"The Peaceful Rise" of China: the problem of image and perception in 2000-2019

As it can be seen from the literature review, this complex phenomenon has been studied extensively on behalf of economic sphere, international relations, political economy separately, focusing on either of the two approaches - the Chinese or the Western - which creates a necessity in a complex analysis that would provide the study and outlook regarding both sides of the debate which our research attempts to produce. Hence, we expect our paper to be further implied as a source for the scholarly research on the matter because the rise politics has been evolving into a more active one, and in the following decade China has been forecasted to acquire the position of the hegemon establishing the unipolar world which creates the conditions for the urgent studies in the field of Chinese foreign policy analysis, especially those examining the origins of the contemporary political course. We assume, thus, that the research design and produced findings will enable the predictions based on redevelopment of the agenda in the nearest future.

At the same time the current global crisis connected with the pandemic should be taken into the account while predicting the development of China's relations with other global actors. We estimate that the projects and initiatives that had been pursued until 2019 are going to be continued in 2020 regardless of the obstacles imposed by the epidemic as the state possesses the necessary resource endowment to catch up with the economic growth after the situation will be stabilized. On the other hand, in case the great powers, including China, will not be able to recover after the crisis in the short term the paper represents a particular importance for the conduction of further research in the area of China and the peaceful rise continuation or temporary termination, as it provides a complex overview on Chinese capabilities and gives an outlook of what its strategies with regard to the international relations resembled before the escalation of the crisis and helps estimate the probable redistribution of power that can happen.

Beside the confirmation of our hypothesis the paper's finding also lies in the fact that the research has helped to confirm that the real contradiction in perceptions has the format of the G2 which is between China and the US as the main great powers. Particularly, it can be seen that even though in the current conditions of multipolarity all of the participating great powers which have been discussed in the paper, namely India, Japan, the US, Russia, and the EU have a specific area of influence attributed to them. However based on our research we can infer that judging from the analysis of the relations of the great powers towards China, particularly, if they are more on the hostile scheme or on pragmatic one, indicates that if some of them recognize the power of China, while others follow the example of the US, the political authority and status of the states are not equal.

Specifically, India being the other rising power has been predicted to engage in conflictions relations with China especially due to the fact that they are situated in the same region, therefore they can compete for the dominance, however as proved with the means of the scholarly research and data, even though the states experience several clashes, including territorial disputes and resource hunt, since early 2000s the governments of both China and India have been underlining the necessity of cooperation and the Indian political leadership has been actively promoting the idea of China being one of the most important partners, rather than threats for India.

From these can be concluded that Japan based on multiple factors has been subject to the Eastphalian peace arrangement, by this recognizing the Chinese power and paying the tribute. As for the cases of the EU and Russia, the China-threat rhetoric has been present but in different ways. For Russia, China represents a threat to its influence in the Central Asia. However, sharing mutual antagonism towards the United States actors cooperate in multiple spheres, including the security of the region and the energy sector, which makes Russia de facto recognize the status of China. With regard to the EU, the economic ties with China have been enhanced during the last two decades and based on the geographical location the relations between the EU and China are different from those of Russia, Japan or India. In addition, the European Union represents not a sovereign nation-state but a supranational institution, therefore acting as one of the international orders mechanisms the threat of China for it lies in its continuous violations of the norms of the international law, intellectual property rights, human rights.

On the other part of the spectrum Japanese contradictions with China are mostly concerned with the historical past, disputed territories and militarization of the South China Sea. It can be seen that, according to the available materials, Japanese reaction to the rise of China lies with a realist approach as the development and securitization of China provokes the security dilemma on behalf of Japan. Simultaneously, we have found out that Japan has been largely influenced by the presence of the United States on its territory, therefore the Japanese contradictions with China are more put forward by alliance with the US rather than by direct threat. Hence, it can be estimated that if the US is more influential than Japan as it is the originator of the hostility towards China, then indeed the contradiction between the perceptions of the rise of whether it is peaceful or provocative and aggressive in fact is the contradiction between the two approaches - the Chinese and the American one. All of the other key players are likely to take one of the two sides, however alone they have lesser influence and power capabilities then the G2, thus as the scholars have suggested the real polarization of the perceptions and clashing approaches are the results of the new Cold War.

Conclusion

Inferring from the analyzed case studies and literature materials, it can be seen that the problem of perceiving the rise of China is still going to be subject to various interpretations and research as the state keeps strengthening its power and position in the international relations which makes it the topic of vital importance for scholarly community. Even though the existing literature extensively examines the phenomenon of the Chinese development from the point of Beijing Consensus, party power legitimization, exercise of communism in a party-state, interaction with other actors, as seen from the literature review, the materials are abundant, however only minor part of them takes up a complex outlook on the issue while the majority is dedicated to some narrow area of study. This underlines the necessity of the further research on the matter of perception and image building, taking an account of different approaches to the study of contemporary international relations and growing importance of the constructivist perspective in explaining the foreign policy agenda of the states, especially applicable to the case of China, representing a distinctive logic and historical past, which makes it insufficient to apply the prevailing realist paradigm (James & Zhang, 2005). Therefore, we have attempted to provide a synthesis of several types of sources, by the means of which the work aimed to produce a quality material on the gradual progress in the formulation of the peaceful rise political course. Through tracing the origins of the rise to the power logic, overview of the actual alterations in the institutional organization and their consequent effects, the research builds a fundament for the explanation of the further changes and shifts in both the party discourse and actual political strategy.

The paper concluded that it is important to notice that the foreign policy of China experienced considerable change since the beginning of the rise politics which is late 1970s - early 1990s towards the beginning of the 2000s onwards. The state has been pursuing the course of gradually developing and sustaining the exceptional economic growth, predicted to surpass the United States and acquire the status of the global economic leader. For the moment, the two rivalries have been vigorously competing as seen from the study of their interrelations, with the direct embodiment of the mutual hostilities in the trade war example. At the same time, particular emphasis should be placed on that, regardless of the use of coercive economic measures, the escalation of an open hard power conflict has not been present, which makes the study conclude, that taking into consideration the adopted definition of peace and China's approach to conceptualization of the soft power means, the peaceful rise framework has not been violated or downgraded.

As seen from the materials constructing the first chapter of the paper, the overview of

the initial rise course and the actual economic and political institutional adjustments are necessary to estimate the factors that had let to the Beijing Consensus being an alternative path to development, contrast to widely accepted list of conditions necessary to acquire the status of a developed state. The Chinese model of development manifests the fact that the Chinese state has been historically different from the Western idea of the state and perception of the international behavior which underlines the concept of Chinese exceptionalism frequently referred to in the contemporary peaceful rise of China course. What is more, passiveness to its participation in the international agenda and engagement in interrelation with other key global players during the domestic reformation and the rise of 1980s has been analyzed through the prism of participation in the international organizations the majority of which represented economic platforms and forums which follows natural from the exceptional economic performance of China during that period. Other than that, the state experienced passiveness towards expressing its national interests.

On the other hand, the following two chapters are dedicated to the analysis of the Chinese foreign policy during the period since 2000s starting with the examination of the historical prerequisites to the current political strategy of a great power behavior which followed directly from the past experience of ancient and medieval China being the regional hegemon and preserving the regional order with the means of the tributary system of the vassal states. It follows that the tributary system existing for centuries has created a distinctive approach to regionalism which Asian states still pursue with their relations to China. Hence we have seen that due to the historically established pattern of interrelation and inclusion of the Confucian values into the present-day political concepts of the Asian states, the Eastphalian peace is maintained and even rising powers of the region, especially India, recognize the power and status of contemporary China with its attempt to gain past glory. The case studies of the Chinese relations with the great powers, namely the US, Russia, Japan, the EU, have been providing the grounds for concluding that in case of at the United States and its allied Japan the approach driving the hostile sentiments is mainly neorealist which makes these actors pursue balancing strategies. Thus, presence of the peacefulness of the rise in the Chinese official political discourse is not likely to change the realist perceptions of the US and Japan.

At the same time even though the other cases of great power actors, Russia and the EU, adopted the same logic of China-threat, the fact, their interactions are driven more by pragmatism, as the players have voluntary chosen to cooperate with China based on shared interests and goals, indicates that they recognize the status and authority of the Chinese state thus contributing to the possible restoration of the neo-tributary system. Based on this polarization of the perceptions it can be inferred that the two main approaches are represented by the Chinese and the American sides of the debate, yet while both parties are sticking to their stances on the rise politics the relations between these poles are predicted to stagnate or deteriorate. Hence, taking into the account the current situation on the verge of global crisis and probable change in the Chinese grand strategy, it can be assumed that the paper is going to be useful both in terms of providing a new perspective on studying the phenomenon and representing a basis for the future research, as we aimed at performing a multisided analysis of the contemporary period, constructed upon a historical outlook on the development.

Reference list

Abegunrin, O., & Manyeruke, C. (2020). China's Power in Africa. Springer International Publishing.

Akamatsu, K. (1962). A historical pattern of economic growth in developing countries. The Developing Economies, 1(s1), 3-25.

Bajpai, K., Ho, S., & Miller, M. C. (Eds.). (2020). Routledge Handbook of China-India Relations. Routledge.

Baldwin, D. A. (1993). Neoliberalism, neorealism, and world politics. In Elman, C., & Jensen, M. (Eds). (2014). The realism reader. Routledge, 17-18.

Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in international politics. International organization, 59(1), 39-75.

Beeson, M. (2010). Asymmetrical regionalism: China, Southeast Asia and uneven development. East Asia, 27(4), 329-343.

Beeson, M. (2013). Can China Lead?. Third World Quarterly, 34(2), 233-250.

Besley, T. (1995). Property rights and investment incentives: Theory and evidence from Ghana. Journal of Political Economy, 103(5), 903-937.

Bolt, P. J. & Cross, S. (2018). China, Russia and twenty-first century global geopolitics. Oxford University Press.

Brautigam, D., Xiaoyang, T., & Xia, Y. (2018). What Kinds of Chinese `Geese'Are Flying to Africa? Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing Firms. Journal of African Economies, 27(suppl_1), i29-i51.

Breslin, S. (2010). Comparative theory, China, and the future of East Asian regionalism (s). Review of International Studies, 36(3), 709-729.

Brodsgaard, K. E. (1987). Economic and Political Reform in Post-Mao China. The Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies, 1(1), 31-56.

Brzezinski, Z. (2012). Strategic vision: America and the crisis of global power. Basic Books.

Bull, H. (2012). The anarchical society: a study of order in world politics. Macmillan International Higher Education.

Callahan, W. A. (2005). The Rise of China. How to Understand China: The Dangers and Opportunities of Being a Rising Power. Review of International Studies, 31(4), 701-714.

Chiang, M. H. (2019). Contemporary China-Japan Relations: the Politically Driven Economic Linkage. East Asia, 36(4), 271-290.

Cohen, W. I. (2007). China's rise in Historical Perspective. Journal of Strategic Studies, 30(4-5), 683-704.

Dahlman, C. (2011). The world under pressure: How China and India are influencing the global economy and environment. Stanford University Press.

De Santis, H. (2005). The dragon and the tigers: China and Asian regionalism. World Policy Journal, 22(2), 23-36.

Deng, Y. (2007). Remolding great power politics: China's strategic partnerships with Russia, the European Union, and India. Journal of Strategic Studies, 30(4-5), 863-903.

Ding, S. (2010). Analyzing Rising Power from the Perspective of Soft Power: a new look at China's rise to the status quo power. Journal of Contemporary China, 19(64), 255-272.

Dreyer, J. T. (2019). Warmer Political and Economic Relations, Continuing Military Cincerns. Comparative Connections, 20(3), 93-134.

Fassbender, B. (2003). Sovereignty and constitutionalism in international law (pp. 115-143). Hart.

Gaur, M. (Eds). (2011). Foreign Policy Research Centre Journal. Focus: India's Look East Policy. FPRC Journal, 8.

Gerschenkron, A. (1962). Economic backwardness in historical perspective: a book of essays. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Gu, J., Humphrey, J., & Messner, D. (2008). Global governance and developing countries: the implications of the rise of China. World development, 36(2), 274-292.

Guerrero, D. G., Manji, F., & Manji, F. M. (Eds.). (2008). China's new role in Africa and the south: a search for a new perspective. Fahamu/Pambazuka.

Hartig, F. (2012). Confucius Institutes and the rise of China. Journal of Chinese Political Science, 17(1), 53-76.

Herrmann, R. K. (2003). Image theory and strategic interaction in international relations. In Sears, D. O., Huddy, L., & Jervis, R. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology. Oxford University Press, 285-314.

Herrmann, R. K., & Fischerkeller, M. P. (1995). Beyond the enemy image and spiral model: cognitive-strategic research after the cold war. International Organization, 49(3), 415-450.

Ho, P. (2005). Developmental dilemmas: land reform and institutional change in China. Routledge.

Holsti, O. R. (1962). The belief system and national images: A case study. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 6(3), 244-252.

Iriye, A. (1970). Imperialism in East Asia. Modern East Asia, 122-50.

Jacques, M. (2012). When China rules the world: The rise of the middle kingdom and the end of the western world. Penguin UK.

James, P., & Zhang, E. (2005). Chinese choices: A poliheuristic analysis of foreign policy crises, 1950-1996. Foreign Policy Analysis, 1(1), 31-54.

Jia, Y. (2019). Beyond the “Bhai-Bhai” Rhetoric: China-India Literary Relations, 1950-1990. Doctoral dissertation. SOAS University of London.

Jisi, W. (2011). China's search for a grand strategy: A rising great power finds its way. Foreign Affairs, 68-79.

Kelly, R. E. (2012). A `Confucian long peace' in pre-Western East Asia?. European Journal of International Relations, 18(3), 407-430.

Keohane, R. O. (1988). International institutions: two approaches. International studies quarterly, 32(4), 379-396.

Keohane, R. O. (1998). International institutions: Can interdependence work?. Foreign policy, 82-194.

Keohane, R. O. (2005). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton University Press.

Kent, A. (2007). Beyond Compliance: China, International Organizations, and Global Security. Stanford University Press.

Kim, S. S. (2018). China and the world: Chinese foreign policy faces the new millennium. Routledge.

Kim, S. W. (2018). IX. The Eastphalian Project Revisited. The Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, 6(1), 102-106.

Korolev, A. (2019). On the Verge of an Alliance: Contemporary China-Russia Military Cooperation. Asian Security, 15(3), 233-252.

Krasner, S. D. (Ed.). (1983). International regimes. Cornell University Press.

Krukowska, M. (2016). China's One Belt, One Road strategy and its implication for the global world order. International Business and Global Economy, 35(1), 157-168.

Kugler, J., & Organski, A. F. (1989). The power transition: A retrospective and prospective evaluation. Handbook of war studies, 1, 171-194.

Lecours, A. (Ed.). (2005). New institutionalism: Theory and analysis (Vol. 23). University of Toronto Press.

Li, Z. (2010). China-India relations, strategic engagement and challenges. Asie. Visions, (34).

Lin, J. Y., Cai, F., & Li, Z. (2003). The China miracle: Development strategy and economic reform. Chinese University Press.

Liu, K. (2020). China's Policy Response to the China US Trade War: An Initial Assessment. The Chinese Economy, 53(2), 158-176.

Liu, T., & Woo, W. T. (2018) Understanding the U.S.-China Trade War, China Economic Journal, 11(3), 319-340.

Liu, W. (2014). China in the United Nations. World Scientific.

Lo, J. T. Y., & Pan, S. (2016). Confucius Institutes and China's soft power: practices and paradoxes. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 46(4), 512-532.

Lukin, A., & Yakunin, V. (2018). Eurasian integration and the development of Asiatic Russia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 9, 100-113.

March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1983). The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American political science review, 78(3), 734-749.

Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. WW Norton & Company.

Moravcsik, A. (1992). Liberalism and international relations theory (No. 92). Cambridge, MA: Center for International Affairs, Harvard University.

Morrison, W. M, (2019). China's economic rise: History, trends, Challenges, and implications for the United States. Congressional Research Service report, RL33534.

Narine, S. (2004). State sovereignty, political legitimacy and regional institutionalism in the Asia-Pacific. The Pacific Review, 17(3), 423-450.

Nye, J. S. (1990). Soft power. Foreign policy, (80), 153-171.

Nye, J. S. (2005). The rise of China's soft power. Wall street journal Asia, 29(6), 8.

Nye, J. S. (2008). Public diplomacy and soft power. The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 616(1), 94-109.

Pan, Z. (Ed.). (2012). Conceptual gaps in China-EU relations: global governance, human rights and strategic partnerships. Palgrave Macmillan.

Pan, S. Y., & Lo, J. T. Y. (2017). Re-conceptualizing China's rise as a global power: a neo-tributary perspective. The Pacific Review, 30(1), 1-25.

Panda, J. P. (2016). India-China relations: politics of resources, identity and authority in a multipolar world order. Taylor & Francis.

Pant, H. V. (Ed.). (2012). The rise of China: implications for India. Cambridge India.

Restall, H. (2007). China's bid for Asian hegemony. Far Eastern Economic Review, 170(4), 10.

Roberts, B. (2004). A gravity study of the proposed China-Asean free trade area. The International Trade Journal, 18(4), 335-353.

Rodrik, D. (2003). Institutions, integration, and geography: In search of the deep determinants of economic growth. In Search of Prosperity: Analytic Country Studies on Growth, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Rolland, N. (2019). A China-Russia Condominium over Eurasia. Survival, 61(1), 7-22.

Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: A non-communist manifesto. Cambridge University Press.

Simon, S. W., & Goh, E. (Eds.). (2007). China, the United States, and South-East Asia: Contending Perspectives on Politics, Security, and Economics. Routledge.

Sohn, Y. & Pempel T., J. (Eds.). (2019). Japan and Asia's contested order. The interplay of security economic, and identity. Palgrave, Macmillan.

Sшrensen, C. T. (2013). Is China becoming more aggressive? A neoclassical realist analysis. Asian Perspective, 363-385.

Stahl, A. K. (2017). EU-China-Africa trilateral relations in a multipolar world: Hic sunt dracones. Springer.

Tammen, R. L., & Kugler, J. (2006). Power transition and China-US conflicts. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 1(1), 35-55.

UN General Assembly. (2004). Report of the Open-ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council and Other Matters related to the Security Council. Official Records Fifty-eighth Session Supplement (No. 47).

Waltz, K. N. (1979). The anarchic structure of world politics. International politics: enduring concepts and contemporary issues, 29-49.

Waltz, K. N. (2001). Man, the state, and war: A theoretical analysis. Columbia University Press.

Yan, X. (2014). From keeping a low profile to striving for achievement. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 7(2), 153-184.

Yilmaz, S., & Daksueva, O. (2019). The energy nexus in China-Russia strategic partnership. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 19(1), 63-88.

Yu, S. (2019). The Belt and Road Initiative: Modernity, geopolitics and the developing global order. Asian Affairs, 50(2), 187-201.

Zhang, F. (2015). Confucian foreign policy traditions in Chinese history. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 8(2), 197-218.

ZiroMwatela, R., & Changfeng, Z. (2016). Africa in China's `One Belt, One Road' Initiative: A Critical Analysis. ISOR Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 21(12), 21-34.

Размещено на Allbest.ru