Rationalizing Chinese hegemony

Doctor of PhilosophySecurity Studies Interdepartmental ProgramDavid GraffThis dissertation examines the Chinese style of imperialism in the early 21st century through China’s self-justifying rationalization and strategic thought. It develops a theory called Cultural Subjectivism to explore the PRC’s preferred world order. Specifically, it analyzes the characteristics of Chinese subjectivity and how Beijing shapes the roles of the self and others through the othering and altercating processes in order to justify the country’s overseas expansion. The international order that Beijing espouses reflects a realistic assessment of world politics. This realpolitik, however, is denied in the narratives for public consumption. Several idealistic principles that China claims are guiding its foreign policy (and devoid of strategic calculations) create a false impression that Beijing is an altruistic actor occupying the moral high ground. Anchoring Chinese behavior to the inherent benevolence of the PRC underpins an unfalsifiable self-justifying logic that, regardless of shifts in policies, Beijing’s behavior is always defensive, peaceful, non-expansionist and non-hegemonic. In accord with Beijing’s assessments of the post-Cold War peace, its narratives have grown more inclusive in that the opposing roles (the othering) between the self and others becomes less salient while the role congruence (the altercasting) that indicates shared interests gets more prevalent. This is tailored to meet China’s strategic needs of the attainment of material strength and international status in the era of post-Cold War globalization through engagement with countries around the world. Paralleling the increasing usage of inclusive rhetoric to rationalize Beijing’s overseas expansion is the growing discursive assertiveness of a China-espoused world order in which Chinese institutions and Chinese culture are said, due to their innate benevolence compared to hegemonic capitalism, to bring the world peace and prosperity. After all, the inclusive narratives and the role (re)construction spin around the concept of Chinese socialism, an embodiment of the PRC’s self-centeredness, and how it is good for both domestic development and international community. Beijing’s role construction operates within a quasi-world-like “Asia Pacific” that includes the Pacific and Indian Oceans and the Eurasian continent. Within this expansive geographical scope, China adopts the grand strategy of “winning without fighting” which consists of the strategies of “cooperation” and limited provocations. The purpose is to amass resources through the land to cope with the challenges from the sea. As the strategic logic of winning without fighting dictates, the PRC intends to achieve its political goals during peacetime while, through disarming enemies and strengthening itself in its overseas expansion, preparing for a possible future war if non-war solutions prove impossible for obtaining its goals. Accordingly, “active defense” needs to be understood as a strategic guideline that directs the generation of resources and abilities for both non-war and war solutions. From a Chinese perspective, regardless of the means adopted, China’s behavior is always defensive and for the sake of peace wherever the activities occur. This unfalsifiable rationalization that relies on the benevolent nature of the self, rather than an admission of realistic calculations, to explain its own behavior functions on a global level and characterizes active defense. From the perspective of discursive rationalization, China exhibits the height of imperialism. Compared to Japan and the US, Beijing shows an unprecedented degree and scale in claiming itself moral in that it is altruistic and inclusive, while firmly believing in its own claims. It is the gulf between complicated realities and the extent of the PRC’s willingness to systematically deny such or cover up what happens on the ground and a lower degree of transparency in its strategic calculations for self-interests that make Chinese imperialism different from others

Russia-China Relations

This open access book examines Russia-China relations across a variety of civilian and military areas of cooperation. Leading experts in the field present empirical case studies covering a wide range of strategic cooperation areas between Russia and China, such as technological, military, economic and political cooperation. The contributing authors shed new light on Chinese and Russian strategic goals, external push and pull factors, and mutual perception shifts, and discuss the options for Western countries to influence this development. This book analyses the evolution of the relationship since the watershed moment of the Crimean crisis in 2014, and whether or not a full-blown military alliance, as hinted in late 2020 by President Putin, is indeed a realistic scenario for which NATO will have to prepare. It will appeal to students and scholars of international relations, political decision-makers, as well as anyone interested in Eurasian politics and the potential military-strategic impact of a Russian-Chinese alliance for NATO

Congressional Testimony: Beijing, Unrestricted Warfare, and Threat Potentials

This is a transcript of a hearing on China’s Military Modernization and Its Impact on the United States and the Asia-Pacific, Panel II: Beijing’s Doctrine on the Conduct of \u27Irregular Forms of Warfare\u27 before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission

Risk Management of the “Belt and Road Initiative” Projects – An Empirical Study on Investments of the Chinese State- Owned-Banks in the Region

This thesis attempts to examine the current risk issues of state-owned banks for their involvement in the ‘Belt and Road’ projects, and to develop a unique risk management framework. It is found in the literature that financial policies and intermediaries play a fundamental role in cross-border investment and requires careful consideration of appropriate methods and regulation instruments, as cross-border investment always involves risks. Developing countries with relatively immature market systems may still need policy-based financial provision at the present stage. Together with an evaluation of traditional measures adopted by firms involved in OFDI, the study tries to identify the potential risk factors that affect BRI projects by looking at various contemporary risk factors. The investigation of the relations between SOBs and development finance that has been overlooked in the existing literature becomes the foundation of this research, whilst thorough evaluations are given to the challenging issues among these projects.This research adopts qualitative research methods, in which the adoption of case studies and interviews as the primary approaches, combined with documentary analysis throughout the research process. The carefully selected cases and correspondent analysis of parallel comparisons provide essential clues for identifying, classifying and prioritizing the risk factors associated with the BRI project. This study aims to reveal the particularities of the state-owned investments of BRI project financing to achieve the research objectives by connecting the theoretical construction with risk management issues. This respect goes beyond the traditional perspective of overseas investment risk management as it endows the classical theory with specific implications under empirical evidence