Rising powers and state transformation: The case of China

Abstract

This article draws attention to the transformation of statehood under globalisation as a crucial dynamic shaping the emergence and conduct of 'rising powers'. That states are becoming increasingly fragmented, decentralised and internationalised is noted by some international political economy and global governance scholars, but is neglected in International Relations treatments of rising powers. This article critiques this neglect, demonstrating the importance of state transformation in understanding emerging powers' foreign and security policies, and their attempts to manage their increasingly transnational interests by promoting state transformation elsewhere, particularly in their near-abroad. It demonstrates the argument using the case of China, typically understood as a classical 'Westphalian' state. In reality, the Chinese state's substantial disaggregation profoundly shapes its external conduct in overseas development assistance and conflict zones like the South China Sea, and in its promotion of extraterritorial governance arrangements in spaces like the Greater Mekong Subregion.

Hunger Reduction in China: An Analysis of Contextual Factors

“…China's infrastructure development played a significant role in overcoming the geographical obstacles to trade, notably, differences in infrastructure investment in communications, for example, roads, railways, waterways, and telephones (Ahlers & Schubert, ; Chakraborty & Kumar, ; Hameiri & Jones, ; Huang, ; Tsui et al., ). Infrastructure investment has had a statistically significant positive impact on growth in China (Sahoo, Dash & Nataraj, ).…”

The Sino-Russian Relationship: Fellow Travellers in the West-dominated World

“…As a result, the volumes pay scarce attention to domestic factors that have potential to influence foreign policy. While top leadership in Beijing and Moscow retains control over strategic direction of their respective foreign policies, the implementation depends on a number of domestic actors (see for instance Hameiri and Jones 2016). While discussing developments in Russian-Chinese relations in the 1990s, Lukin's book paid a lot of attention to different domestic players and the role of their parochial interests.…”

Beyond the hinterland: exploring the international actorness of China’s Yunnan province

“…Before analysing the shift of scholarly interest to Chinese paradiplomacy, it should be noted that China has long been regarded as a typical centralized state (Hameiri and Jones 2016), with a monolithic grand strategy (Goldstein 2003). The central government in Beijing monopolized every aspect of political, economic and social activities, leaving non-state actors, including provincial governments, with no say in foreign policymaking (Perkins 1966;Barnett 1967Barnett , 1985O'Leary 1980;Garver 1993).…”