![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
The rise of China/East Asia and the perceived decline of the US/West pose an emerging question about how international relations (IR) theory should respond to this change. Increasingly, there have been heated discussions among Chinese IR academics over a desirable Chinese contribution to IR theory (IRT), particularly the possibility of building a distinctive Chinese IRT. Inevitably, this drive towards theorizing from a Chinese perspective also creates a backlash among not only Western but also other Chinese scholars as they question the ‘nationalistic’ if not ‘hegemonic’ discourse of the scholarship. Drawing on the sociology of scientific knowledge framework, this article examines the linkages between the vibrant dynamics of the Chinese theoretical debates and the actual practices of Chinese scholars in realizing their claims. It suggests that this investigation can serve as a springboard into a better appreciation of the theory–practice and power–knowledge relationships in the context of Chinese IR.
Acknowledgments
Interviews were conducted with ethics approval from the Australian National University Humanities & Social Sciences DERC. Reference no. 2013/322. Special thanks go to all the Chinese scholars who agreed to participate in the interviews and provided relevant materials.
The author would like to thank Prof. William Tow, Dr. Mathew Davies, Dr. Feng Zhang, the Editors of Global Change, Peace & Security, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions. Any errors contained herein are the author's own.
Notes on contributor
Thuy T. Do is a PhD candidate at the Department of International Relations, Australian National University. She is currently on leave from her lectureship at the Department of International Politics and Diplomacy, Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam.
Notes
1 Yiwei Wang and Xueqing Han, ‘Guoji Guanxi Lilun De Zhongguo Meng’, Shijie Jingji yu Zhengzhi 8 (2013): 21–39. I thank Prof. Wang for providing me the English version of this article.
2 For the purpose of convenience, these academic movements are hereafter referred to collectively as the ‘Chinese IRT’ debate.
3 Peter M. Kristensen and Ras T. Nielsen, ‘Constructing a Chinese International Relations Theory: A Sociological Approach to Intellectual Innovation’, International Political Sociology 7, no. 1 (2013): 19–20.
4 Ibid., 24.
5 Merrilee H. Salmon, ed., Introduction to the Philosophy of Science (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1999), 162.
6 Xinning Song, ‘Building International Relations Theory with Chinese Characteristics', Journal of Contemporary China 10, no. 26 (2001): 67–8.
7 David Shambaugh, ‘International Relations Studies in China: History, Trends, and Prospects', International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 11, no. 3 (2011): 359.
8 Tingyang Zhao, Tianxia Tixi: Shijie Zhidu Zhexue Daolun (Nanjing: Jiangsu Jiaoyu Chubanshe, 2005), 1–2. In this article, the Chinese names in text are put in the Chinese order (surname first, followed by first name) while the references adhere to the journal's referencing standards.
9 Ibid., 2.
10 Ibid., 10.
11 Ibid., 11.
12 Tingyang Zhao, ‘A Political World Philosophy in Terms of All-under-Heaven (Tian-Xia)’, Diogenes 56, no. 1 (2009): 6.
13 Tingyang Zhao, ‘All-under-Heaven and Methodological Relationism: An Old Story and New World Peace’, in Contemporary Chinese Political Thought: Debates and Perspectives, ed. Fred Dallmayr and Tingyang Zhao (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2012), 46.
14 Zhao, ‘Political World Philosophy’, 11.
15 Ibid.
16 Zhao, ‘All-under-Heaven and Methodological Relationism’, 60.
17 Ibid., 52.
18 Ibid., 54–5.
19 Bijun Xu, ‘Is Zhao's Tianxia System Misunderstood?’, Tsinghua China Law Review 6, no. 1 (Fall 2013): 95–108; Feng Zhang, ‘The Tianxia System: World Order in a Chinese Utopia’, China Heritage Quarterly, no. 21 (2010), available at http://www.chinaheritagequarterly.org/tien-hsia.php?searchterm=021_utopia.inc&issue=021.
20 Yaqing Qin, ‘Culture and Global Thought: Chinese International Theory in the Making’, Revista CIDOB d'Afers Internacionals, no. 100 (2012): 71.
21 The following Chinese IR scholars are listed as intellectuals who have affected the development of contemporary China: Yan Xuetong, Wang Yizhou, Shi Yinhong, and Wang Jisi. Zhidong Hao, Intellectuals at a Crossroads: The Changing Politics of China's Knowledge Workers (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2003), 288.
22 For example, Wang Yizhou, Wang Jisi, and Tang Shiping moved from different institutes at CASS, Yan Xuetong and Chu Shulong from the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, and Shi Yinhong from the Center for International Strategic Studies at International Relations Academy, Nanjing.
23 Shixiong Ni, interview by this author, Shanghai, August 2013.
24 Yaqing Qin, ‘Why Is There No Chinese International Relations Theory?’, in Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives on and Beyond Asia, ed. Amitav Acharya and Barry Buzan (London: Routledge, 2010), 36–41; Xuetong Yan, Ancient Chinese Thought, Modern Chinese Power, ed. Daniel Bell and Zhe Sun, trans. Edmund Ryden (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011), 256; Wang and Han, ‘Guoji Guanxi’, 38.
25 Yaqing Qin, ‘Development of International Relations Theory in China: Progress and Problems', in Transformation of Foreign Affairs and International Relations in China, 1978–2008, ed. Yizhou Wang (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 467–8.
26 Yaqing Qin, ‘Relationality and Processual Construction: Bringing Chinese Ideas into International Relations Theory’, Social Sciences in China 30, no. 4 (2009): 18.
27 Benjamin Creutzfeldt, ‘Qin Yaqing on Rules Vs Relations, Drinking Coffee and Tea, and a Chinese Approach to Global Governance’, Theory Talk, no. 45 (2011): 9.
28 Robert W. Cox, ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations’, in Neorealism and its Critics, ed. Robert Keohane (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), 207.
29 Xiaoming Zhang, ‘China in the Conception of International Society: The English School's Engagements with China’, Review of International Studies 37, no. 2 (2011): 785.
30 Yiwei Wang, ‘Between Science and Art: Questionable International Relations Theories', Japanese Journal of Political Science 8, no. 2 (2007): 191–208.
31 Ibid., 204.
32 Wang and Han, ‘Guoji Guanxi’, 38.
33 Ibid., 32–7.
34 Ibid., 38–9.
35 Ibid., 39.
36 Wang, ‘Between Science and Art’, 207.
37 Yaqing Qin, ‘Theoretical Problematic of International Relationship Theory and the Construction of a Chinese School’, Social Sciences in China 26, no. 4 (2005): 65–9.
38 Yaqing Qin, Guanxi Yu Guocheng: Zhongguo Guoji Guanxi Lilun De Wenhua Jiangou (Shanghai: Shanghai Renmin Chubanshe, 2012).
39 Qin, ‘Relationality and Processual Construction’, 12.
40 Qin, ‘Culture and Global Thought’, 81.
41 Ibid.
42 Ibid., 83.
43 Ibid., 85.
44 Xin Liu, quoted in Qin, ‘Relationality and Processual Construction’, 18.
45 CFAU's website, http://iir.cfau.edu.cn/col/col1069/index.html.
46 Creutzfeldt, ‘Qin Yaqing’, 3; see also Yaqing Qin and Ling Wei, ‘Jiegou, Jincheng, yu Quanli de Shehui hua: Zhongguo yu Dongya Diqu Hezuo’, Shijie Jingji yu Zhengzhi, no. 3 (2007).
47 Interviews with Chinese scholars by this author, Beijing, September 2013.
48 Yiwei Wang, ‘Yi He He Gongsheng Shixian Sanchong Chaoyue – Zhongguo De Xinxing Daguo Guanxi Lilun Jishi', Xueshu qianyan, no. 12 (2013); Xiao Ren, ‘Lun Dongya ‘Gongsheng Tixi’ Yuanli – Duiwai Guanxi Sixiang He Zhidu Yanjiu Zhiyi', Shijie Jingji yu Zhengzhi, no. 13 (2013).
49 In my interview with Prof. Ren Xiao in August 2013, he said that he had suggested that Prof. Qin Yaqing form a hard-core group of scholars to work on the construction of the ‘Chinese school’ but so far this has not been realized.
50 Yan, Ancient Chinese Thought, 252–9.
51 Jin Xu, interview by this author, Beijing, September 2013.
52 Feng Zhang, ‘The Tsinghua Approach and the Inception of Chinese Theories of International Relations', Chinese Journal of International Politics 5 (2012): 73–102.
53 Benjamin Creutzfeldt, ‘Yan Xuetong on Chinese Realism, the Tsinghua School of International Relations, and the Impossibility of Harmony’, Theory Talk, no. 51 (2012): 2.
54 Ibid., 4.
55 Yan, Ancient Chinese Thought, 258.
56 Ibid., 26.
57 Ibid., 84–91.
58 Creutzfeldt, ‘Yan Xuetong’, 5.
59 Zhang, ‘Tsinghua Approach’, 95.
60 Xuetong Yan, ‘How China Can Defeat America’, New York Times, November 20, 2011.
61 Interview by this author, Beijing, September 2013.
62 Xuefeng Sun, ‘Rethinking East Asian Regional Order and China's Rise’, Japanese Journal of Political Science 14, no. 1 (2013).
63 Fangyin Zhou, ‘Equilibrium Analysis of the Tributary System', Chinese Journal of International Politics 4, no. 2 (2011).
64 Prof. Wang has served in the government's Consultancy Committee on Foreign Affairs. He is also known as former President Hu Jintao's ‘chief brains truster’ for foreign policy. Mark Leonard, ed., China 3.0 (London: European Council on Foreign Relations, 2012), 118.
65 Jisi Wang, ‘China's Search for a Grand Strategy – a Rising Great Power Finds Its Way’, Foreign Affairs 90, no. 2 (March/April 2011): 68–79; Jisi Wang, ‘China's Search for Stability with America’, Foreign Affairs 84, no. 5 (September/October 2005): 39–48.
66 Jisi Wang, interview by Yoichi Kato, ‘China Deserves More Respect as a First-Class Power’, Asahi Shimbun, October 5, 2012.
67 Interviews with SIS scholars by this author, Beijing, September 2013.
68 Jifang Zan, ‘A New Series of Books Presents Chinese Scholars' Assessment of World Affairs and China's Role in Them’, Beijing Review, February 1, 2007.
69 Jisi Wang, ‘International Relations Theory and the Study of Chinese Foreign Policy: A Chinese Perspective’, in Chinese Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice, ed. Thomas W. Robinson and David Shambaugh (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), 481.
70 Jisi Wang, Zhongguo Guoji Guanxi Lilun Yanjiu De Tedian, Wenti, he Kunnan (Beijing: Chinese Academy of Social Science, 2004).
71 Hung-jen Wang, The Rise of China and Chinese International Relations Scholarship (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2013), 23.
72 Yizhou Wang, Chuangzaoxing Jieru: Zhongguo Waijiao Xin Quxiang (Beijing: Beijing Daxue Chubanshe, 2011); Yizhou Wang, Chuangzaoxing Jieru: Zhongguo Zhi Quanjiu Juese De Shengcheng (Beijing: Beijing Daxue Chubanshe, 2013).
73 Ying Ding, ‘New Direction for China's Diplomacy’, Beijing Review, March 8, 2012.
74 Yizhou Wang, ‘“Creative Involvement”: A New Direction in Chinese Diplomacy', in China 3.0 (see note 63), 109.
75 Ying Ding, ‘China's Evolving Global Role’, Beijing Review, October 24, 2013.
76 Ibid.
77 I thank Peng Lu for this observation.
78 Li Mao, ‘China Should Speak Its Own Language, Scholars Say at IR Meeting’, Chinese Social Sciences Today, no. 473, July 10, 2013.
79 Ruizhuang Zhang, Bu Hexie De Shijie (Shanghai: Shanghai Renmin Chubanshe, 2010).
80 Shiping Tang, The Social Evolution of International Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 110–47.
81 Barry Buzan, ‘Review of The Social Evolution of International Politics, by Shiping Tang', International Affairs 89, no. 5 (2013): 1304.
82 Alastair Iain Johnston, The State of International Relations Research in China: Considerations for the Ford Foundation (Beijing: Ford Foundation, 2003), 34–5.
83 Xiao Ren, interview by this author, Shanghai, August 2013.
84 Shiping Tang in discussion with this author, Shanghai, August 2013.
85 Kristensen and Nielsen, ‘Constructing a Chinese International Relations Theory’, 27.
86 Yaqing Qin, ‘The Possibility and Inevitability of a Chinese School of International Relations Theory’, in China Orders the World: Normative Soft Power and Foreign Policy, ed. William A. Callahan and Elena Barabantseva (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2011), 50.
87 Ibid.
88 Creutzfeldt, ‘Yan Xuetong’, 4.
89 Wang, Rise of China, 6.
90 Yan, Ancient Chinese Thought, 99.
91 Creutzfeldt, ‘Qin Yaqing’, 3.
92 Yaqing Qin, ‘The Accidental (Chinese) Theorist’, in Claiming the International, ed. Arlene B. Tickner and David L. Blaney (London: Routledge, 2013), 161–3.
93 Wang, Rise of China, 126.
94 Yiwei Wang, ‘China: Between Copying and Constructing’, in International Relations Scholarship around the World, ed. Arlene B. Tickner and Ole Weaver (New York: Routledge, 2009), 116.
95 Wang, Rise of China, 31.
96 Xiao Ren, ‘Toward a Chinese School of International Relations?’, in China and the New International Order, ed. Gungwu Wang and Yongnian Zheng (London: Routledge 2008), 306; Honghua Men, ‘Huigui Guoji Guanxi Yanjiu De Zhongguo Zhongxin, Jia Qi Lilun Yu Shijian De Qiaoliang', Jiaoxue yu yanjiu, no. 11 (2005).
97 Chih-yu Shih and Jiwu Yin, ‘Between Core National Interest and a Harmonious World: Reconciling Self-Role Conceptions in Chinese Foreign Policy’, Chinese Journal of International Politics 6, no. 1 (2013): 68.
98 Interview by this author, Shanghai, August 2013.
99 Xiao Ren, ‘Zou Ziji Fazhan Zhi Lu: Zhenglun Zhong De “Zhongguo Xuepai”’, Guoji Zhengzhi Yanjiu, no. 2 (2009); Kejin Zhao, ‘Zhongguo Dalu Guoji Guanxi Lilun Yanjiu Sishi nian’, Dongya Yanjiu, no. 1 (2007).
100 Ping Ren, ‘Systematic Innovation, Comprehensive Development and Going Global: Some Thoughts on the Construction of an Innovation System for Philosophy and Social Sciences in China During the “12th Five-Year Plan” Period’, Social Sciences in China 33, no. 3 (2012).
101 National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science, http://www.npopss-cn.gov.cn/n/2013/1024/c221360-23311531.html.
102 Interview by this scholar, Beijing, September 2013.
103 Yizhou Wang, interview by this author, Beijing, September 2013.
104 Ibid.
105 Jiangli Wang and Barry Buzan, ‘The English and Chinese Schools of International Relations: Comparisons and Lessons', Chinese Journal of International Politics 0, no. 0 (2014): 44–5.
106 Yiwei Wang, interview by this author, Beijing, September 2013.