Foreign policy of Xi Jinping (2012 - onward)
President since 2012
China’s rise seemed inevitable
2008 - economic crisis
China’s economic model was superior to the West
The crisis exposed vulnerabilities in Western economies and highlighted the resilience of China’s economic model
Model was superior to the West in terms of rapid growth and state-led development
developing a strong self-esteem
New era, new attitude
Still in the making and started before Xi (2009)
Had to react to the changes in international and national environment
the Biden administration followed the footsteps of the Trump era in adopting a more confrontational stance toward China, continuing the trend of strategic competition
Probably had thoughts of foreign policy before being a president
Time for China to show its strength
The end of the conservative and low-profile approach, PRC Diplomacy 3.0 (preceded by revolutionary diplomacy and development diplomacy)
Great power rivalry foreign policy
High-profile, more assertive diplomacy with greater emphasis on China’s global influence
The GDP surpassed the GDP of Japan in 2010, making China the world’s second largest economy
Olympics, Shanghai Expo - China was on the rise, gaining international recognition
Increasingly active and confident approach, more emphasis on FP, international engagement
The global financial crisis and surpassing Japan as the world’s second largest economy boosted the confidence of Beijing
Previous leaders insisted upon diplomatic strategy that would best ensure the country’s prosperity, while now the country’s prosperity should assist its diplomacy
New model of major power relations (US) / XJP thought on diplomacy
Announcing the end of the old world order
New world order: China influence = US influence
National Security Committee (2013)
similar to US Security Council, lead by Xi
Centralizing foreign and security decision-making
The Americans realized the changes in domestic policy - centralization
Different decision system making from Mao - more centralized control and institutionalized mechanisms
Centralized decision making - threat for the US, might be preparation for war
Initiatives to enforce sovereignty claims
They can wait, now the focus is on domestic development
The leadership abandoned this strategy
Militarizing … islands
Economic sanctions to punish countries it considers hostile
More flexible attitude towards Beijing’s traditional non-interference principle
War of narratives: Covid-19, wolf warrior diplomacy (diplomatic overstretch?)
Confucius Institute - established in 2005
The chines started to value soft power
Might be serving Chinese national interests, propaganda
Covid-19: break in China’s global prominence, challenging international image
Wolf warrior diplomacy
represents a more confrontational and nationalistic diplomatic style
Wolf warrior: Chinese movie
rising China’s self-awareness
politicians should also be wolf warriors
supporting the ideas of the leader - getting promoted
the colleagues started to follow the lead
New slogans to shape IR discourse (or new propaganda)
China needs to offer its vision (alternative to the West)
previous decade: low-profile policy
now: high-profile, alternative to the West, start of an ideological competition
“no strings attached” - nothing in exchange like the West asked
popular among the elites of the countries - no democracy needed
Building the counter pillars of the AU
Exchange: work with Chinese companies, loan
China Dream and the great rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation: vague, aspirational and open-ended
BRI - feature of Chinese concept
Problem for the US - hard to define it → hard to fight against it
Win-win situation
Trying to convince the world that is is a mutual benefition
Europe plays a zero-sum game
joke: “China wins twice”
BRI = loan + construction with a Chinese company
Duo diligence: investigating the partner before giving a loan
“no strings attached”
not caring about the domestic political situation
offering loans for corrupt regimes
using legal elements to get the money back in any situation
if the host country can’t pay, the Chinese are getting the infrastructure for 99 years
“Regional and later global community of common destiny of mankind” - Xi’s motto
includes nothing and everything
Rather liberal than Chinese
The Chinese are eager to put their concept into international documents
Can lead to legal problems
Global fights of narratives
so vague that they can easily say that pl. the UN has already used this concept – global fight of narratives – legal pattern
New Asian Security Concept: Asian problems should be solved by Asians themselves (XJP, 2014)
Comes from the Monroe doctrine
Not successful attempts by the Chinese
Socialism with Chinese characteristics “offers a new option for other countries and nation who want to speed up their development while preserving their independence” (2017)
XJP defended globalization at the WEF (2017)
The US is protectionist
The US has large industrial producers - interest in decolonization
BUT: XJP thought on FP is de facto Western liberalism (interdependence, coop, insitutions, connectivity, integration, globalization and idealism) at least in rhetorics
Belt and Road: infrastructure investments in Eurasia
goal: all roads should lead to Shanghai
o political and economic influence along the road
o internationalization of the yuan
o in case of a conflict/blockade on the Eastern shores of China, then these land connections will be super important
Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
TPP: Trans-Pacific Partnership
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)
· influencing the global and regional order through institutions
o they have wanted to have a bigger say in the existing international system
· only the US has veto power in the World Bank
· IMF – countries have a say based on their GDP – China’s growing GDP in the past decades – the US didn’t want this even though they were the ones who created this rule – China got fed up, starting to create their own institutions
Meanwhile: security realism (core interests), Westphalian approach
China’s re-emergence: a benignly hierarchical order that would bring shared prosperity and peace Asia (new tributary system?)
Shortcomings and failures
Increased Chinese assertiveness triggered an international backlash
China’s new assertive and aggressive FP alarmed countries - destabilizing regional security and global norms, undermining China’s earlier efforts to present itself as a peaceful rising power
Retaliation against the EU in 2021 (CAI)
In late 2020, the EU and China reached a political agreement on the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI)
However, in 2021, the EU imposed sanctions on Chinese officials over human rights abuses in Xinjiang - China imposed counter-sanctions
2020 clash with the Indian army in the Galwan Valley
1 soldier died (officially, possibility of more)
Showed the world that China found its new aggressiveness - damaging its image as a responsible regional power
Trump administration
Short pain, long-term benefits
Russian invasion of Ukraine
China lost its European supporters - effect of China’s perceived political alignment with Russia
Taiwan - turning itself into a hedgehog – asymmetrical warfare
Hong Kong - big clash
Australia
Australia became a target of Chinese economic coercion after it called for an investigation into the origins of Covid-19 and criticized China’s human rights record
Failing BRI?
While the BRI aimed to expand China’s global influence through infrastructure investments, it has faced criticism for creating debt dependency, environmental concerns, and geopolitical pushback
Some projects have stalled or been scaled back
Quad (Japan, India, Australia and the US – surrounding China), NATO, AUKUS (security pact between Australia, the UK, and the US)
The Biden administration has continued and expanded the Trump-era focus on countering China, particularly through reinforcing alliances like the Quad, to rebalance China’s influence
Yes-men around XI?
Loyalty comes first
nod and say yes, zero criticism
Putinization of Xi
Sidelined MFA and TAO
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and the Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO), traditionally responsible for diplomacy and Taiwan policy, have reportedly been sidelined by Xi’s centralized decision-making
Good and bad at the same time