How Sentiment Matters in International Relations: China and the South China Sea Dispute
potential negative effects of China’s conduct on others’ respect needs be observed?
[49] The final question on China’s sensitivity and empathy regarding other countries’ needs and respect considerations is particularly interesting, also from an empirical point of view. It relates to this book’s point of departure, the proposition that an increase in empathy and consideration of other parties’ interests is required to mitigate conflicts and to create mutual trust and confidence instead. Asymmetry of sensitivity (or mismatch) is expected nonetheless. In total, Hypothesis III concerns the output dimension of respect.
2.2.4 The Hypotheses: Summary
Ultimately, confirmation of these three hypotheses would strongly indicate that experience of respect (and its absence thereof) has been a key-determining variable of China’s policy preferences relating to the SCS dispute between 2010 and 2016. Likewise, it would draw further attention to the significance of respect sensitivity and empathy as key prerequisites for stability, trust and cooperation in Southeast Asia in general and the SCS dispute in particular.
2.3 Operationalization of Respect and Disrespect
Previous chapters have loosely touched upon a number of theoretical limitations and obstacles accompanied by the study of respect (and emotion) in IR research. They range from identification issues to questions of measurement, definition, reference and issues of application to the collective/state level. That said, this chapter takes up some of these challenges and sets forth the theoretical operationalization.
Broadly speaking, it is the primary objective of this project to examine the role of (dis)respect experiences in China’s South China Sea policy. These experiences are generally operationalized as discursive manifestations of respect and disrespect reflected in discourses by two leading Chinese foreign policy think tanks (FPTTs) (chapter 2.4). In doing so, the applicability of respect to the realm of foreign policy is taken for granted as it is assumed that individual perceptions and expectations of FPTT staff convert into collective perceptions of the political elite if shared by a significant preponderance of scholars (at a given time). In this way, dominant perceptions of disrespect can turn into collective disrespect experiences. Such collective experiences and associated emotions and responses to out-group behavior may be just as strong [50] or even stronger than on the interpersonal level64 (Kelman, 2008).
Furthermore, manifestations of respect experiences are essentially operationalized as tantamount to the lack of significant signals of disrespect experiences. This is because positive accounts of respect, due to the ‘negativity bias’ phenomenon, are much less common and, thus, much more difficult to identify. Similarly, it is not concrete PRC policy measures that are subject to analysis but policy recommendations and preferences advocated and articulated by FPTT scholars (dependent variable).
Moreover, the collective entity subject to analysis consists of scholars who published articles in two journals by two highly prestigious Chinese foreign policy think tanks (FPTTs) between 2010 and 2016 on issues revolving around the South China Sea. Both institutions are considered significant actors of Chinese foreign policy.65 That said, these groups’ dominant perception patterns of the PRC, which both FPTTs are directly associated with, and their assessments in terms of the adequacy level of SCS-related conduct by other parties will be identified and closely studied.
The fourth challenge covered involves the issue of identification of respect dynamics and respect experiences66. In general, respect considerations including an actor’s status and identity needs are not articulated literally and directly in the majority of cases67. Hence, respect dynamics have to be analytically extracted from the wider context of using qualitative data analysis and further qualified by means of the theory-guided hypotheses68 provided. In this vein, reference points and indicators are called for in order to guide and enable respect and disrespect identification processes. These reference points and indicators are outlined in the following.
[51] 2.3.1 Reference Points and Respect Indicators
Given the subjective character of respect perception, its discursive identification cannot be executed solely by means of universal criteria. Instead, an additional brief look at some country-specific criteria is necessary. Against this backdrop, the domestic significance criterion (Wolf, 2011) represents an appropriate starting point. As established previously, respect and face are traditionally rooted in Chinese (and Asian) culture and history. In the words of Nathan & Scobell, “Chinese tradition emphasizes the importance of giving and getting ‘face’, or favourable personal recognition. Face has long been a central consideration in interpersonal relations in China” (2012, p. 25). In recent years, Chinese philosophy and Confucian thought have increasingly developed into key pillars and concepts of official Chinese historiography, thereby shaping China’s identity conceptions (Chen, 2005; Feng, 2007; Zhang, 2015c). At the same time, aside from its Confucian origin, China’s political system is assumed to be somewhat conducive to respect dynamics. According to Bakr. et al., respect is more likely to matter in countries governed by “authoritarian elites with a fragile popular legitimacy” (2003, as cited in Wolf, 2008, p. 29; cf. Heller, 2013). Overall, the PRC clearly appears to meet the domestic significance criterion69. In addition, identity stability (Wolf, 2011) is another crucial reference point. Accordingly, several scholars point to the existence of a Chinese national identity crisis in recent years (chapter 4.1). In this vein, Yan stresses, “China is not prepared for world leadership. When the world asks China: what do you want to be? It doesn’t know, and that’s the problem“ (Yan, 2012, as cited in Shambaugh, 2013, p. 13). Hence, the criterion of identity stability or fragility can also be considered to be met. Furthermore, as respect dynamics are said to be particularly eminent in conflict-prone and unstable environments, the general nature and setting of the SCS dispute as well as its overall significance to the PRC are noteworthy, too. This assessment is underscored by Roy who contends that ”China’s perception of whether its external environment is accommodating versus threatening, and offers opportunities versus dangers, will shape PRC foreign policy“ (2013, p. 2). [52] Accordingly, the SCS region’s fragile, unstable and conflict-prone order, its conflictual history, the highly sensitive issues at stake (national sovereignty, territorial integrity, etc.) all suggest that respect dynamics are indeed playing a vital role in Southeast Asia, a region in which conflicting norms, values and political systems are clashing with one another.
Building upon these reference points suggesting a general significance of respect in Chinese FPTT discourses on the SCS, the disrespect identification process has to be discussed in detail. Drawing upon constructivist logic, disrespect, while frequently not articulated in a literal and direct manner, is assumed to be reflected in performative acts, particularly speech acts and discourses (Austin, 1962) but also signs, gestures and concrete conduct. Accordingly, for the sake of identification, this project applies six theory-guided indicators70:
(1) literal usage and direct reference to respect and related concepts,
(2) references to status & social importance,
(3) references to rights & interests,
(4) references to dominant Chinese national identity narratives,
(5) emotional critique of external conduct (the question of adequacy),
(6) reliance on minor issues (e.g. rights) regardless of disproportionate costs involved.
Those respect indicators and the major reasons as to why states tend to respond to disrespect by means of confrontation call for a brief introduction.
2.3.2 Literal Usage
Focusing on FPTT discourses, the monitoring of semantic patterns and arguments naturally rests at the heart of the analysis. While discursive manifestations of respect can be voiced both directly and indirectly, this first and most obvious indicator only covers direct references to respect and related concepts such as recognition, pride, reputation and honor. To be sure, lexical references do not per se provide an