| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
162608
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the past decade, observers in Western countries have been increasingly challenged to describe China’s rising power in one of two ways: as contributing to established world systems, or as a growing threat fulfilling certain predictions made at the end of the Cold War. For some, perceptions of increasingly assertive regional behaviors confirm that China’s self-proclaimed policy of pacifism is being used to cloak selfish national interest and power goals. The current international relations (IR) literature tends to treat China’s assertiveness as evidence that it is indeed a threat, with few attempts to conceptualize assertiveness as a relational strategy. In this paper, the author uses eight current and historical cases involving four relational strategies — engagement, boycotting, reciprocation, and pressing — to examine conventional assessments of assertiveness that focus solely on perceptions of and responses to threatening statements and behaviors made in defense of Chinese national interests. In the end, this paper tries to contribute to the general IR literature that has tended to misinterpret China’s assertiveness, which is actually an identity issue regarding bilateral relationality instead of power or interest calculations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
178895
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Current anti-Chinese sentiment in the international community has emerged from a knowledge-production background that entails the material fact of China's rising power and ideational factors tied to how the rising China phenomenon is interpreted. The ideational factors can be divided into two groups. One analyses China according to established Western IR theories that describe the country in terms of either threat or opportunity, thereby rendering China as part of an established universal ontology. A second group approaches China's experiences in a more sympathetic light, but still conceptualizes China's rise according to fixed categories such as “nation-state.” This paper argues that both of these groups are guilty of creating self-fulfilling prophecies – that is, they consistently theorize China in opposition to the West owing to the rational epistemology upon which they built their knowledge or perceptions of China. This epistemology conflicts with the efforts of Chinese IR scholars to evaluate China's rise in a relational manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
165584
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Posited as ‘post-national’ and articulated as ‘relational,’ recent historiography of the mandate period has had a long-term effect on how we read (and have been warned not to read) nationalism and resistance in Palestine. Beyond a critical survey of a select part of this recent historical literature, this essay shows how the question of nationalism has been framed in only one way and towards one end. Using this critical reading of the historical literature, this essay further attempts to open up space for a means of understanding Indigenous nationalism (and indigenous resistance) outside of the confined space of this particular treatment of nation-state nationalism. I suggest we move towards exploring an indigenous epistemological understanding of ‘history as story telling’ outside of these Zionist ontological constraints.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|