form, consolidate and project such an identity? Will it be accepted by the international community? In this regard, some modified version of social constructivism could help us understand the changes and continuities in Chinese foreign policy.16 Eventually, perhaps some fusion of Western and Chinese philosophies may emerge as a distinct Chinese theory of international relations. China’s domestic transformations and its evolving foreign policy are already shaping the global landscape of the 21st century. For this reason alone, extra efforts are needed to study China’s foreign policy — its rationale, implementation, contradictions, major challenges, and significant impact on the world.
References
Bell, A. Daniel, “China Might As Well Boldly Promote Its Political Values” (Zhongguo Bufang Dadan Tuiguang Zhengzhi Jiazhi), Global Times, November 17, 2010.
Chan, Steve, China, the US and the Power-Transition Theory: A Critique (Routledge, 2007), Abingdon, UK.
Feng, Huiyun, Kai He and Yan Xuetong (eds.), Chinese Scholars and Foreign Policy: Debating International Relations (London and New York: Routledge, 2019).
Guo, Shuyong (ed.), Guoji Guanxi Huyu Zhongguo Lilun (International Relations Calls for a Chinese Theory) (Tianjin: Tianjin Renmin Chubanshe, 2005).
Hao, Yufan and Lin Su, China’s Foreign Policy Making: Societal Force and Chinese American Policy (Ashgate, 2006).
Hickey, Dennis and Kwei-Bo Huang, “Taiwan Should Return to the 1992 Consensus,” PacNet #78, Pacific Forum, November 27, 2018. https://www.pacforum.org/analysis/pacnet-78-taiwan-should-return-1992-consensus.
Huang, Cary, “Rising Giant Stretches Its Arms across the World,” The South China Morning Post, November 12, 2018, pp. A4–A5.
Jakobson, Linda and Dean Knox, “New Foreign Policy Actors in China,” SIPRI Policy Paper 26, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, September 2010.
Jørgensen, Knud Erik and Reuben Wong, “Social Constructivist Perspectives on China–EU Relations” in Jianwei Wang and Weiqing Song (eds.), China, the European Union, and the International Politics of Global Governance (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), pp. 51–74.
Lemon, Jason, “U.S. or China? Asian Nations May Soon Be Forced to Choose, Singapore PM Warns,” Newsweek, November 15, 2018.
Noesselt, Nele, 2015. “Revisiting the Debate on Constructing a Theory of International Relations with Chinese Characteristics.” The China Quarterly, Vol. 222, pp. 430–448.
Organski, A.F.K. World Politics, 2nd edition (Alfred A. Knopf, 1968), New York.
Pan, P. Philip, “The Land That Failed to Fail,” The New York Times, November 18, 2018.
Qin, Yaqing, 2005. “Core Problems of International Relations Theory and the Construction of a Chinese School” (Guoji Guanxi Lilun de Hexin Wenti yu Zhongguo Xuepai de Shengcheng). Social Sciences in China (Zhongguo Shehui Kexue), Vol. 3, pp. 165–176.
Qin, Yaqing, 2007. “Why Is There No International Relations Theory in China?” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 313–340.
Ren, Xiao, 2000. “Lilun yu guoji guanxi lilun: yixie sikao” (Some Thoughts on Theory and IR Theory), Ouzhou Yanjiu (Chinese Journal of European Studies), Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 19–25.
Shambaugh, David, “China Under Xi Jinping,” East Asia Forum, November 19, 2018.
Uemura, Takeshi, 2015. “Understanding Chinese Foreign Relations: A Cultural Constructivist Approach.” International Studies Perspectives, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 345–365.
Wang, Jisi “The ‘Two Orders’ and the Future of China–U.S. Relations,” ChinaFile, Center on U.S.–China Relations, Asia Society, July 9, 2015.
Yeh, Hui-chi, “Norms and Their Implications for the Making of China’s Foreign Aid Policy since 1949,” PhD dissertation, April 2010, University of Sheffield.
Yu, Xiaofeng, 2014. “Gongxiang Anquan: feichuantong anquan yanjiu de zhongguo shijiao” (Shared Security: Chinese Perspectives on Nontraditional Security Studies), Guoji Anquan Yanjiu (International Security Studies), No. 1, pp. 4–34.
Zhao, Tingyang, Tianxia tixi: shijie zhidu zhexue daolun (The Tianxia System: An Introduction to the Philosophy of a World Institution) (Nanjing: Jiangsu Education Press, 2005).
Zhu, Zhiqun, US–China Relations in the 21st Century: Power Transition and Peace (Routledge, 2006), Abingdon, UK.
Zhu, Zhiqun, China’s New Diplomacy: Rationale, Strategies, and Significance (Ashgate, 2010).
Zhu, Zhiqun, “Is Indo-Pacific the ‘New’ Pivot?” The National Interest, November 23, 2017. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/indo-pacific-the-new-pivot-23321.
1According to the White Paper “China’s Peaceful Development 2011,” China’s core interests include: (1) state sovereignty; (2) national security; (3) territorial integrity; (4) national reunification; (5) China’s political system established by the Constitution and overall social stability; (6) basic safeguards for ensuring sustainable economic and social development.
2The term “Thucydides’ Trap” was popularized by Harvard Professor Graham Allison in his book Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2017). However, international relations scholars especially those working on the power transition theory have presented the same concept long ago. For an analysis of how the power transition theory can be applied to US–China relations, see for example, Zhu (2006) and Chan (2007), For the original power transition theory, see Organski (1968).
3Tensions on the Korean Peninsula were lowered to some extent as a result of inter-Korean reconciliation and the Trump–Kim summit in Singapore in 2018, however, the future of the Korean Peninsula remains uncertain.
4For a brief overview of the “1992 Consensus” and why Taiwan should accept it in order to improve cross-Strait relations, see Hickey and Huang (2018).
5During Prime Minister Abe’s visit in October 2018, China and Japan vowed to raise the relationship to a new level. Japan pledged to actively participate in the BRI, especially in developing infrastructure in third countries. This is encouraging, but due to historical and structural conflicts, Japan–China relations remain delicate.
6“How Much Trade Transits the South China Sea?” China Power Project, CSIS, Washington, DC, undated report. https://chinapower.csis.org/much-trade-transits-south-china-sea/. Accessed on November 15, 2018.
7First agreed upon between India and China in 1954 to handle Sino-Indian relations, these five principles have guided Chinese foreign policy since. The Five Principles are: mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, mutual nonaggression, mutual non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and cooperation for mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence.
8For a discussion of “Indo-Pacific,” see Zhu (2017). The article is also included in this book.
9Pence’s speech transcript can be found on the White House website here at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-vice-president-pence-administrations-policy-toward-china/.
10“AIT Dedicates