| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
159918
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Through the lens of securitization theory, this article looks at the significant impact that non-traditional security has had over Chinese foreign policy. Over time, non-traditional security has changed from being understood as an opportunity to boost China’s international standing, to being seen as an important category within security threats. China’s security and diplomatic behavior has changed accordingly. In particular, China has become more confident in using and authorizing force. This article pinpoints this process started in the 1990s by looking at the debate within the government and the legal, institutional and military response against those new threats. It also prompts important considerations about the drivers and the direction of Chinese foreign policy, and the general approach of studying the same subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
123026
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this article I seek to improve the dominant neorealist analysis of China's rise. I offer a neoclassical realist analytical framework in order to identify the influence of certain Chinese domestic developments and priorities on Chinese foreign and security policy behavior. Rather than reflecting a more self-confident and aggressive China, developments in Chinese foreign and security policy in recent years reveal an internally conflicted, inward-looking, and reactive China not yet ready for its new international role. Beijing is uncertain how to manage the challenges and the inevitable tension, both domestically and internationally, arising from China's rapid development.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
168170
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
There is among Chinese international relations scholars an intense debate about how China can protect and promote Chinese global presence and interests while at the same time continue to adhere to the principle of non-intervention. New concepts, distinctions and approaches are developing as the debate progresses. The current Chinese foreign and security policy practice reflects a more flexible and pragmatic Chinese interpretation – and implementation – of the principle of non-intervention with different degrees and types of intervention. This article explores the search for “legitimate great power intervention” characterizing both the debate among Chinese international relations scholars and the current Chinese foreign and security policy practice, and uses this case as the departure point for a more general discussion of the drivers of change – and continuity – in Chinese foreign and security policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|