Domestic politics of Chinese foreign policy: where will Xi Jinping bring China?

Takeuchi, Hiroki

doi:10.1080/14799855.2019.1594782

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Scholars of Chinese foreign policy approach their task from a wide variety of angles using a wide variety of paradigmatic lenses. Lively debates persist between those who believe that one can explain Chinese foreign policy fully satisfactorily through the lens of rational choice, history, identity, culture, ideology, nationalism, personality, bureaucratic politics, or – most commonly – various combinations of these (see, e.g., Bueno de Mesquita et al, 1985; Chang Liao, 2018; Duan, 2017; Feng and He, 2017, 2020; Gong, 2018; Heberer, 2014; Hoo, 2017; Poh and Li, 2017; Rosyidin, 2019; Takeuchi, 2019; Wirth, 2020; Wong, 2018; Zhang, 2014; Zhu, 2011). Our task is not to adjudicate these debates as it might be if we sought to explain Chinese foreign policy in general, although we are inclined to suspect that they thrive on a series of false dichotomies (culture, for example, conditions rational choice, and is therefore not an alternative to it).…”

Section: Explaining Chinese Policy Changementioning

confidence: 99%

What’s Really Going On in the South China Sea?

Raymond

Welch

2022

Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most analysts and commentators portray China's conduct in the South China Sea as a series of aggressive norm violations by an emerging peer competitor to the United States. We argue that this narrative misreads both the substance and dynamics of recent Chinese policy. Since 2016, China has strenuously sought – and largely managed – not to be in technical violation of the Philippines Arbitration Tribunal ruling despite having publicly disavowed it and has attempted to position itself as a champion of win–win co-operation. This stands in stark contrast to the previous four years in which China rather shockingly began asserting itself with little regard for either legality or diplomatic nicety – the period in which the “aggressive China” narrative gelled. What explains China's whiplash behaviour? Why has the international community largely failed to notice recent changes and adjust the narrative accordingly? We argue that the answers to these questions lie in an eclectic appeal to bureaucratic struggles, the regime's two-level game balancing domestic and international pressures, and psychological considerations. These do not, however, provide satisfactory accounts either of China's behaviour or of the international response in the absence of recognising the crucial importance of second-order rules for making, interpreting, and applying first-order rules in the international system. Social practices of rule-making, in short, provide vital context. Our analysis suggests a series of takeaways both for International Relations theory and for managing relations with China.

show abstract

Section: Explaining Chinese Policy Changementioning

confidence: 99%

What’s Really Going On in the South China Sea?

Raymond

Welch

2022

Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the personalization of dictatorship may activate such a power struggle and allow nationalist hardliners to rise in foreign policy-making. The Chinese leadership is divided into reformist internationalists and nationalist hardliners (Takeuchi, 2019). They both agree that maintaining one-party rule is the utmost goal but have exactly opposite views on how to achieve the goal (Takeuchi, 2020).…”

Section: The Future Of Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

Chinese politics and comparative authoritarianism: institutionalization and adaptation for regime resilience

Takeuchi

Desai

2021

Japanese Journal of Political Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China's authoritarian regime under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) remains resilient and responsive to domestic and international threats to its survival, especially considering the inherent instability of other authoritarian regimes. What strategies allow the CCP to stay in power? How do institutions help the CCP to sustain one-party rule, if at all? How does the regime maintain centralized rule over its vast population and territory? Finally, how does the regime respond to the people's demands and dissatisfactions? This review essay discusses how the growing literature of comparative authoritarianism helps (or does not help) us to answer these questions. It discusses three books – one on comparative authoritarianism and two on Chinese politics. In How Dictatorships Work: Power, Personalization, and Collapse, the authors (i.e., Barbara Geddes, Joseph Wright, and Erica Frantz) test various hypotheses exploring the issues regarding the central political processes that shape the policy choices of authoritarian regimes, such as seizing power, consolidation of elites, information gathering, and how dictatorships break down. Are their findings consistent or contradictory with observation of Chinese authoritarian politics? To answer this question, we draw empirical evidence from Bruce Dickson's The Dictator's Dilemma: The Chinese Communist Party's Strategy for Survival and Min Ye's The Belt Road and Beyond: State Mobilized Globalization in China, 1998–2018. These books suggest why China's authoritarian regime remains resilient.

show abstract

Section: The Interests Of China India and Japan In The Rcep Negotiationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the former Japanese ambassador to China, Mr Miyamoto Yuji, Chinese leadership is divided between reformist internationalists and conservative hardliners that both influence responses toward internal issues and external issues, such as how to respond to international politics (Takeuchi 2019, p.205). Takeuchi (2019) summarised four books that highlighted the relations between China's domestic politics and international relations. According to these books, he suggested that President Xi Jinping has maintained his commitment to state‐owned enterprise reform and to coordinating foreign policy as a response to the domestic politics of China, thus resulting in threats to Asia‐Pacific regional security, as the other major powers see China's efforts as part of a plan to establish global dominance.…”

Section: The Interests Of China India and Japan In The Rcep Negotiationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The interests of China, India, and Japan in the negotiations of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership: Theoretical perspectives

Wardani¹

2021

Int Social Sci J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The negotiation process of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) has been challenging for its participating countries, who have sought to find a balanced compromise and consensus in spite of their many different interests. While some scholars have studied the RCEP negotiation, there has been no detailed study exploring how domestic interests influence leaders’ positions on the RCEP deal. The objective of this study is to explore the interests of major countries – China, India, and Japan – in the negotiation of the RCEP. China and Japan decided to stay within the RCEP formation, while India opted to stay out of the RCEP formation. This study argues that domestic interests have influenced leaders’ decisions in the RCEP negotiations. The existence of major countries shows hegemonic rivalry/game in the development of the RCEP. The neoliberal institutionalism theory has emphasised the importance of common interests for international cooperation. The existence of common interests has become a fundamental element for the conclusion of the RCEP to achieve its objective, namely economic integration, economic development, and strengthening economic cooperation.

show abstract

Domestic politics of Chinese foreign policy: where will Xi Jinping bring China?

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

What’s Really Going On in the South China Sea?

What’s Really Going On in the South China Sea?

Chinese politics and comparative authoritarianism: institutionalization and adaptation for regime resilience

The interests of China, India, and Japan in the negotiations of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership: Theoretical perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About