| ID | 157972 |
| Title Proper | Non-western visions of regionalism |
| Other Title Information | China's New Silk Road and Russia's Eurasian Economic Union |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Kaczmarski , Marcin |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | The weakening of the West's global domination and the growing unwillingness on part of the US to defend the liberal order have increased the importance of regional-level international politics. For the past decade, China and Russia have stood out among rising powers attempting to rearrange their neighbourhoods. A significant part of International Relations scholarship regards this drive for regional predominance as a natural and unavoidable consequence of rising material power. Analysing China's and Russia's flagship regional initiatives, the New Silk Road and the Eurasian Economic Union, this article offers a more nuanced explanation of rising powers and their role in contemporary international order. The article argues that China and Russia have different visions of regionalism and distinct views on how a regional order should be arranged. China defines regionalism in functional rather than territorial terms and sees its project as inclusive. The Chinese ruling elite regards the New Silk Road as a way of reinforcing China's links with the outside world and as furthering the benefits it harvests from globalization. Russia, in turn, interprets regionalism in spatial and historical terms, seeing it primarily as a way to reorganize the post-Soviet space. The Russian elite considers the Eurasian Economic Union to be a protectionist measure against globalization and a barrier against the influence of other actors. China defines principles on which cooperation is based in vague terms and emphasizes the flexibility and openness of its project. Russia opts for universal and legally binding norms, which reinforces the defensive nature of its regional project. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Affairs Vol. 93, No.6; Nov 2017: p.1357–1376 |
| Journal Source | International Affairs Vol: 93 No 6 |
| Key Words | East Asia ; Eurasia ; International Relations Theory ; Pacific Russia |