|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
173221
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The world has declared COVID-19 (a disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus or novel coronavirus) to be a pandemic. China has been chastised by various countries, especially the United States, for suppressing information and not taking necessary measures which could have helped in controlling the spread of and/or eradicating the disease in the earlier stages. Consequently, China has undertaken numerous measures to change the COVID-19 narrative and disassociate itself from COVID-19. It launched a campaign to question the origins of SARS-CoV-2, blamed the United States for spreading COVID-19, claimed victory in combating COVID-19 domestically, and provided aid (“mask diplomacy”) to countries. These actions betray China’s concern about its image. The country wants to portray itself as a Good Samaritan, a responsible and reliable partner, and an essential global power. Additionally, China has grave concerns about regime stability and survival. President Xi’s legitimacy is built on technocratic competence. The outbreak has the potential to seriously dent his personal legacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
187157
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This study investigates a novel dataset comprised of a universe of 537 donations in 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, between 11 February and 20 June 2020, which provides a high level of detail on China’s and Taiwan’s mask diplomacy. We describe who the main donors were, who the main recipients were, what was donated to each country, and which variables explain why some countries received more aid than others. Drawing on previous literature, the article advances understanding about the political determinants of these donations. Our findings revealed that, although seemingly uncoordinated, donations made by China’s central government, Chinese companies, cities, and foundations were strongly affected by two political determinants, namely the recipient’s partnership status with China and the One China Policy. Furthermore, aid provided by China’s Central Government was larger in autocracies than in democracies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
182949
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The analysis discusses domestic sources of China’s diplomatic offensive in Europe following the outbreak of Covid-19, with a focus on the central and eastern parts of the continent. By examining selected case studies of countries competing for Chinese medical supplies in the time of the global crisis, it demonstrates how the party-state leadership with “Xi Jinping at the core” has been promoting the narrative of its transparent and timely response to the outbreak of the pandemic, while at the same time nurturing its image as a (benevolent) global leader in the struggle against the coronavirus. The article argues that mask diplomacy has served two overlapping domestic and foreign policy goals: aiming to cover up China’s leadership’s failure to contain the pandemic in its initial stage, while also turning acts of foreign gratitude to its advantage in seeking domestic public approval and the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party governance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
193186
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authorities of Serbia have undertaken a concerted effort to secure China’s support in containing the coronavirus. This asymmetrical cooperation, apart from aspects concerning health security, has allowed both sides to obtain considerable political and economic benefits. This article examines how China and Serbia utilize pandemic cooperation to pursue and realize their wider foreign and internal policy goals through patron–client ties, as well as highlighting the pitfalls of this kind of relationship. Although the outbreak of the pandemic and the medical cooperation that followed do not constitute a turning point in the well-established relations between the two countries, the article argues that pandemic cooperation has considerably strengthened relations. In many ways, the pattern observed by the authors resembles China’s pandemic exchanges with other countries, especially smaller states with authoritarian inclinations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|