international trade in recent years (e.g. Brazys and Dukalskis, 2017; Flores-Macías and Kreps, 2013; Ross, 2006). In particular, it forms the basis for the view that increased trade has provided China with significant political influence across Africa (see Alden, 2007; Large, 2008; Lumumba-Kasongo, 2011; Sun, 2014; Tull, 2006).…”

“…There are some partial exceptions that include coverage of other regions (e.g Flores-Macías and Kreps, 2013;Strüver, 2016;Kastner, 2016;Brazys and Dukalskis, 2017)…”

“… 3. There are some partial exceptions that include coverage of other regions (e.g. Brazys and Dukalskis, 2017; Flores-Macías and Kreps, 2013; Kastner, 2016; Strüver, 2016). …”

When democratic governance unites and divides: Social status and contestation in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

“…While scholars have argued that democratic governance became a more formal basis of social stratification in international society at the end of the Cold War, attenuating the principle of sovereign equality and marginalizing some states from the full benefits of membership (Clark, 2005: 159, 173–179; Donnelly, 2012; Hurrell, 2007: 143–158; Viola, 2013: 120–126), there is a dearth of research on potential implications in formal IOs. Scholarship on norm contestation typically analyzes norms as the primary object of explanation (Wiener, 2014, 2018; Brazys and Dukalskis, 2017; Deitelhoff and Zimmermann, 2020; Panke and Petersohn, 2012; Poppe and Wolff, 2013; Rosert and Schirmbeck, 2007; Wolff and Zimmermann, 2016). Less attention has been paid to symbols of informal social hierarchies as objects (or targets) of contestation in international organizations.…”

China and its Region: An Assessment of Hegemonic Prospects

“…On the study of world politics using UNGA voting data, seeVoeten (2013) andBailey, Strezhnev and Voeten (2017), and the database at https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:1902.1/12379 Also see analyses of the conditions under which the US and PRC "buy votes" with aid and other goods(Woo and Chung 2018;Brazys and Dukalskis 2017).29 The US Congress, for example, mandates annual reports that compare the US voting record to those of other member states, with particular emphasis on the voting records of US allies and various regional groupings, thus identifying "a country's orientation in world arenas: where it stands, with whom it stands (at least in a UN context), and for what purpose" (Department of State 2018: 3).…”