The sources of China's assertiveness: the system, domestic politics or leadership preferences?

Abstract

Why has China's foreign policy become more assertive since 2009, and what is driving Beijing's foreign policy orientations? Given the significance of China's rise over the past few decades, it is surprising that this question has not been subjected to systematic analysis as well as general investigation within scholarly research. This article serves to examine the sources of China's assertiveness using a system‐level, unit‐level and individual‐level analysis. This article first looks at system‐level explanations such as state power, external threats and national interests, and then considers unit‐level factors including bureaucratic competition, struggles of the elite and the surge of nationalism. However, both system‐level and unit‐level explanations alone fail to account for China's more assertive foreign policy. This suggests that individual factors play a major role in explaining the country's more assertive external behaviour. This is especially the case when the perceptions of the political elite are deeply embedded in the state leader's preferences. This finding can enhance our understanding of why traditional explanations, that do not incorporate the role of the state leader, may fail to predict Chinese foreign policy behaviour. To understand better the implications of China's rise, therefore, we must take into account the role of the state leadership and its impact on China's growing influence in international politics.

The Concept of ‘Community of Common Destiny’ in China's Diplomacy: Meaning, Motives and Implications

“…The Chinese government has also emphasized ‘two guides’ ( liangge yindao ) in their future diplomacy: ‘China needs to guide the international community to jointly build a more just and equitable new world order’ and ‘China needs to guide the international community to jointly safeguard international security’ (China Party School ). Some scholars argue that China's more assertive diplomacy is a reflection of ‘triumphalist’ mentality among China's elites and the preference of the president as the dominant leader (Liao , pp. 828–830).…”

Ambivalent accommodation: status signalling of a rising India and China's response

“…Chinese perceptions are shaped by India's status signals as well as China's identity and domestic calculations. 37 Just as India is sending out different signals about its preferred status, so China maintains an ambivalent attitude towards India. In particular, while having reservations regarding India's Great Power status, the Chinese embrace enthusiastically India's signals of developing country status.…”

Is Assertiveness Paying the Bill? China’s Domestic Audience Costs in the South China Sea Disputes

“…Yang Jiechi, the then Foreign Minister of China, rebuffed such statement and accused the United States of interfering with the disputes. Some scholars argue that China’s assertiveness in the South China set off after the 2008 global financial crisis—a juncture where a shift of power from Washington to Beijing was assumed to take place (e.g., Friedberg, 2015; Liao, 2016; Yahuda, 2013; Zhou, 2016). 2 2There is no definition of what assertiveness is in foreign policy terms, let alone China’s assertiveness.…”